Slashdot Mirror


Vive La Loafing!

theodp writes "Bonjour Paresse, an anti-corporation slacker manifesto whose title translates as 'Hello Laziness,' has become a national best seller in France and made a countercultural heroine of its author, who encourages workers to adopt her strategy of calculated loafing in response to dimming prospects of success for rank-and-file employees. Could a translation find a Silicon Valley audience?"

493 of 649 comments (clear)

  1. Slacker Thee by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Interesting
    who encourages workers to adopt her strategy of calculated loafing

    In english: reading/posting on slashdot (e.g. I should be working on X but wonder if CowboyNeal is mentioned in the latest slashpoll)

    in response to dimming prospects of success for rank-and-file employees.

    Got news for you, there was a terrific article in the Detroit Free Press back in the 80's regarding the epic scale slacking which contributed to the ills of the automotive industry. Overly strong unions and workers with an "I deserve stuff" attitude resulted in many of the anecdotes of redundant jobs and slacking where the line was already overstaffed (workers taking turns going across the street for a few quarts of beer and sitting on the roof working on tans and such.) I went to school with a lot of laid-off workers who recounted many tales which often even amazed them by the audacity of the perpetrators. Slacking is by no means unique or original to people in IT.

    Could a translation find a Silicon Valley audience?

    Dunno, when Silicon Valley finally hires a a worker I'll ask.

    Work hard. Learn new skillz. Get sacked anyway

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Slacker Thee by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The Big Three in Detroit agreed to and signed off on every letter of those contracts, so wouldn't that make the management at least one half responsible for this supposed "audacious slacking"?

      You have to remember, back in the 50's and 60's the automotive industry had a LOT of capital tied up in foundries, assembly lines, parts plants and logistics. I hail from the former heart of GM, Ford and Chrysler where cities grew with the fortunes of these companies and saw first hand the stranglehold the unionized workforce had on this investment. With nowhere else to go for labor (a strike would idle their lines and the competitors would reap those lost sales, and damn few would cross a picket line in a company town) and much of their investment located where the attitudes were complacent, GM, Ford, Chrysler and AMC were sitting ducks for the japanese automakers. The pendulum has swung very far to the other side, now as the companies have considerable strength in negotations (don't ratify the agreement, we'll move to Mexico or China)

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Slacker Thee by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1
      The Big Three in Detroit agreed to and signed off on everyBecause they had to. Unions where and are very strong back east. It's hard, though to label one or the other as the bad one when if the union had not forced a cushy contract, the car companies would have screwed the workers. letter of those contracts

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    3. Re:Slacker Thee by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      There came a time when the unions and companies came to understand that in the interest of mutual survival they each needed to make concessions. I think the manufacturers are getting the better of the deal, though, as most manufacturing is long gone from the host cities. Flint, Michigan is a prime example, which you can learn a bit about from Michael Moore's films, since he's from there. It was a thriving city with a booming economy in the 60's It's a derelict now. I don't think GM has anything left, where once AC, Delco, Truck and Bus and Buick employed thousands.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:Slacker Thee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      No. Workers pissed off about the well documented abuses by "management."

      Unions got you the 40 hour work week, vacations, unemployment insurance, work-place safety, end of child-labor, end of the 16 hour mandatory work day. The worst thing for the economy has been the decline in worker power in the last 30 years. It has allowed concentration of wealth at unprecedented levels.

      The scariest thing is that the people who regularly get screwed in this economy believe the bull**** that justifies their own screwing.

      Read "Strike!," "Which Side are you on?" and "Rivethead"---learn something about history, and stop repeating the Pravda-esque ideology of the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, and the
      Republican and Democratic parties.

      Eventually "white collar" workers will realize that unions are the only way to resist. Until then "take stuff from work"--read Guy Debord and the situationalists--and work as hard as **you** think you are being paid to work.

    5. Re:Slacker Thee by danheskett · · Score: 1

      It was a thriving city with a booming economy in the 60's
      In the 60's people actually bought stuff made in America, like for example cars.

      Then automakers became even more corpulent, and people took their cash elsewhere, and American auto has never recovered.

      There are whole generations of people who will only drive Toyota, Honda, or Nissan cars.

      Especially since now many of those companies assemble these cars domestically with foreign made parts.

    6. Re:Slacker Thee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      well.. that's just because they grew up and stopped the method used earlier in breaking labour unions: just killing the bosses and bullying the rest.

      (now, how that differs from the soviet union way I honestly don't know)

      anyways.. don't do low value jobs and expect to be paid highly.

    7. Re:Slacker Thee by TyrranzzX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I believe the goal here is to show bosses that giving the fruits of their workforces labors to the workforce and not to investors or themselves is the key to success. Infact, it is the key to making a capitalistic society go round. Unfortunatly, a corporation exists for the enrichment of investors, workers be damned unless they own voting stock. The workers revolt by working based on their pay; if they're paid minimum wage to stock shelves, they work slow and slack off. If they're paid $8 or $10 to stock shelves, then they work hard.

    8. Re:Slacker Thee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Michael Moore is actually from a wealthy suburb of Flint. He never lived in Flint itself, and was a line worker for all of one day before deciding he didn't care for it and quit.

    9. Re:Slacker Thee by Dravik · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This only works if you can get rid of bad workers. My brother works at Publix and this is how they do it. Pay at the top of the range and you always have a pool of willing new hires. Then you can set higher standards for hiring and toss out the slackers. Resulting in a workforce of good hard working people whoes higher productivity and motivation cover the higher labor cost. If, as in France, it is almost impossible to get rid of poor workers then the higher pay method doesn't work. Your good people get fed up with having to take the the slack from the lazy guy and leave. Eventually the unremovable slackers build up and you have high labor costs with the same level of people as everybody else.

      --
      The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
    10. Re:Slacker Thee by cubicledrone · · Score: 5, Insightful

      regarding the epic scale slacking which contributed to the ills of the automotive industry

      While the hairpieces in middle management heroically toiled late into the night to keep the business afloat, no doubt.

      Funny how the slightest voice in support of workers generates a response of "they're just a bunch of lazy bastards who want more money for less work" along with the obligatory "they're all in unions too."

      The article makes a very important point: that the possibility of success in the average corporate job is zero. That much is quite beyond dispute.

      Now, let's all sing the company song.

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    11. Re:Slacker Thee by Brandybuck · · Score: 1, Troll

      I remember working in a union printing shop in the late 80's. One lady spilled an entire drum of ink on the printing floor in sight of everyone, and calmly walked away saying "I don't have to clean it up, it's not in my job description."

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    12. Re:Slacker Thee by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1
      To the barricades, Comrades!

      Seriously, anyone who quotes Guy Debord in a casual conversation is a wackjob.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:Slacker Thee by cubicledrone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You have to remember, back in the 50's and 60's the automotive industry had a LOT of capital tied up in foundries, assembly lines, parts plants and logistics.

      Yeah. A lot of people had real jobs then too, and could afford a house before they started applying for Medicare. Funny how that works, isn't it?

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    14. Re:Slacker Thee by Dravik · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm not going to pay thousands more for a car that will break down sooner. American auto has not recovered because many of the improvments in manufacturing have been fought by the unions. Most of the processes that increase quality also increase efficancy. If the line is more efficient then you don't need as many workers. The unions have fought everthing that reduces the numbers of workers needed.

      --
      The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
    15. Re:Slacker Thee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      work as hard as **you** think you are being paid to work.

      Hooray for the bare minimum and mediocracy!

    16. Re:Slacker Thee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am not a lazy employee. I am a very dedicated, loyal, hard-working employee with the best of work ethics. I just want a company that values me and that will reward my hard work with more than a pending layoff. If I knew that I would be with a company for most of my life, like people did a generation or two ago (or they do in some other countries), I would continue to be the most productive, enthusiastic and capable employee ever.

      However, after putting in years of sweat and tears and relationship building and education and heart into a job for the last five years only to be laid off with a thirty second phone call one morning (not because I sucked - but because after a half dozen layoffs, I could no longer escape the axe and a few thousand more of us said goodbye), I've come to realize that all of my hard work and loyalty was for nothing. Here I am five years later, starting all over again.

      People work hard and are dedicated and productive and happy when they know that progress and achievement can be theirs. But when they recognize that for all the toiling they put in, they could be axed due to budget constraints or politics (as opposed to personal ability) on a whim, they give up.

      Would you run a marathon if you knew the finish line was going to be randomly extended and that you would periodically be grabbed and yanked back to the starting line all over again? After awhile, wouldn't you realize that the race itself is pointless and give up?

    17. Re:Slacker Thee by XBruticusX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I once remember working in a non-union metal shop, running a grinding machine until my left hand no longer has sensation of any kind, and the company refusing my workman's comp claims. Which is worse?

    18. Re:Slacker Thee by danheskett · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eventually "white collar" workers will realize that unions are the only way to resist. Until then "take stuff from work"--read Guy Debord and the situationalists--and work as hard as **you** think you are being paid to work.
      You are wrong, and I tell you why.

      Blue collar workers, are in essence, human machines. They do a thing or a limited set of things, and that's about it. If they aren't at work that particular day, a different person needs to do the same thing in the same way.

      White collar workers do not do a limited set of things. If a white collar worker is not at work on a given day, it is likely that the things he or she needed to do are delayed until he or she returns.

      A lot of tech people wrongly believed they were white collar due to either (1) their pay or (2) a false sense of pride. The jobs that have been shipped off to India and the rest of the world have been by and large blue collar jobs.

      White collar workers in the realest sense have a much bigger chip to bargin with than the true-blue collar workers. Their skill.

      For example, I am skilled programmer, writing on average two to three useful programs a week. Replacing me is expensive due to the learning curve to get up to speed in our specific tailored circumstance. A person in a foreign country/timezone would have trouble with doing my job because it requires close heavy interaction with customers and other workers on site.

      When you sum the value I add to the cost of replacing me you have a rather high business penalty to me leaving.

      This isn't to say I am unique or irreplaceable. There are probably 100-200 programmers who could do my job - with 3-6 months training - in my area (population: 60,000).

      I can generally get what I want, because the management has learned from past experiences that I am (1) the best qualified and most productive person to hold this job in the 5 person history of the position, (2) I am key in keeping the division profitable, and (3) that replacing me would cost between $15k and $30k in training costs as well as anothe $10k-20k in lost revenues while my replacement comes up to speed.

      The bottom line? My only way to resist is not stealing stuff from works or unionizing. Unionizing would hurt myself and others like me who are well above average in skill, productivity, and value-added to the company.

    19. Re:Slacker Thee by GreyPoopon · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Unions got you the 40 hour work week, vacations, unemployment insurance, work-place safety, end of child-labor, end of the 16 hour mandatory work day. The worst thing for the economy has been the decline in worker power in the last 30 years. It has allowed concentration of wealth at unprecedented levels.

      Unions are only useful when a company has little or no other place to which to turn. Since labor markets started opening up overseas, the power of the Union has declined dramatically. Funny how the movement of labor to overseas started at about the 30 year-ago-mark that you cited for the beginning of the decline.

      I agree with you that the power of the Union has declined. I agree that the wealthy have taken unprecedented advantage of it. However, I'd like to point out that the rise to power of Japanese automobile manufacturers is a perfect example of what happens when American companies try to "play ball" with the unions. The only reason that American automobile companies are beginning to compete again is because the cost of manufacturing has risen dramatically in Japan.

      Eventually "white collar" workers will realize that unions are the only way to resist.

