Re: Question for you....raec123March 25 2011, 20:45:45 UTC
Ah, okay. Now I understand what you are basing your comments on. From your post, I was a bit confused since you were referencing fines, but I didn't get that from the Swirtwaist factory link.
I remember reading about and studying the development of Labor Unions in history class, which of course does relate to current events in many states, but wasn't sure if you were reference a particular event that provoked your comment on your journal.
In relation to the Maine article, as a manager of a business, I find this appalling. When a student, be they 16, 17, or 18, has to divide their attention between work and school, everything suffers. Their work ethic, their ability to concentrate, and serve the customers to the best of their ability. At 20 hours a week, unless an employer has an extraordinary person on their hands, even that time is pushing the limits of the student to perform. How is asking the teenager to work even more hours going to benefit the business?
If you think about it logically, and this is how I think of it from my perspective, a student is in school for five to six hours a day. This is a job. That is their main employment, so to speak, and must be their primary focus. The secondary job is mine. It's what they do to have spending money. When I have teenagers on staff, I try to only work them on Fridays and Saturdays, because a)I need workers, and b)everyone needs to have a day off completely from all their jobs or they will not be refreshed.
I did the same thing for any one of my employees who worked more than one job. While they may want more hours, they can't do the job that they've been asked to do if they are over-worked. A worker that is refreshed and happy will work harder and take less time to accomplish a task than one who is over-worked, has no focus, and paid little to do the work. It's a no win situation.
Work ethic, in that situation, will only get you so far and in the end, turn over goes up. Once turn over rises, you have training costs to consider. It costs money and time that should have been focused on serving the guest. The guest is not happy because they are not remembered the next time they come in, it takes longer to serve them because a person is new, and the familiarity and good will that you have spent time earning are now gone.
This repeal, on all counts, is stupid. It serves no one, not a business owner, a manager, or the student themselves. There are laws on the books for those young people who have left home and no longer under their parents purview. They can and do work forty hour weeks. They need to, to survive. And they bring their bosses their working papers so that the HR departments know they have an emancipated young person on their hands.
I'm not sure of the complete history behind this repeal, I'd have to see the actual wordage, but on the surface, it's complete and utter bullshit. I don't know what would be accomplished by it other than to create a cheap, underpaid, under educated work force that can't read and write. I wouldn't want someone like that working for me. I need people who can think.
Rae - Posting a comment on unions as a separate post.
I remember reading about and studying the development of Labor Unions in history class, which of course does relate to current events in many states, but wasn't sure if you were reference a particular event that provoked your comment on your journal.
In relation to the Maine article, as a manager of a business, I find this appalling. When a student, be they 16, 17, or 18, has to divide their attention between work and school, everything suffers. Their work ethic, their ability to concentrate, and serve the customers to the best of their ability. At 20 hours a week, unless an employer has an extraordinary person on their hands, even that time is pushing the limits of the student to perform. How is asking the teenager to work even more hours going to benefit the business?
If you think about it logically, and this is how I think of it from my perspective, a student is in school for five to six hours a day. This is a job. That is their main employment, so to speak, and must be their primary focus. The secondary job is mine. It's what they do to have spending money. When I have teenagers on staff, I try to only work them on Fridays and Saturdays, because a)I need workers, and b)everyone needs to have a day off completely from all their jobs or they will not be refreshed.
I did the same thing for any one of my employees who worked more than one job. While they may want more hours, they can't do the job that they've been asked to do if they are over-worked. A worker that is refreshed and happy will work harder and take less time to accomplish a task than one who is over-worked, has no focus, and paid little to do the work. It's a no win situation.
Work ethic, in that situation, will only get you so far and in the end, turn over goes up. Once turn over rises, you have training costs to consider. It costs money and time that should have been focused on serving the guest. The guest is not happy because they are not remembered the next time they come in, it takes longer to serve them because a person is new, and the familiarity and good will that you have spent time earning are now gone.
This repeal, on all counts, is stupid. It serves no one, not a business owner, a manager, or the student themselves. There are laws on the books for those young people who have left home and no longer under their parents purview. They can and do work forty hour weeks. They need to, to survive. And they bring their bosses their working papers so that the HR departments know they have an emancipated young person on their hands.
I'm not sure of the complete history behind this repeal, I'd have to see the actual wordage, but on the surface, it's complete and utter bullshit. I don't know what would be accomplished by it other than to create a cheap, underpaid, under educated work force that can't read and write. I wouldn't want someone like that working for me. I need people who can think.
Rae - Posting a comment on unions as a separate post.
Reply
Leave a comment