      All this would do is move jobs to India and China at a faster pace. If you really want to fix the problem, you have to get people to start paying attention to the employment practices of companies from which they purchase goods and services. All of those on-strike unionized workers continued to buy products from other companies who were treating their employees pretty much the same way. If you don't break this cycle, your union has no power at all, and only serves to give the company a reason to start offshoring.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    20. Re:Slacker Thee by KilobyteKnight · · Score: 2, Informative

      Read "Strike!," "Which Side are you on?" and "Rivethead"---learn something about history, and stop repeating the Pravda-esque ideology of the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, and the
      Republican and Democratic parties.


      Wow, that's quite an attack on American institutions. It would be absurd in and of itself. However, as this was a story about a French woman upset with the French socialized work place, your comments are even more out in left feild. Did you read and comprehend the article?

      --
      When will Windows be ready for the desktop?
    21. Re:Slacker Thee by MBraynard · · Score: 1
      I just want a company that values me and that will reward my hard work with more than a pending layoff.

      Then start your own company.

    22. Re:Slacker Thee by Darby · · Score: 4, Interesting

      However, I'd like to point out that the rise to power of Japanese automobile manufacturers is a perfect example of what happens when American companies try to "play ball" with the unions.

      Don't try to blame the rise of the Japanese Automakers on the unions.
      The primary reason is that the Japanese thought for the long term and the American auto makers thought for the short term.
      Ever heard the term "planned obsolescence"?
      American cars were absolute shit for a number of years *by design*. Their thought was that if the car broke down sooner then the customer would have to buy a new one sooner. Obviously, they would buy a new American car because the Japanese cars were crap.
      Well, lo and behold the Japanese cars were no longer the peices of crap that they once were.

      That is why there was a crisis in the US auto industry, and that is why the Japanese auto industry rose.

      This short term thinking is rampant in this country and it is almost universally negative for the country. It does make a few people very rich in the short term. At the expense of everybody else and with no long term benefit to anybody.

    23. Re:Slacker Thee by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      who encourages workers to adopt her strategy of calculated loafing

      In english: reading/posting on slashdot


      Actually, I believe in English it's called 'working'.

    24. Re:Slacker Thee by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it is funny, because those workers were being subsidized by other US workers, non-autoworkers, like us.

    25. Re:Slacker Thee by trick.one · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I know this is /. and all, but really, what is the purpose of your post? We always get the posts like "I invented the computer" etc, but at least they sometimes contribute to the discussion. your post in a nutshell : im good at what i do, im white collar, me me, union bad because i'm special. Get a better friend than your right hand and then let's discuss. A programmer's union, for the specially talented few like yourself, would not necessarily be a really bad thing. If implemented correctly, it would be an assurance of your skills and therby simplify job search on both ends. It would also be a powerful force for benefits across an industry. If you are so good, so irreplaceable, then you and your elite brethren would be quite a strike threat, no? I know a guy who works with marble and granite-- very blue collar. But his skill set is such that he is also very valuable to his company. Should he declare he is therefore some elite worker, and face his company without his union? I hate unions, don't get me wrong. Not at all in their idea, but in their implementation. But, your post said nothing more than what i summarized earlier, never making any kind of conclusions about your great skills and why you shoudlnt unionize.

    26. Re:Slacker Thee by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Informative
      Yeah. A lot of people had real jobs then too, and could afford a house before they started applying for Medicare. Funny how that works, isn't it?

      You don't know the half of it. Kids would drop out of highschool at 16 and go work for one of the autobuilders. They didn't need math, science, french or anything but a pair of hands and could do the job. It was called 'skilled labor' which really translated to someone who could do a repetitive task once it was demonstrated to them, no thinking involved. One income, with overtime (which funded much of the development of cabins, boating, etc.) could buy a house, put kids (those who didn't follow in dad's footsteps) through university and afford a cabin, boat and so on up north. It really was the good life on very little education. Quite the culture shock when they found other people in the world could do the same job and would do it for a fraction without making lots of demands of their employers. It created a lot of resentment, too, but not enough introspection.

      I remember Owen Bieber making a speech, broadcast over WJR, where he refused to give the companies what they demanded and made lots of promises to the workers in the UAW. Probably 1 in 10 of those jobs exists today. Not only did mexicans and japanese take a lot of work, but many jobs moved to more centrally located areas, like Kentucky and Tennessee, where organized labor wasn't as strong and couldn't insist upon re-hiring workers who couldn't operate robotics or anything which required tradeschool classes or such.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    27. Re:Slacker Thee by jcr · · Score: 2, Funny

      They should have canned her, since spilling a drum of ink isn't in her job description, either.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    28. Re:Slacker Thee by phoenix321 · · Score: 1

      A bold statement, Mr. Know-it-all. But I have to say I found The Society of the Spectacle a rather interesting piece of philosophy. I read the first statements out of pure curiosity and was pretty much drawn to read a few chapters that evening.

      Beware from judging each and everything by your opinion, it may be subjective. I recommend Guy Debord at least the "spectacle" and with a grain of salt, but still.

      [...] The reigning economic system is a vicious circle of isolation. Its technologies are based on isolation, and they contribute to that same isolation. From cars to television, the goods that the spectacular system chooses to produce also serve it as weapons for constantly reinforcing the conditions that engender "lonely crowds." With ever-increasing concreteness the spectacle recreates its own presuppositions.

      The spectacle is capital accumulated to the point that it becomes image.


      If that contains not at least a small truth, I don't know what to say...

    29. Re:Slacker Thee by GreyPoopon · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Don't try to blame the rise of the Japanese Automakers on the unions.

      I'm not. I fully blame the decisions made by the auto manufacturers -- they had a choice. Although, I *may* end up blaming the unions on the failure of US Airways, if and when it happens. Don't get me wrong. Unions have done a lot for workers, and not every union is "evil." However, I contend that there are a number of unions that abuse their power in much the same way the wealthy companies do.

      The primary reason is that the Japanese thought for the long term and the American auto makers thought for the short term.

      No. The primary reason is that Japanese cars were being sold for significantly less than American cars. By the time people realized that the Japanese autos were much more reliable, most of the damage had already been done. The reliability factor just helped to keep the dominance of the Japanese manufacturers firmly in place after the prices of their cars rose.

      By the way, you mentioned "planned obsolescence" and short-term thinking as the primary reason for failure. However, surely you must realize that American consumers suffer from the same short-sightedness, right? This weakness in our society is what I blame most for the declining power of the union.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    30. Re:Slacker Thee by anagama · · Score: 4, Funny
      • Now, let's all sing the company song.

      Workers Doxology:
      • Praise bossman morning workbells chime
        Praise him for bits of overtime
        Praise him whose wars we love to fight
        Praise him fat leach and pa-ra-site
        AMEN
      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    31. Re:Slacker Thee by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      Unions opposed child labout because they didn't like the competition...

      Read "Strike!," "Which Side are you on?" and "Rivethead"---learn something about history, and stop repeating the Pravda-esque ideology of the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, and the Republican and Democratic parties.

      Amusing you say that, when unions and their supporters were funded by the same folks that funded Pravda.

      Unions had a purpose once (putting an end to things like the company town), but their place is not in IT. Monolithic unions can be just as bad as monolithic corporate hierarchies.

    32. Re:Slacker Thee by cubicledrone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It really was the good life on very little education.

      Yeah, it was.

      when they found other people in the world could do the same job and would do it for a fraction

      Now that has been expanded to all jobs except management, so the "good life" isn't even available to those with four-year University educations any more. In fact, education has been rendered largely worthless because nothing can overcome the money grab of selling out to the lowest possible wage.

      So, no house, no boat, no university, no cabin, no nothing. It's five to a rent application and hope they don't build a Wal-Mart.

      It's all been sold, and progress it ain't.

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    33. Re:Slacker Thee by serutan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sounds like you are very happy in your job. Fine. Lots of people are. But there's a reason Dilbert is so popular, and it's not because cubicle-land is utopia. My experience of 25 years in the corporate world as a contractor, working for many different companies, is that managements that treat technical employees like commodities are more common than those that don't.

      Post again someday after you change jobs and work for a manager who is technically clueless yet insists on micromanaging you anyway, who turns vague estimates into hard deadlines, who insists that you work 60 hrs/week to solve the latest crisis caused by his/her own ill-considered decisions, who believes outside consultants and ignores you, who basically wants you to shut and do as you're told and leave the thinking to the smarter, higher-paid people who get stock options. Then come back and preach the joys of your world.

    34. Re:Slacker Thee by flacco · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The bottom line? My only way to resist is not stealing stuff from works or unionizing. Unionizing would hurt myself and others like me who are well above average in skill, productivity, and value-added to the company.

      that's a nice personal perspective, but what about the (by definition) large majority of workers who are *not* "well above average"?

      true, employment is driven by a series of sticks and carrots, and i don't think we can get away from that; but should human beings necessarily have their destinies dictated by the results of endless "cage-match" style antagonism with their fellow workers (competitors), having nothing but their personal, individual strengths to protect them?

      i think there is a role for collective power in the labor force. sure, everyone wants to maximize productivity, but there is something to be said for smoothing out the distribution of wealth too, and coming to common understandings about what makes a humane, non-hellish work environment. even if you, personally, believe you would do better in a dog-eat-dog environment, you're still living the life of a dog, and consigning those around you (many of whom, admittedly, may have lesser talents than yourself) to the same circumstances.

      organized labor is simply the counterweight to amassed capital in the hands of the economic elite. capital would love to deal with each worker-unit individually, and play one against the other. the role of labor is to realize labor's true worth as a unit.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    35. Re:Slacker Thee by lysium · · Score: 2, Insightful
      replacing me would cost between $15k and $30k in training costs as well as anothe $10k-20k in lost revenues while my replacement comes up to speed.

      So you are basically tenured. You have a close rapport with your management, you are functioning well in the niche you have created. As the French author advocated, that is surely the best way to get ahead in a broken system.

      Unionizing would hurt myself and others like me who are well above average in skill, productivity, and value-added to the company.

      Unions are like insurance. Nothing but a drag when things are going well, but nothing is more dear when things are not. Your view, while totally understandable, is rather parochial and self-limited. You don't need to care about the fate of your less-talented and less-fortunate fellows. But if your status or capacities ever change, you may regret it.

      --
      Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
    36. Re:Slacker Thee by c0rN_g0aT · · Score: 2, Funny

      There is former programmer at the the gas station I frequent that used to say the exact same thing about himself. And I must say he has turned out to be a very arrogant cashier. He is always glaring at the ID and access cards that hang from my belt as he takes my money. He also begrudgingly hands me my free carwash ticket as though I didn't deserve it. The universe is indeed a cruel place because the gas station is owned by Indian immigrants.

    37. Re:Slacker Thee by Phoenix666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      i cannot believe that this was modded up to 5. anyone arrogant and ignorant enough to believe that blue collar workers are just "human machines" and that white collar workers are somehow more intelligent and skilled either has a lot of growing up to do or desperately needs a visit from the down-sizing fairy.

      the fact is, rare indeed is the employee who does not do the same task over and over again, white-collar/blue-collar be damned. my brother is an engineer with ford motor company. he graduated with honors from carnegie-mellon. know what he works on now, day in and day out? hood fasteners. they could just as easily replace him with another engineer to design hood fasteners as they could the union guy assembling them on the line. it is, my friend, the hallmark of working for corporate America. they do not want you to be indispensable, because then you are irreplaceable. they dedicate entire management training sessions to making sure that the enterprise is not exposed to that sort of risk.

      unions protect their members against the amoral, artificial persons known as corporations. if you are not an executive with a high priced lawyer, or in a union that can protect your livelihood, then you are vulnerable. from the sound of it, your turn is long overdue, and mazeltov! redefining the meaning of "blue collar" and "white collar" to suit your current situation won't seem so cute then.

      --
      Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
    38. Re:Slacker Thee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Or to summarise...
      I'm white collar and costly to replace, therefore these blue collar issues are beneath me.

      You sir are one arrogant bastard.

      Human machines? You are the kind of trash that unions protect against.

    39. Re:Slacker Thee by Yokaze · · Score: 1

      I've no disagreement with your assessment of the state of Unions and consumer behaviour, but...

      > The only reason that American automobile companies are beginning to compete again is because the cost of manufacturing has risen dramatically in Japan.

      Since the mid 80s 90s, many cars are produced in the region they are sold. IRC, today, more than 50% of the "Japanese" cars sold in the US are manufactured either in the US or Mexico. Mainly in joint-ventures with U.S.American companies.

      So possibly, there are other reasons why they became competetive. Like, transfer of knowledge through said joint ventures. It is very likely, that an American car has a Japanese motor, or a German chassis, or a German car a American chassis for that matter.

      Disclaimer: I'm no MBA.

      AFAIK, in the 90s American managers were quite eager to adpot Japanese management ideas.

      Among others: Keep your warehouse small. Produce on demand. Hence local production (the other reason are import tariffs and changing exchange rates). Having most of your monetary value bound in unsold items is generally not a good idea.

      --
      "Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
    40. Re:Slacker Thee by jcr · · Score: 1

      Should a nice girl kiss on the first date?

      Your question about workman's comp has nothing to do with the woman who spilled the ink and refused to clean it up.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    41. Re:Slacker Thee by XBruticusX · · Score: 1

      And the spilt ink story had little to do with my rebuttal of the usual Slashdot anti-union Randroidism, and I was trying to move the discussion more back to the primary subject at hand.

    42. Re:Slacker Thee by jcr · · Score: 1

      usual Slashdot anti-union Randroidism

      Ad hominem, so you lose. Nice try.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    43. Re:Slacker Thee by flacco · · Score: 1
      Perhaps you could elucidate instead of just state? I find most people who spout such nonsense to be the inferior workers. Perhaps you aren't, fine. Most seem to be.

      sure, if you could elaborate on just what in my statement you found confusing.

      How nice of you to tell him what his environment is like.

      my observation was more general than you understand it to be.

      Having seen organized labor first-hand, I disagree with your view. I find it to be no more than bullying to allow slackers to pay them dues.

      that seems to be a rather prejudiced observation, and demonstraby false. i, too, have seen organized labor, in a white-collar setting, and that's not what a find at all.

      Ideally, mayhap, but in the real world they don't do that.

      ...from your perspective.

      i don't doubt that there are seedy elements in labor unions, and perhaps some are hopelessly corrupt. but there are also those that are above-board and work well. and, in any case, they have gotten real gains for their employees.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    44. Re:Slacker Thee by Dr.+Transparent · · Score: 1
      Great ad hominem attack. You say his conclusion is completely based on his good working environment, ignoring the concetps and facts he brought up.

      And then you get modded up +1 insighful. More like +5 slashdot-whore-who-hates-everyone-and-can't-argue- to-save-his-life.

      Hehe, kinda like this post.

    45. Re:Slacker Thee by Dr.+Transparent · · Score: 1

      Has anyone seen the point? Oh there it is, way over your head.

      If you want to start a damn union go do it. He said unionizing would hurt him, so he isn't going to join the club. Big farking deal.

      And if you think he won't be able to join later then you've completely missed the facts about unions and especially union heads who will bob the knob of anyone nearby who might give them money (i.e. dues) and keep them in power.

      Collective barganing is great if the members have the power. But too often in unions that's not the case. The lust for power doesn't end just because you find a big sign with the word "Union" to stand under.

    46. Re:Slacker Thee by Everleet · · Score: 1
      (now, how that differs from the soviet union way I honestly don't know)

      In Soviet Russia, the bosses kill YOU.

      --
      It's tragic. Laugh.
    47. Re:Slacker Thee by Shajenko42 · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the extremely high barriers to entry into the Japanese market, for damn near every single product.

    48. Re:Slacker Thee by ksheff · · Score: 1

      Funny. Investors are the ones with the capital which is used to get the company started. When the company starts to make a profit, they can take that capital and either put it back into the company to fund new projects or whatever the investor wants to do with it. This creates jobs that's what makes capitalism go round.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    49. Re:Slacker Thee by jcr · · Score: 1

      Unions got you the 40 hour work week, vacations, unemployment insurance, work-place safety, end of child-labor, end of the 16 hour mandatory work day.

      Nope. The rise in the marginal productivity per worker, caused by capital investment, is what got us the 40-hour work week.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    50. Re:Slacker Thee by xp · · Score: 1

      Instead of loafing what if you work hyper-productively? How does it hurt you?
      ----
      Stop the Procrastinating Monkey

    51. Re:Slacker Thee by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      However, as this was a story about a French woman upset with the French socialized work place

      And there's a difference?

    52. Re:Slacker Thee by danheskett · · Score: 1

      Or to summarise... I'm white collar and costly to replace, therefore these blue collar issues are beneath me.
      I am saying that blue collar issues are best addressed as such. Programmers and tech people pretending to be blue collar when they are not, or pretending to be white collar when they are not is not helping anyone.

      Blue collar workers are essentially human machines. That's the purpose of the work. Sorry to be the one to break the news to you.

    53. Re:Slacker Thee by Darby · · Score: 1

      You're handily forgetting that the actual build quality of American cars also sucked ass, and that was directly attributable to the unions.


      No, that was an intentional part of the design. That is called "Planned Obsolescence". That came straight down from the top.

      anyone to the right of Trotsky is a "dangerous corporate reactionary"

      Uh huh. So the auto execs deciding that they will fleece the American public by selling them intentionally shoddy products and then marketing it as patriotic to "Buy American" while they are betraying the American people is A OK in your book?

      Christ, you are way to the right of Reverend Moon, Dude.

    54. Re:Slacker Thee by danheskett · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you are very happy in your job.
      Who said anything about that?

      is that managements that treat technical employees like commodities are more common than those that don't.
      Every person is a commodity. People forget that everyone - everyone - is replaceable - for a cost. If you want a surefire way to make yourself hard to replace and create job security, I will fill you in:

      Create value that sets you apart from the others in your field.

      That's it. Now. For the bad news. Not everyone in every job can do that. If you are blue collar, you can't do that. That's the whole point of your job. Even if you are the best ever, all the job requires is average to slightly better than average. If you are truly white collar, you can create value a few ways. First, you can be crufty. You can do stupid, proprietary, unethical things to lock yourself into a job - meaning, you actively make your work sloppy, hard to maintain, and unwieldy. For me, try to make my work pristine, well documented, transparent, easily transferred to other workers. Why? Because it enhances my value. If I want an extra week of vacation I can ask for it and not hear "we can't afford to not have you here next week, in case that X thing you did needs attention".

      manager who is technically clueless yet insists on micromanaging you anyway
      What makes you think I am not there now?

      who turns vague estimates into hard deadlines
      Again, that's real life. Everyone deals with that, me included.

      who insists that you work 60 hrs/week to solve the latest crisis caused by his/her own ill-considered decisions
      This is most likely a co-op, but I've been in similiar situations. The key here is to document, illustrate, and repudiate. I've had bosses who tried that "you gotta fix this before my boss finds out" attitude. A few minutes of printing out e-mails, collating a few notes from meetings, and a well expressed one paragraph is all the defense you need. Present them to your boss in time-order. When presented with this factual, non-emotional case 100% of bosses will admit fault, ask for you help, and be flexibile with your reward.

      . Then come back and preach the joys of your world.
      You are just bitter, and chances are you have a bad attitude towards work. You think you are smarter than others where you work, and that you deserve to be in charge. This is typical. Chances are you underemployed. Am I right? Are you seriously underemployed?

      Look, unions are great for what they are. They are a tool to keep corporate interests in check, line the pockets of corrupt politicans, and help out blue collar workers. If you are a true white-collar worker than you are not going to benefit from a union. That's it. In a white-collar world you advance and succeed based on what value you add to the company's interests. That's it. No union, no government, no person is going to change that. Ever.

    55. Re:Slacker Thee by danheskett · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My point is that unions are not the solution to your problems if you are a white collar worker. If you are white collar, a union is going to hurt you, not help you.

      The tech world keeps thinking a union will save them. It won't. It will help the blue collar "human machines" of IT who are at risking to losing thier jobs to outsourcing.

      I explained it very clearly. White collar workers gain security and pay through what they add to the company.

      I clearly did not say I was irreplaceable. I said specifically that I was replaceable, but at a cost.

      Just because someone works with marble and granite doesn't make them blue collar. It sounds to be me that your friend is actually an artisan - someone whose skill is both physical and aesthically based. If he is good, and his work is expensive to replicate he has very good bargaining position to go the company with.

      Let me put it this way. A white collar person adding $150,000 to the bottom line of the company while his co-workers with similiar jobs are adding $100,000 is in a good position to ask for additional compensation of, say, $10,000 a year. All things being equal replacing him with an equally skilled worker is unlikely. The company would rather have that $50,000 in extra income minus the $10,000 extra than just have the same $100,000 as everyone else averages. The problem is that if these workers unionized, and say there were 10 of them, the person who had been there the longest would be getting the highest pay, on down the ladder. It's not a good productive situation, and the most productive are paid the best.

      The bottom line is that unions are good at what they are good at: helping blue collar workers. White collar workers do not benefit in the same way that blue collar workers will.

    56. Re:Slacker Thee by chewy_2000 · · Score: 1

      Not that I don't believe you, but do you have a source?

    57. Re:Slacker Thee by eison · · Score: 1

      Not for nothing - all that hard work was for the paycheck you got, not for something in the future. Just make sure you get enough now to justify the work you do, and don't base your effort on some pie-in-the-sky promise of tomorrow.

      --
      is competition good, or is duplication of effort bad?
    58. Re:Slacker Thee by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Japanese and most of the far eastern industrial growth was driven by two main points: 1. blind employee loyalty. After all the company gave you a house, hospital, school for kids, wonderful trips abroad with your co-workers. Of course you'd sell off your life and soul but after all you could sink some of the gripe down a bottle. 2. banks & loans. Humongous loans. Many banks finally folded when the companies could pay back and this in turn broke down the system driving entire corporations close to the ground. Actually there's a rather nasty social crisis in Japan... people are getting out of the serf mindframe and only after many got crushed by an economy that's still struggling.

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    59. Re:Slacker Thee by noxida · · Score: 1

      To the tune of Red Flag The working class can kiss my arse, I've got the foremans' job at last. I'm out of work and on the dole, You can stuff the red flag up your hole. The working class can kiss my arse, I've got the foremans' job at last.

    60. Re:Slacker Thee by Julia+Cameron · · Score: 3, Insightful
      • Or to summarise...

        I'm white collar and costly to replace, therefore these blue collar issues are beneath me.

      Oh aye, sure. In Scotland we have a saying:'Self-praise comes aye stinkin ben.'

      You are of course referring to blue-collar workers, like stone masons, and the sort of highly-skilled tradesmen who have been on the job for yonks and have seen it all. They have an eye for material that even with my experience and education I will never achieve. I'm a structural engineer, and the old fellows know that they can come up to me and point out anomalies in material that only the most practised eye can spot. I am always aware that despite my lofty status and advanced degrees, my buildings are no better than the crews who work on them. The structures are no stronger than my design, and the materials that go into them.

      • You sir are one arrogant bastard.

      Have you considered that you too can be replaced, and probably will be replaced someday. It will most likely occur when you become too costly, and they find someone younger who can do your job for less pay. Even with your replacement's training factored in, at some point it will be more economical for them to sack you and hire some younger person to take your place.

      • Human machines? You are the kind of trash that unions protect against.

      We are all doing the same job over again, to some degree. Steelwork differs between projects, but it isn't programming, or cardiac surgery. Corporate executives see you no differently than you see some poor soul collecting rubbish by the side of the highway.

      Only the greatest artists are irreplaceable, though even then other great artists come to fill the void they leave. The rest of us are simply competent, or merely brilliant. If you are deluded enough to think that your skills elevate you in management's eyes, and that those skills are sufficient to insure you job security for life, you're living in Cloud Coo-Coo Land. Unless you own the company, you have no control at all, and like the poor soul who picks up rubbish along the roads, your fate is at the mercy of other people. The reason for unions -- call it 'professional representation', if you require fawncy terms to prop up your snobbish façade -- is that there is strength in numbers, and protection for the individual when people stand together.

      --
      Julia Cameron
      Oich ù agus hiùraibh éile
    61. Re:Slacker Thee by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      not that I don't believe you, but do you have a source?

      Here's a long New Yorker piece on MM:
      Michael Moore can make you cry.

    62. Re:Slacker Thee by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      " I've come to realize that all of my hard work and loyalty was for nothing. Here I am five years later, starting all over again."

      What a lot of people don't realize is that all that hard work is NOT for nothing. Sure it sucks that you got fired, but hopefully you'll be able to get a great reference from your last job and that can help you out getting a new job.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    63. Re:Slacker Thee by Ryan+Huddleston · · Score: 1

      It doesn't mean "average". It means "moderate to inferior in quality" or "barely passable"; definitely on the low end of average. A C- is a mediocre grade; it is passing, but it ain't too great.

    64. Re:Slacker Thee by Sir+Homer · · Score: 1

      I don't think Publix is a good example of a well paying company. Publix employees average pay is less then Wal-mart employees according to Forbes. They get away with this by hiring immigrants in general ignorant people.

    65. Re:Slacker Thee by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

      Now don't get me wrong, I'm very pro-union, but I don't think I've ever worked a job with a 40 hour work week, and I've worked in some conditions well above repeated 16 hour workdays. That and minnimum wage, I think 60%ish of my jobs have been less-than-minnimum wage. And this isn't just me here, either - Long hours are more common than most union-protected people are aware of, and there was a time for awhile where all of my friends were either unemployed or making less than minnimum wage. As I grow older some people I know are getting on with Wal-mart and the like and making 7-8$/hr, but even then that's not really great...

      Don't kid yourselves, this stuff has yet to be accomplished. Unions are good things, but don't think that they've allready accomplished what they have yet to.

      The worst thing, in my experience, is that in the past 30 years is the corporate experimentations with drugs, and drug-free environments, respectively. Corporations deciding what goes in and out of your body, and trying to change the chemical make up of your brain. Oh, that and the greater ability for them to monitor your every-second of work, and pay accordingly, although that is still mostly paranoia on my part and it may not have happened yet. But as technology in general becomes more adapted to that sort of thing, it will become a reality.

      "Eventually 'white collar' workers will realize that unions are the only way to resist'. unless they don't want to resist! most people are very similar to cattle, and are perfectly content to be exploited, so long as they get their television, and or drugs, and or pussy and alchohol, and or whatever-the-distraction-of-the-day is. Television killed the union movement, in my opinion, but that hasn't happened yet.

      How is unionism in china going? Due to dialectic, I think the united states may very well be more chinese than china will ever be sometime in the future.

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    66. Re:Slacker Thee by severoon · · Score: 1

      I thought tech workers already had a kind of union. It's called "stock options".

      Wait...that's not the same thing... 8]

      --
      but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
    67. Re:Slacker Thee by mrlsd · · Score: 1

      Set your own finish lines.

      Are you working for them or are you working for yourself, for a feeling of having done something worthwhile whether or not it is recognised by others? I was treated much the same way at another company after management got tired of my steadily chanting "We really must inspect the code before the product ships". Being dumped hurts a lot and the only solution I can see is to do most of the work for my own satisfaction and not expect other people to praise or even acknowledge it. It's nice when they do, but no longer necessary.

    68. Re:Slacker Thee by dave420 · · Score: 1
      "This short term thinking is rampant in this country and it is almost universally negative for the country. It does make a few people very rich in the short term. At the expense of everybody else and with no long term benefit to anybody."

      :) No shit

    69. Re:Slacker Thee by TyrranzzX · · Score: 1

      Lets just take a set of events here, just to show you how corrupt the entire system is.

      I invest $100,000 (a paltry sum of my 30 million) into you to start up a business for 49% of the company stock. You begin making some product, and it takes off. Within a year, the company is worth 2 million, and I own $990,000 of that. In 4 years, I have done no work accept invest some money, and now the company has grown to 2 billion a year, and I own $999,000,000 of that. Now, if the company only had to pay back, at maximum, 10 times the investment, the company would be doing fine and the workers would be making probably double what they were making.

      Because I invested $100,000, I made 10,000 time more back and I did absolutely nothing, while someone else did something. You could say that's smart investing, but that's $990,000,000 that doesn't go toward a families mouth but towards my sorry ass. Additionally, in order to increase the value of my stock, the company is required to by law to pretty much do as I say.

      Say I sell my stock, the company takes a huge dive, a few thousand are layed off, and I reinvest. I reinvest so well, that within 10 years I'v made over $100 billion. I now own some small percentage of the US economy and I have more power than most small 3rd world governments. Companies still scramble to make their stocks look nice.

      This is what's called usury, and this is why the Bible said it was bad. You are using other people to make money instead of doing the work yourself, and when taken on a grand scale, it's used to instiage the most henious inhuman crimes.

    70. Re:Slacker Thee by goodydot · · Score: 1

      Actually, only HALF of workers can be below average. When you mention 'smoothing out the distribution of wealth,' are you implying communism? We see how that idea worked out. If I ran a business, I would want only to hire people who are 'well above average in skill and productivity,' wouldn't you? How can you expect to compete with anybody if you have idiots for workers? People aren't born into some natural right to 'deserve' a job, they need to earn the right to work by doing a good job. If they aren't smart, they can make it up with a good work ethic. this isn't a sig. I really don't have one, so I just added this line.

    71. Re:Slacker Thee by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      I, and just about everyone I work with, feel the same way. It's a lot easier to be a good worker when you feel like you're a part of something, like everyone on the team is working towards the same goal: to build something of lasting value.

      Of course, that's a completely foreign concept to the folks in management, most of which haven't been with any one company for more than 3 or 4 years. They implement their cost-cutting programs, get their big bonus, and move on before anyone above them realizes how much their "cost-cutting" costs the company in production delays, support for half finished products, and the resulting missed opportunities. They got theirs, and screw the rest of us!

      We used to be _the_ premier brand in our industry. It's amazing how far we've been able to skate on that reputation after management has done away with almost everything that built it.

      The best part is, they still expect the same level of loyalty from us, with nothing in return.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    72. Re:Slacker Thee by be951 · · Score: 1
      Lets just take a set of events here, just to show you how corrupt the entire system is.

      Let's take a contrary example to show how effective the system is:
      You don't invest anything in my company, I never make a product that takes off. I never hire thousands of employees, so they are not only not making "probably double" what they could be had you invested and your return was capped, many are making much less than they would have in your scenario.

      Now, let's look at you scenario a little closer:

      Because I invested $100,000, I made 10,000 time more back and I did absolutely nothing....

      Not true. You put your money at risk. And since many more business ventures fail than succeed, that is a significant consideration.

      Additionally, in order to increase the value of my stock, the company is required to by law to pretty much do as I say.

      Again, not really true. While public companies have a duty to investors, unless you own a controlling interest, you generally can't exercise direct control. Furthermore, your interest in the company could be diluted when the company goes public, or a portion of your investment could be subject to a buyback option by the owner, or other restrictions.

      Now, if the company only had to pay back, at maximum, 10 times the investment....

      That would be more like a loan than a direct investment. Business owners have that option as well.

    73. Re:Slacker Thee by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      Generation X is quite guilty of holding manual and factory laborers in contempt. Now that superqualification, offshoring and outsourcing are threatening to make their own jobs as scarce as they smugly applauded for the blue collar set, they are unhappy and are crying "foul!". You should never attempt to impoverish your own parents; but this fact is unable to enter the general GenX brain.

      I should know; I'm GenX myself. I used to express at least some disdain for unions. Now I fully understand that unions in part gave me the America I was able to gorw up in with running water, electricity, schools, roads, entertainment, and all that vast countryside with no bombs falling on it. The question is, did I awaken too late?

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    74. Re:Slacker Thee by bentcd · · Score: 1

      Actually, only HALF of workers can be below average.

      Actually, that is technically wrong. To illustrate, consider the set of numbers 1, 1, 1, 1, 10. The average is 14/5, or just under 3. In this case, then, 80% of the sample population is below average.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    75. Re:Slacker Thee by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      It's funny how many times I hear that, while also noting how little companies care about the experience content of resumes. If education and (or?) experience have much less effect, then We The Workers are truly doomed. Hopefully I'll have saved enough money before some real doom hits, and I can move to a nation with more sensible Socialism, like Switzerland.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    76. Re:Slacker Thee by goodydot · · Score: 1

      First off, an IQ of 100 is average, so you need to make your numbers fit around that. Also, and I could be wrong, intelligence is spread out in a standard bell curve, not a curve following the numbers you gave.

    77. Re:Slacker Thee by AceWithACase · · Score: 1

      >>Unions, on the other hand, are gigolos. Their job is to pimp their members to special interests under the guise of "fairness" and "equality." They just want to keep their positions of power. Take away their whores and suddenly they aren't as big on the street as they used to be. If unions are 'gigolos', what are employer-capitalists? Seems to me they fit the pimp analogy just as well. Do you think the employer pursues "fairness" in contrast to the union? In fact current law exposes a corporation that does so to share-holder lawsuit. As to "sucking your unions boss's dick", can you not pull your nose our of your boss's ass-crack?

    78. Re:Slacker Thee by AceWithACase · · Score: 1

      In fact both wealth and income are distributed as poster said. 10% own >70% of wealth in U.S., and income is also skewed, although not as badly.

      If you and I are standing in empty room, and Bill Gates walks in, how many of us have below average income/wealth? No reason the overall distribution isn't similarly skewed.

    79. Re:Slacker Thee by bentcd · · Score: 1

      I'm not entirely sure that we're talking
      about intelligence here, but even if we are,
      you should keep in mind that IQ isn't a measure
      of intelligence, it's a measure of IQ. Exactly
      what intelligence is and how to measure it remains
      unclear and it may or may not have a strong
      correlation with IQ.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    80. Re:Slacker Thee by ksheff · · Score: 1

      No. Usury is the practice of giving people money and expecting that amount plus a fee for letting them use that money after a given length of time. It's what banks and loansharks both do. The Bible says that it's bad because it makes the borrower slave to the lender. What you described is not usury - it's also not very likely. My selling of stock should not interfere with the company's day to day business or it's bottom line, unless it was trying to use it's stock as some sort of currency that it could crank out of a copy machine to help pay off employees or other companies. THAT is probably the source of more scandal than anything. I also think you need to re-read the parable of the talents.

      On a side note, the prohibition of usury is one of the many reasons economists give for the stagnant economies of the Middle East. It makes it hard for people with good ideas but no capital to start a new business. In your example, the $100K was the seed that enabled a creation of a $2B company that employs many people and allows them to feed their families. That is better than just keeping the $100K or giving it away.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    81. Re:Slacker Thee by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      For exactly the reasons you enumerate, there are no unions of professional atheletes in Football, Basketball, or Baseball.

      Oh, wait.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    82. Re:Slacker Thee by NaDrew · · Score: 1
      Now that has been expanded to all jobs except management, so the "good life" isn't even available to those with four-year University educations any more.
      Perhaps that's the real problem. I've worked for "managers" who could barely tie their loafers without a Project Plan and a Timeline and Measurable Goals.

      Outsource management, I say!

      --
      Vista:XPSP2::ME:98SE
  2. Can't be bothered to RTFA. by Kenja · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can't be bothered to RTFA, I've got too much slashdotting to do here at work before lunch rolls around.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:Can't be bothered to RTFA. by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Funny
      Can't be bothered to RTFA, I've got too much slashdotting to do here at work before lunch rolls around.

      <Comic Book Guy>
      "Sorry, I can't get to that project right now, I'm terribly busy, please call back later, thank yew!"
      "Now where was I? Oh, yes, moderating on /. 'Worse post, ever!'"
      </Comic Book Guy>

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Can't be bothered to RTFA. by Doctor+O · · Score: 1

      How is this a troll? I'd rather say +4, Funny, but hey, you never get those moderation points when you need them.

      --
      Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?
    3. Re:Can't be bothered to RTFA. by jvalenzu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you haven't been permanently banned from moderating slashdot yet, it means you weren't doing a very good job moderating.

    4. Re:Can't be bothered to RTFA. by Doctor+O · · Score: 1

      Actually at the moment I have mod point every five to seven days, but I have the impression that I often have them at the wrong time. ;-)

      FWIW, I found that posting and meta-moderating results in getting mod points much more often. When I'm only lurking and don't meta-moderate, I get mod points around every three or four weeks, but actually I don't find having mod points so important that I would post and m2 only to get them. Bad moderation might spoil this, but I have only had two or three "Funny" rejected of which people thought they were trolls (which of course they were, but funny ones).

      --
      Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?
  3. Please follow her advice. by grub · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Let the weenies that hate their work slack away. When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead. Then the weenies will bitch about not being liked, etc. ANYTHING but looking in the mirror and taking responsibility for their place on the ladder.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:Please follow her advice. by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Beware the union shop (well, some of them), where it might be the status quo to slack off and delay work, and anything resembling industrious labor will get you ostracized

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    2. Re:Please follow her advice. by essreenim · · Score: 1

      I looked in the mirro today, and realised my stuble didn't bother me that much. I saw no ladder tho..
      I only see the ladder when the leprechaun talks to me.

    3. Re:Please follow her advice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Ho, ho, ho. You must be an Ivy League student. Valuable annual reviews?

      I live on a magical planet where work reviews actually make sense. And there's dogs with bees in their mouths, and when they bark they shoot bees at you.

    4. Re:Please follow her advice. by GeckoX · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Great point. (Not always the case as you have implied, but certainly true much of the time)

      Anyone ever had a job on a roadwork crew?
      What happened when you showed up on your first day and tried to actually work a full day without standing around with your thumb up your ass?

      I quit after 2 weeks of being shown that it is not actually acceptable to 'work' all day long. How people can show up to a job day in and day out and fuck the dog all day every day is beyond me. In my experience this leads to the LONGEST days imaginable. Working is a heck of a lot easier when you actually work. (You know those days where you don't even get a chance to think hardly, and they're typically over before you realize the day was even begun!)

      --
      No Comment.
    5. Re:Please follow her advice. by dykofone · · Score: 1
      looking in the mirror and taking responsibility for their place on the ladder

      Jesus man, do you have any idea the shree amount of work that would involve?

    6. Re:Please follow her advice. by fred_sanford · · Score: 1

      You missed the point of the article. She's stating that it doesn't matter if you work hard, you're only judged on pedigree.

    7. Re:Please follow her advice. by Mateito · · Score: 2, Insightful
      When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

      Please give me a one-way ticket to your ideal world.

      The chances that annual reviews will hand out awards in a way that correspondes to reality is basically nil. The problem, widely documented, is that most low to middle IT managers have no management skills. Corperations are failing to instill these skills when promoting good technical people.

      Its Catch 22, we need your technical skills so we promote you, but when we promote you, you manage people.

      That people are slacking THIS badly means that his or her manager should be shot, and they are obviously not excessing control over their team.

    8. Re:Please follow her advice. by WormholeFiend · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In my experience this leads to the LONGEST days imaginable.

      looking on the bright side, at least it will give you the impression that you live a longer life, as opposed to life in the fast lane...

    9. Re:Please follow her advice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Annual reviews are garbage. Half the time, they are glossed over because there is WORK TO BE DONE rather than filling out pissy little paperwork. The rest of the time, they often go by a "curve" which means if 100 employees all kick super ass, 20% will always get fucked, 20% will always be gods on paper and 60% will be mediocre... evne though they ALL kick as much ass.

      And companies don't so much care about your reviews. When it comes to layoff time, seniority plays more of a role than capability, productivity and work-ethic. That seems bizarre since a company that is having financial trouble should trim their belt by retaining only the few best people they can rather than ditching everyone based on number of years in the company, retaining some of the crappier, lazier, lesser qualified individuals simply because they've been at the company, skating by without notice, longer.

      Seriously, reviews aren't worth the paper they're written on.

      I put in 80 hour work weeks for seven years. I lived my work. I worked at work, then I went home and worked on work the rest of the night. Plus weekends. And holidays. That's assuming I didn't just live at work, which I did for weeks at a time. And all of my reviews were golden. But I didn't play the political game as much. Rather than kissing ass and talking big about myself, I kept my nose down and did the work that was being neglected by those who were spending their time ass kissing rather than working.

      I neglected my health and social life and now I'm in very poor health (living in an office and eating crap food so you can spend more time working is a bad thing in the long run) and I have no social network. All I did was work. Day, night, weekend, holiday. Sometimes I would go home at 10pm and drive back at 2am because I got bored or wanted to get more work done, even though the work day didn't start until 9am.

      Anyway, I was laid off a few months ago in favor of hiring a bunch of people in india. I noted that all of the people that were laid off had been there less tiem than those who were kept on the payroll, and many of those who were laid off were known company-wide to be far more talented and capable than those that stayed on.

    10. Re:Please follow her advice. by HangingChad · · Score: 1
      When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

      What color is the sky on your planet? lol.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    11. Re:Please follow her advice. by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't work in government.

    12. Re:Please follow her advice. by Carmody · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

      You obviously don't work in the United States. It is not like that here. The people who work hard stay in their same position, because they are good at it.

      --
      God is real unless declared integer
    13. Re:Please follow her advice. by funaho · · Score: 1

      Hmm I'm kinda bummed to hear that, because road construction is one thing I've always thought I'd like to try someday, after I finally get fed up with IT as a job (it's a nice hobby though.)

    14. Re:Please follow her advice. by GeckoX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Careful, I never suggested I'm living in the fast lane.

      I cherish my time above all else. I work to live and nothing more. I do not and never will live to work.

      I work an 8 hour day 5 days a week on average. I will not work overtime unless it is compensated with flex-time. My work days fly by and the _rest_ of my life gives me the impression of a longer life.

      It's up to us as individuals to make these choices and decisions though, and to stick to them. Our employers are not people, they are corporations and they will use us as much as we let them.

      Choose not to let them, you'll be a happier human being for it I assure you.

      --
      No Comment.
    15. Re:Please follow her advice. by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      I was generalizing, and there are certainly construction companies out there where this is not acceptable.

      Look for a smaller, non-unionized private construction firm whose core business isn't latched to a single city contract or similar. They exist and can be quite good jobs.

      --
      No Comment.
    16. Re:Please follow her advice. by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      looking on the bright side, at least it will give you the impression that you live a longer life, as opposed to life in the fast lane...

      I go with the grandparent. What's wrong with a sense of purpose and accomplishment?

      Why would you enjoy a "long" life of mediocrity? I tremendously enjoy a sense of competence, purpose, and accomplishment. I also frequently work my 455 off on 60 (or more) hour weeks, interspersed with a few 2-3 week vacations throughout the year.

      There's nothing quite so delicious for my ego than to realize that many people depend on the critical services that I provide - and that it's totally ok because I am perfectly capable of providing them.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    17. Re:Please follow her advice. by aralin · · Score: 1
      Well, sometimes the "annual review" does not come for 3 or more years, who is better off then? Then it finally comes and your reward will be that you get up on the corporate ladder a step closer to the level that the bunch of slackers has been on for years already, thanks to the only skill they have been able to demonstrate - endurance.

      Your ambition, enthusiasm, skill and hard work does not stack up against endurance as the measure of success. And that is the point. Read not just the article, but the book as well. You will find that it has its points even for Sillicon Valley.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    18. Re:Please follow her advice. by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Hmm, where are you from?
      I'm pretty used to the exact opposite in southwestern ontario.

      --
      No Comment.
    19. Re:Please follow her advice. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

      HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!... oh, you were being serious.

      Have you seen the movie "Office Space"?

    20. Re:Please follow her advice. by bluekanoodle · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Here's where you missed it then. Most people who complain about how "I work harder then everybody else in my office, and I don't play the political game at work, i just do my job, and do it well and now I got shafted," don't get it.

      The fact is, that playing the social game is part of your job. Is it written in your job description? No. Do they teach a college course on it? probably not. Don't like it? Tough. It's a harsh world out there and nepotism, favoritism and who you know are just as important as what you know. Deal with it and move on, or drop out, grow some dreadlocks, and blame the man.

    21. Re:Please follow her advice. by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      In my department of transportation that I contract with, I'm utterly convinced that actually working a full day gets you transfered to Information Systems. Regardless of previous training. The sad thing about this is that the people most stuck up about working a full day get transfered to the Computer Security Unit, where they have control over the firewall. Amazing what web sites get blocked at the proxy, and which ones don't (like /. isn't blocked but everything2 is).

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    22. Re:Please follow her advice. by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hehe. This takes me back.

      Back when I was putting myself through school working as a electronic/mechinical tech in a research lab, I had a terrific work ethic.

      A lot of our time was wasted waiting around for some project mileston or some demonstration needed for a proposal. So, being industrious me, I made it my job to be useful every hour of every day. I checked the lab bays and made sure that all the appropriate safety equipment was in place and that there were first aid kits available and everyone knew where they were. I fabricated shelves and racks for things and made useful devices for moving heavy stuff around. I checked that all the equipment was inventoried and properly cleaned and maintained. I broke down useless old equipment for parts that we'd need, sorted and inventoried all the pieces. When there was nothing else I could think of, I swept the floor while the other guys sat around and drank coffee.

      So, when a really cool project came along, who did the bosses turn to?

      Right. Somebody else but me. I was already busy, the cool projects went to the guys who spent their time loafing. In fact, I'd trained everybody to think of me as their maid or their mom. I was useful as hell doing what I was already doing. Oh yes, and since the things that you do affect your job description, and the skill level of the things on your job description determine your compensation, guess who was in line for promotion and raises?

      There was an important lesson in this situation for me. I just wish I knew what it was. Other than that bosses (even ones with PhDs) are stupid.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    23. Re:Please follow her advice. by mvdwege · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In my personal experience, working harder than the slackers just means that the boss will pile even more responsibility (read: work) on your shoulders, until you're about to break.

      Meanwhile, the slackers will just have to do a little more than just slack oof, just enough to get in a decent performance review.

      And worse, because the corporate ladder is actually a pyramid, your chances of climbing the ladder are actually not as good as they want you to believe. The competition for the next highest level job is such that there is a good chance you won't get it.

      End result: not slacking off means more stress for you. And the payoff is effectively wholly dependent on the whims of your superiors, not on your performance.

      Now, if only I could set aside my personal pride and slack off, I wouldn't be so bitter...

      Mart
      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    24. Re:Please follow her advice. by cubicledrone · · Score: 1

      When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

      Oh, please. Move ahead right into a layoff. I know dozens of people who worked hard and took pride in their work. They are ALL unemployed and have been for years.

      Then the weenies will bitch about not being liked, etc. ANYTHING but looking in the mirror and taking responsibility for their place on the ladder.

      So management is always blameless, and never has to take responsibility for the low morale of the workers THEY HIRED? If the workers are bitching, it's MANAGEMENT'S fault. But no, middle management would much rather make the workplace a giant festering cesspool of office politics and non-specific gripes about the paycheck-to-paycheck guy in cubicle 1874-C.

      W-4 employment is obsolete anyway. Can't depend on a paycheck anymore, so society can't depend on higher education, retirement, investments, neighborhoods or mortgages either.

      --
      Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
    25. Re:Please follow her advice. by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Good plan- I did live to work, then the 2001 recession hit my job- and I spent the next 26 months going slowly insane. I'm now fully insane, which is why I'm working in government. So don't be like me- work to live, don't live to work.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    26. Re:Please follow her advice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And how do you avoid being fired? Management and corporations expect you to work more than the required time. If your job requires 60 hours a week or 80 hours a week, how can you refuse?

      If you're salaried, you are not being paid per-hour and are expected to work however long the job takes. If you are hourly, you can still be fired for not putting in due effort to accomodate extra necessities.

      You can't just "choose not to let them", unless what you mean is "choose to be unemployed".

      I have no life. I've made work my life. I have not gone to a movie, party, vacation, dinner or anything else in over a decade. I work seven days a week, 14 hours per day while everyone else in my group works about five days a week, for 40 or 50 hours and does the regular family/whatever thing the rest of the time.

      Having a "life" isn't all it's cracked up to be. For one thing, what's the point of having a "life" if you don't have enough money to have fun with your life? And second, there are a lot of shitty things that can go on in your "life". Like shitty relationships and such. I could invest my many hours into a relationsihp that will eventually end and all I'll have gotten out of it is some sex. Big fuckign deal. OR, I could put those same hours and that same effort into my job, where the return is cold hard cash, accolades and the respect of my colleagues, as well as a better resume. It's clear which one is the more productive choice.

    27. Re:Please follow her advice. by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      A lot of people live without a sense of purpose, and only have a sense of disillusionment.

      Just for the sake of philosophical argument, I ask, what's the point of it all?

    28. Re:Please follow her advice. by pubjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

      My dad once gave me a piece of advice that stuck with me because it was so out of character of my dad to say it.

      He had worked dilligently and hard all his life for a good employer. He did so thinking that that was the way to get to the top - your achiements would be recognised.

      What he told me was, it isn't the people like him who get to the top. It's those that know how to "play the game":

      * take credit for work you haven't done. This espcially works if you have junior staff that want to get ahead - you can ride on top of them.
      * quickly dissociate yourself from projects that go wrong. Subtly point the finger of blame at others.
      * be a nice guy most of the time, but know when the moment is to stab your friends in the back.
      * get others (especially your subordinates) to do your job for you. They'll probably do it better anyway.
      * Make friends with people as high up the ladder as you can. Really suck up to them.
      * etc.

      My dad didn't want me to do any of these things, he just didn't want me to spend my working life under a false illusion.

    29. Re:Please follow her advice. by OSI7 · · Score: 1

      >>When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead Depends on how you define "hard work." In most real companies, the people who work "hard" by putting in the most hours will certainly get bonus money but they are also guaranteed bonus work to do. I have heard many complaints from my long-suffering IT colleagues who never have enough team members to get the job done and are always calling their spouses because they'll be home late. Is that moving ahead? I don't know. Ask their families, or ask their doctors. On the other hand, those who work "hard" by thinking a lot about business processes, information analysis, customer psychology, and management indecision and incompetence, and who focus on making their own work as efficient as possible, and absolutely do not work the extra hours expected of everyone -- well those "hard" workers might get a financial bonus, but usually do not get bonus work because mgmt doesn't have a high opinion or high visibility of them. Who's really ahead?

    30. Re:Please follow her advice. by gmack · · Score: 2

      Forget that.. I did that for months on end only to get layed off and I having to completely relearn what to do with free time.

      Now that I'm employed again I fight any hours over 40. The laugh is that now that I'm not the company footstool I'm valued even more now. It does however help that there is no one here who can do what I do.

      Learn some ballance.

    31. Re:Please follow her advice. by Ubergrendle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I feel for you. I've seen employees -- coworkers, superiors, people who report to me -- lose their focus in life. Corporations and management can easily run over their employees unless they say 'no'. What I've always found surprising is how little negative response 'no' ultimately solicits... I've never seen someone fired for saying 'no' to overtime, or 'no' to working on yet another project, or 'no' to a missed deliverable. At most it only hits your performance rating (in a severe case) which might effect your bonus...if there is a bonus that year. Life is too short to worry about $1,000 - $10,000 extra per year.

      I'm my last organisation I was a middle-level manager. I was on the fast track to a senior manager or director position. But then I looked at my boss and his peers. All were divorced, or unmarried. Workaholics every one of them. And not one of them was physically fit or led a healthy lifestyle. I refused a promotion, and the response was akin to me speaking Farsi. After a few interviews ('why are you refusing a promotion???') the end result was that my boss' peers thought I either had a) personal problems, b) a bad work ethic and I needed career counselling, or c) was holding out for more money. My boss fortunately understood my reasons and didn't take it personally. He was impressed with my confidence, and was also happy that i would continue working for him.

      Nevertheless, the writing was on the wall and I was out on my own accord in 6 months. I took a promotion in another department that promised 9-5 hours (meaning 8-6, with ~occasional~ OT when necessary), and extra vacation. Best career move I ever made.

      --
      John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
    32. Re:Please follow her advice. by grendelkhan · · Score: 1
      Its Catch 22, we need your technical skills so we promote you, but when we promote you, you manage people
      Part of what drew my to my current employer is a dual advancement track - one to stay technical and one to go managerial. I want to avoid all managerial duties like the plague and now I can.
      --
      Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
    33. Re:Please follow her advice. by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Let the weenies that hate their work slack away. When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead. Then the weenies will bitch about not being liked, etc. ANYTHING but looking in the mirror and taking responsibility for their place on the ladder.

      Not entirely true- I worked my tail off at every job I've ever done up until 3 years ago, and NONE of them were secure, or even close to the "permanent employee" promised. True, several times I made it until the "end of the company"- but no matter how many times I put in 24 hour or 48 hour shifts developing software, the company eventually went bankrupt anyway. And no job ever lasted more than 2 years.

      Government is MUCH more reliable than private industry- though I've yet to build up my loyalty barrel again after being out of work for 26 months.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    34. Re:Please follow her advice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      But what in the hell do you do with all your time?!

      There's nothing wrong with being unmarried. Having a significant other (or kids, etc) would only impact my ability to work. If I only worked 9-5 five days per week, I'd be bored out of my fucking skull.

      Even on company holidays when we were all forced to take time off and the hours were taken out of our vacation accrual, I would work. I just wouldn't tell my boss. I'd log on from home through the VPN and get a lot of work done in those extra 8 to 16 hours. Not to mention the weekends. I was able to do in one 16 hour per day 7 day per week stint what it would have taken the average employee a month to accomplish.

      I think people place too much value on "personal" time and "relationsihps" and "real life". I work insane hours and durations because it's my passion. It may not be my dream job (I don't care about the product or the specific position), but a man's worth is dictated by his professional recognition, salary and resume. Any schuck can go knock some skank up and have a family. It takes someone of principal and accomplishment to build a smashing resume and career over his life time.

    35. Re:Please follow her advice. by GeckoX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't make the mistake of assuming you have no choice, and that you have made no choices. You have made your bed, and appear to have no problem in lying in it. That's great, but you have made a choice to live your life this way, the company you work for did not force this on you.

      Who is forcing you to work for that employer? Nobody except yourself. Don't like it? Change. Can't find a better employer? Be your own. There is ALWAYS choice.

      Concidering you appear to be sacrificing your own personal life for work, what good is cold hard cash? If you choose to work constantly, why bother with paying for accommodations, transportation, nice clothing, toys, television etc etc. I.E.: What does that cash get you?

      And what does accolades and respect of your colleagues and a better resume get you other than more of the same?

      And how does this make it clear what the more productive choice is? Not that you've convinced me as I already had this view, but your argument reaffirms my convictions that the exact opposite is true.

      Think of it another way, when you're gone will your corporation remember you and your contributions? I know my family will.

      --
      No Comment.
    36. Re:Please follow her advice. by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't even try to define the point of it all, but I have a large view on what the point is NOT.

      I'm pretty sure that in the grand scheme of things, working ones tail off for a corporation is certainly quite pointless.

      --
      No Comment.
    37. Re:Please follow her advice. by BestNicksRTaken · · Score: 1

      "Other than that bosses (even ones with PhDs) are stupid."

      Think you miss-typed there, I think you meant "*especially* ones with PhDs".

      I know exactly how you feel - as does most of the /. crows I expect, the Suits are the enemy, and they regularly have no clue.

      Jees my boss has like 2 PhD's, admittedly from some crappy US university, but Hell, he can barely even make the coffee in the morning!

      --
      #include <sig.h>
    38. Re:Please follow her advice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Money is like points in a videogame. The man with the most before he dies wins.

    39. Re:Please follow her advice. by Cereal+Box · · Score: 1

      Specifically, what was your job title? I ask because you said you had this job while you were in school (in other words, before you had a degree). It sounds to me like you were probably an intern-level (not saying you WERE an intern but you probably ranked below employees with degrees) employee, so all the "cool projects" would naturally go to the regular, degree-holding employees. Without knowing more about your situation it sounds to me like you're getting a little bitter that projects were handed off to higher ranking employees who might have been "loafing" because they had other things to do than the low-level "house cleaning" work you were engaged in (and probably hired to do, being a student).

    40. Re:Please follow her advice. by phurley · · Score: 1

      We need a +1 Sad, but true moderation.

      --
      Home Automation & Linux -- now I know I'm a geek
    41. Re:Please follow her advice. by phearlez · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Yeah, they're of the same breed as the men who whine they don't have any luck with women because they are "nice guys" and not "assholes." The reason they have no luck is that they're wimps who never stand up for what they want (which they mistake for what it is to be 'nice') and nobody - men or women - respects a doormat. They're great to wipe your feet on but you wouldn't take one to bed.

      But I think you misidentify it when you call it "playing the social game" though - this assumes it's necessarily frivilous rather than perfectly reasonable. Being agreeable to your cow orkers means they feel free to approach you for assitance. Putting the big boss's requests above other people's demonstrates a respect for the hierarchy (even if s/he doesn't respect the chain of command).

      --
      Bad management trumps ideology - Show the world you want better leadership. http://www.timefornewmanagement.com
    42. Re:Please follow her advice. by Trent05 · · Score: 1

      The fact is, that playing the social game is part of your job.

      So true. I've heard it called "Networking" many times. I've seen a couple people passed over for several positions due to their attitude. Knowledge-wise they were probably the best for the job, but if you're bitter as f*ck and don't care what people think about you, it shows. If you're going to be a thorn in the other employee's side, might as well pick the second most knowledgeable candidate that can work with others and train them an extra week.

      The BOFH maybe funny to read about, but I don't want to have to depend on him. :P

      --


      --
      The Marines: The few, the proud, the not very bright. - Slashdot tagline 04/21/05
    43. Re:Please follow her advice. by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      I put in 80 hour work weeks for seven years. I lived my work. I worked at work, then I went home and worked on work the rest of the night. Plus weekends. And holidays. That's assuming I didn't just live at work, which I did for weeks at a time. And all of my reviews were golden.

      Luxury. In my experience, that kind of effort results in reviews that say "Meets Expectations" or "Satisfactory".

      Dilbert may be cynical fiction, but there's some truth to the Wally character.

    44. Re:Please follow her advice. by chaosmage42 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like someone had some gene therapy.

      --

      done
    45. Re:Please follow her advice. by hey! · · Score: 4, Informative

      Job title: Eletromechanical tech. I was working during a hiatus in my school career to raise money to pay for tuition, not as an intern. The jobs were not ones that required a degree (i.e. technician jobs, not engineer jobs). I had way on the ball more than the other guys.

      And, no I'm not bitter. I was being funny.

      I think this post has gone to +5 faster than any other post that I've made, so I seem to have touched a nerve. The truth is that this work experience, as well as others, has taught me a lot.

      Looking back at my young self, I have to laugh. I expected to be a)noticed then b) appreciated then c) rewarded for being more diligent and hard working than the other guys. Well, the plan fails at step A. Very few bosses notice when anything happens unless it is bad and requires their attention. People don't go to boss school and learn how to run an efficient organization. By in large, bosses are consumed with their own day to day concerns and as in the dark as anyone else as to how make things run better. They'll piss away all the staff time and let the place turn into an unsafe stye, then deal with accidents and curse the slow response time when crunch time comes.

      The lesson is: when you are the situation of having to manage yourself, then you are also in the position of having to manage your boss. Bosses love to have somebody tell them what needs to be done, as long as it doesn't sound like your are telling them what to do. I call this "Boss Management", and key is bringing things to the boss's notice. This is how the older, wiser me would handle this situation today:

      Me: Hey Dick, I noticed we have a lot of down time around here.

      Dr. Dick: Yeah, but right now there isn't any work to do until until we present to DOE next month.

      Me: Well, sure, but there's still better ways we can use our time than just sitting around and waiting. We can improve the safety and organization of the lab; I've noticed for example there's only one first aid kit and it's nowhere near where anyone is going to have an accident. We can get things organized and ready for crunch time. We can build things that are useful or spend our time on projects that would sharpen our skills. Hell, you know you're going to give a VIP tour, and the place looks like a pigstye. There's no reason we can't keep the place spruced up rather than running around at the last minute. Plus a well organized lab will make a better impression.

      Dr. Dick: OK, why don't you go ahead and do it.

      Me: Great, but I think this would be better coming from you. The guys would take it more seriously. Why don't you write a memo suggesting the tech staff put together a plan to use slack time more effectively. You can use some of the suggestions I made.

      Dr. Dick: I don't know, I'm really busy now.

      Me: OK, I'll draft it for you, and if it looks OK it can go out over your signature.

      The things to remember is that you can't expect bosses to notice things or to have a plan to make things better. You're the one with the ideas, so you package them up nice and sweet and tie it up with a bow and let the boss rubber stamp it. It gets the job done, spreads the work fairly, and it gets you noticed and credited with making things better.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    46. Re:Please follow her advice. by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I never seem to win video games either, go figure ;)

      --
      No Comment.
    47. Re:Please follow her advice. by Watcher · · Score: 1

      There's nothing wrong with being unmarried. Having a significant other (or kids, etc) would only impact my ability to work. If I only worked 9-5 five days per week, I'd be bored out of my fucking skull.

      Dude, get a hobby, start a company, something that is for yourself, and doesn't involve sacrificing the small amount of time you have on this world making someone else rich.


      I think people place too much value on "personal" time and "relationsihps" and "real life".

      Maybe its because of different priorities. After my experiences, only your family and friends (by friends I mean the people who will stick with you through the most hellish shit you can't even imagine-not folks who will go out boozing with you on friday night and can barely remember your last name, let alone anything else about you), will stand by you when things get tough-your employer will fire you the moment they feel they need the cash for something else, no matter how invaluable you think you are to them. Loyalty in business is only as good as the balance sheet.



      I'm very focused on family and friends, and I try to do the best I can at work while maintaining a personal life. I'm also focused on having a challenging job, because I bore pretty easily, but once the day is done work is the last thing on my mind. I started to compartmentalise my life like that because I was sliding into the "work all the time" life, and it was killing me and hurting the people I care about.


      It takes someone of principal and accomplishment to build a smashing resume and career over his life time.
      Wow. It also takes principal and accomplishment to have a happy, stable family, and more commitment and dedication than damn near any career will ever demand. That's why so many people fuck it up-they figure raising kids and keeping a marriage together is all nice and self maintaining, when in reality its a lifetime of effort-rewarding effort, but effort.

    48. Re:Please follow her advice. by Marko+DeBeeste · · Score: 1

      A new problem; This has the potential of turning from recreational doing nothing to sabotage (a word coined from the wooden shoes into machines) A deep sense of being disenfranchised has led to racial violence in this country, so get ready for the information age equivalent of everything from looting TVs to burning down cities.

      --
      Faith: n. -- That human impulse that drives them to steal appliances when the power goes out
    49. Re:Please follow her advice. by Shajenko42 · · Score: 1

      I smell a troll.

    50. Re:Please follow her advice. by Strontium-90 · · Score: 1

      You mean that stuff like this doesn't happen in real life?

      Michael Bolton: You haven't even been showing up for work, and you got to keep your job.

      Peter Gibbons: Actually I'm being promoted.

    51. Re:Please follow her advice. by genner · · Score: 1

      It's hard to see the sky from a a windowless cubicle. If management says it's pink it's hard to prove otherwise from where I'm sitting.

    52. Re:Please follow her advice. by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Money is like points in a videogame. Just abstract numbers representing nothing.

    53. Re:Please follow her advice. by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      Performance reviews have been a waste of time every place I have ever worked. First of all the format is usually reviewed and changed every 6 months anyway making it impossible to compare any review against any other.

      The last place I worked had a scale which went from 1 ( Very good ) down to 5 ( Very bad ) but for some reason the HR department had decreed that 1's were in affect unattainable since people scoring 1's should be instantly promoted elsewhere and 5's indicated employees who should not be working there under any circumstances.

      In consequence even on the ( rare ) occasions when my work conformed to the written standards to attain a 1 my boss was too scared to award that because of the level of justification required to the clueless HR department. In the event I got a 2 which the HR department argued with until my boss rediscovered his backbone and pointed out that HR had no clue what work anyone was doing and should butt out.

      But anyway what is the point of a review grading system when everyone is effectively barred from using 2/5ths of the available gradings ????

    54. Re:Please follow her advice. by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      Your PHB called: two fresh college grads are going to be replacing you next week, since the two of them combined are cheaper than you and can certainly do the same thing you do.

      I AM the PHB - as an indie consultant, I am my own boss! I lose contracts from time to time, but I have enough different contracts in enough different industries that I'm not worried...

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    55. Re:Please follow her advice. by nihilatron · · Score: 1

      When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.

      Unless you are female and work at Walmart...


    56. Re:Please follow her advice. by Phleg · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they're of the same breed as the men who whine they don't have any luck with women because they are "nice guys" and not "assholes." The reason they have no luck is that they're wimps who never stand up for what they want (which they mistake for what it is to be 'nice') and nobody - men or women - respects a doormat. They're great to wipe your feet on but you wouldn't take one to bed.

      So it's bad to be a doormat. Check.

      But I think you misidentify it when you call it "playing the social game" though - this assumes it's necessarily frivilous rather than perfectly reasonable. Being agreeable to your cow orkers means they feel free to approach you for assitance. Putting the big boss's requests above other people's demonstrates a respect for the hierarchy (even if s/he doesn't respect the chain of command).

      Unless you're at work. Check.

      --
      No comment.
    57. Re:Please follow her advice. by jcr · · Score: 1

      Your dad forgot to tell you that all of the above is unnecessary if you're working for a healthy organization. Usually, this means a business that hasn't been around for more than about forty years or so, and still has some pride in their work.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    58. Re:Please follow her advice. by Laz7 · · Score: 1

      I worked for a pulp and paper mill as a summer student one year. Coming from $8 / hour dishwashing jobs, the $22 / hour job moving lumber around and sweeping up woodchips was heavenly. I worked dilligently the first week but was taken aside by my manager to let me know that I was making the regular guys look bad and I should really slow down. It was quite disillusioning. Of course, now, 10 years later, 2/3 of those workers have been let go as the mill has sold off nonprofitable equipment due to high labour costs. I wonder how many of those guys would still have their jobs if they had strived for a higher level of performance?

    59. Re:Please follow her advice. by MrWa · · Score: 1
      There was an important lesson in this situation for me. I just wish I knew what it was. Other than that bosses (even ones with PhDs) are stupid.
      How can you blame your bosses for being stupid when you were the one that didn't know doing busy work and making people think of you "as their maid or their mom" was not the way to get ahead in life. Looking for things to do is good, if they are the right things to do. Sure, the floor may have needed sweeping but that doesn't mean you need to do it. Making yourself appear so busy that you are not available to do the "real" work is the wrong way to go about things in life - not just at your job.

    60. Re:Please follow her advice. by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      "How people can show up to a job day in and day out and fuck the dog all day every day is beyond me. In my experience this leads to the LONGEST days imaginable."

      Bet it seems even longer to the dog.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    61. Re:Please follow her advice. by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      Amen. A wise teacher of mine told me of the 80-20 rule. Business is 80% who you know and 20% what you know. If you don't like the game, play a different one.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    62. Re:Please follow her advice. by El+Cabri · · Score: 1
      How people can show up to a job day in and day out and fuck the dog all day every day is beyond me. In my experience this leads to the LONGEST days imaginable

      What do you mean by "in your experience" ? What the hell did you do to that dog ?

    63. Re:Please follow her advice. by Kuad · · Score: 1

      I thought the original poster was more along the line sof "+5 - Funny", based on my corporate experiences.

    64. Re:Please follow her advice. by ksheff · · Score: 1

      probably about 1/2 of all of them. They need the extra guys because they are all slacking.

      Is it any wonder why work is being offshored or contracted out to firms employing illegal aliens? I walk by houses under construction on my way to the office. The crews with Americans are on site when I go by, but are sitting around drinking coffee and are gone when I come home from work. The crews with Mexicans are _working_ any time I walk by and do so until the sun goes down. Guess which houses are still only 1/2 built and which ones are finished? I did some construction related work in the summer while in college. Like these guys, I could only work when the weather was nice, so we worked all day as long as there was sufficient light to see. Whether you are paid by the job or paid by the hour, for these type of seasonal jobs, why not put in as many hours as you can while you can? Then you have lots of cash for the parts of the year when work is scarce.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    65. Re:Please follow her advice. by ksheff · · Score: 1

      (I'd bet no non-European can ever imagine the annoying and tremendously dense 24/7 truck traffic here)

      You're joking right? Come to any US city with at least one interstate highway and you'll find lots of 24/7 truck traffic. Since your autobahns inspired Eisenhower to propose the creation of our interstate highways, I guess the similarity wouldn't be a surprise, but I would have thought more of your stuff would be on rail. Or is that just a misconception due to other /.ers from Europe bragging about how great all the trains are on the Continent?

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    66. Re:Please follow her advice. by hey! · · Score: 1
      Everybody feels underappreciated.


      The lesson in that is you have to manufacture appreciation for your good deed.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    67. Re:Please follow her advice. by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      Let the weenies that hate their work slack away. When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.
      You've completely missed the point. You are assuming that it is a good thing to enjoy your work and get ahead. A slacker has different priorities.

      Anyway, it is certainly *not* true that working hard will automatically move you up that slippery pole, I would guess that you have had more experierence of studying than working. They are not the same thing at all.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    68. Re:Please follow her advice. by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      I think you got trolled.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    69. Re:Please follow her advice. by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      In a different fashion, your efforts still won't bring you notoriety since "jack of all trades", "making do", and "increasing reliability" are simply not admirable qualities to today's MBA-governed businesses. They only admire making more profit this quarter over the last. If they could make more money this quarter by setting the building on fire, they would.

      What you did was take care of infrastructure. Infrastructure is the most invisible thing in the world to Americans, and to excessively-capitalistic people in general. Infrastructure is only overhead to them -- an investment, made by some bankrupt folks, that they get a return on for nothing -- and I certainly don't need to tell you that salespeople are less involved than technicians in the details of infrastructure. Infrastructure is tech, hence despised and marginalized.

      I admire what you did, and your pluck. I fear you will hardly ever receive recognition and appreciation for it.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    70. Re:Please follow her advice. by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      The problem, widely documented, is that most low to middle IT managers have no management skills. Corperations are failing to instill these skills when promoting good technical people.

      My experience in the corporate world has been that the low level managers are the only ones that actually have any management skills at all. Of course, those are also the people who don't have business degrees.

      Business is the party major. That truth was first presented to me in a Dead Kennedys song, then solidified while working as a math tutor in college, and reinforced daily now that I'm out in the real world when I hear such management gems as "If you guys don't cut down on your overtime we're going to have to lay someone off" (actual quote from an upper level manager speaking to our field service engineers).

      I used to think Dilbert was funny.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    71. Re:Please follow her advice. by Magius_AR · · Score: 1
      Yeah, they're of the same breed as the men who whine they don't have any luck with women because they are "nice guys" and not "assholes." The reason they have no luck is that they're wimps who never stand up for what they want
      True for some, not for others.

      Women really will take the asshole over the nice guy, mainly because being disregarded/mistreated/ignored is highly valued to a woman. They like the game and like to "work" for affection. Most nice guys are open with their feelings and treasure the women freely and openly. This is boring to women, who find the indifferent attitude of the assholes to be mysterious, exotic, and thrilling.

      It disgusted me to my core playing that game to get a girl, but it worked. Indifference paid off where respect and diligence (and confidence) got me nothing

      Believe me, the nice guys have a reason to whine.
      Women are f%^%&# up.

    72. Re:Please follow her advice. by k12linux · · Score: 1
      It's one thing to work 60+ hour weeks in exchange for 6-9+ weeks of vacation. Sounds like you may still be working around a 2000 hr workyear. It's working a 3000+ hr workyear that seems insane to me.

      I'm willing to give up 1/3 of my waking time over the course of a year (roughtly 2000 hrs) in exchange for the $ I need for neccessities and toys. I'm not willing to spend more time working over the course of the year than I do enjoying the fruits of my labor.

      Since I'm salaried, why haven't I been replaced by someone who lives to work? Because during those 2000 hrs that I am working, I'm working hard. I'm not chatting at the water cooler, I'm not taking the two optional 15 minute paid breaks, I'm not randomly surfing the Internet and I'm not buying/selling stuff on eBay. (All things which most bosses can't say of the majority of their employees.)

    73. Re:Please follow her advice. by NaDrew · · Score: 1
      When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.
      HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!... oh, you were being serious. Have you seen the movie "Office Space"? The problem is that many people don't realize it's a documentary.
      --
      Vista:XPSP2::ME:98SE
  4. Close, but misses the mark by skrysakj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This mostly pertains to France, which is similar to other European countries whereby employees stay at one job, for life, and very rarely get fired.

    I think US citizens should focus on different things, like getting 3 or 4 weeks of vacation per year, not just two.

    Also, some professions are not equal in the USA. Medical residents, for example, are under the same employee laws as everyone else, but routinely work 100 to 120 hours per week. Only *now* are they starting to get tired of it and fight back.
    Good for them, because that kind of thing is outrageous and needs to change.

    Instead of focusing on "Bonjour Paresse", people should focus on working to live, not living to work. Or, how to be a good employee and not slack off, bringing down the system.

    1. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As someone who used to work for a multinational before having his job outsourced to india, I'd just like to reaffirm the fact that French people (and many euros) are fucking lazy as hell. It pisses me off that Americans are branded as "fat and lazy" when I'm being paid the same as some dickhead in France, but I'm picking up HIS slack, because he only works 35 hours a week, can't be forced to work weekends, can't be forced to work overtime, is gauranteed something like six weeks of vacation per year, plus gets something called RT every month for another day off.

      Fuck all that. The french don't need a book on how to slack off. Their government fucking ENCOURAGES it to begin with.

    2. Re:Close, but misses the mark by pubjames · · Score: 2, Informative

      This mostly pertains to France, which is similar to other European countries whereby employees stay at one job, for life, and very rarely get fired.

      That's one hell of a sweeping generalisation.

      Although this is more true of Europe than the USA, it is not true of all jobs (especially IT jobs), nor is it true of all countries.

    3. Re:Close, but misses the mark by skrysakj · · Score: 1

      You're right, and I tried not to be TOO accusative, or generalize too much. Europe is a large body of countries, and off the top of my head I only think of Spain and Germany being close to the mark.

      Hence my use of the words "mostly pertains to" and "similar to other European countries" instead of "similar to ALL European countries".

      Anyways, as hard as we all work, in any country, us Americans often find ourselves envious of such employee comforts in most of Europe. (on the whole)

    4. Re:Close, but misses the mark by The+Bungi · · Score: 1
      I think US citizens should focus on different things, like getting 3 or 4 weeks of vacation per year, not just two.

      Perhaps you'd like to offer some insight as to how to go about achieving this. I routinely cash out vacation I had no time or inclination to take during the year. Not because I don't want to take it, but because I can't afford to be away from the job for more than 7 days at a time.

      And no, I don't want the government to "help me out" with this. I'm fine. I have a life and time for my family and I'm building a future. Work is not that bad when you truly love what you do.

    5. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Jens_UK · · Score: 1

      I find the opposite to be true in your skrysak.com article on how to be a good employee. Here, no one notices how early you come in, only how late you stay. Personally, I would love to come in early, but with late afternoon assignments that have to be "done before you go", I gave up and have shifted to two hours later in an attempt to reduce the amount of time spent at work. :sigh:

    6. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Hard_Code · · Score: 1

      Well, maybe he was talking about those disagreeable Old Europe countries, not the amicable New Europe countries that have such bubbly dispositions.

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    7. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I like how this gets modded up without any sign of a statistic (from a source we can believe) to back it up.

      Wanting it to be true != true.

    8. Re:Close, but misses the mark by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      yet their productivity per capita is actually higher than in the USA.

      Well, yes, but they have double-digit unemployment too. You can have all the holiday you want if you don't have a job!

    9. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Mateito · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nah.

      Spanish companies are bastards (and, as an sometime employee of Telefonica, I can say that with authority).

      The Spanish management mentality is really stuck in the "People are meat" age. Bum on seat = position filled. If you can sack somebody and replace them with somebody cheaper, then do it. Experience counts for nothing. If you've got a degree, then that is what you are.

      Efficiency means "sack people", business plan means "sell stuff". Its really a very simple way to look at the complex dynamics of a business.

    10. Re:Close, but misses the mark by skrysakj · · Score: 1

      No puede ser.....

      Bueno, pense que Espana era diferente, mas "seguro" en la tema de sus empleados.

      Que pena. A mi, suena como paises sin much socialismo. Odio a la falta de respeta para empleados y su valor.

    11. Re:Close, but misses the mark by ratamacue · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I just read an article the other day that stated exactly the opposite of what this poster claims.

    12. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you'd like to offer some insight as to how to go about achieving this. I routinely cash out vacation I had no time or inclination to take during the year. Not because I don't want to take it, but because I can't afford to be away from the job for more than 7 days at a time.

      Are you really that indispensable? What would happen if you got hit by a truck and had to spend a couple of months in the hospital?

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    13. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Holy crap, I hope I never have to work for you.

    14. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Mateito · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm can't speak for the French, but realise that "hours worked" does not equal productivity.

      Chileans are number 3 when it comes to most hours worked, but number 43 when it comes to productivity.

      Maybe US culture still rewards people who spend 80 hours a week with their nose to the grindstone, but in general, people who achieve goals are more highly regarded, whether they do it in 20 hours or 80.

      Work HARD = Work SMART, not Work LONG

      And, yeah, I'm slacking, but I'm putting in my resignation next week (unless I can negotiate an exit package this week).

    15. Re:Close, but misses the mark by swb · · Score: 1

      There was a NYT article on European vacation habits the other week, and I think they said that European labor practices generally were contributing to a decline in European productivity, not an increase to it.

      To paraphrase a character from "Slacker" -- "I may live badly, but at least I don't have to work to do it."

    16. Re:Close, but misses the mark by David_W · · Score: 1
      yet their productivity per capita is actually higher than in the USA.
      Well, yes, but they have double-digit unemployment too. You can have all the holiday you want if you don't have a job!

      So are you actually proposing the idea that more vacation leads to higher unemployment?

    17. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Mateito · · Score: 1

      Mira.

      Puede ser que hay ejemplos de empresas con una manera de pensar mas "moderno", pero telefonica no es, ni Alma Technologias, ni Indra, ni las otras empresas informaticas con quien he trabajado.

      Mi novia trabajé por un banco, y ellos siempre estaban implementando tecnicas gringas y europeas. No siempre con exito, pero por lo menos fue buenas intenciones.

    18. Re:Close, but misses the mark by nanoakron · · Score: 1

      It's a way to justify their existence. I had a boss who did it too - came in every weekend 'just to make sure things are running'.

      TIf they were ever away from work for more than a day, it would mean that work could function without them, and thus their entire life would become meaningless. Truly tragic.

      -Nano.

    19. Re:Close, but misses the mark by The+Bungi · · Score: 1
      It depends on the situation (and even the phase the project is in). But yes, sometimes I am. This is where the term "one-truck project" comes from. I mostly try to stay away from trucks =)

      It's also a matter of money and politics and the fact that I'm a consultant - however I don't work for a body shop. I am salaried with full benefits, paid vacation, etc. It's just complicated to synchronize my vacation requirements with the client's expectations and deadlines.

      OTOH as long as I'm making the money and not collapsing because of exhaustion then all is peachy.

    20. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Planesdragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, yes, but they have double-digit unemployment too. You can have all the holiday you want if you don't have a job!

      "unemployment" is a bad measure. Tracking "per capita poverty" and "per capita productivity" is a much better measure. Or, heck, we could track "per worker productivity."

      If your country and my country both have 100 people, and we both produce $1,000,000 in wealth per year, we have the same per-capita producitvity. If you employ 98 of those 100 while I employ 85, and those 2 non-workers in your society live in poverty while only 1 of mine lives in poverty, then picking statistics is even more important.

      GDP: $1,000,000 you & me.
      Per-capita: $10,000 you & me
      Unemployment: 2% you, 15% me
      Per-worker: $10,204 you, $11,764 me.
      Poverty rate: 2% you, 1% me.

      (if the conventional wisdom about socialsim and capitalism holds out, of course, your country would have a 1% poverty rate, while mine would be much higher--regardless of the rest.)

    21. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It depends on how you measure productivity. Annual productivity is much higher in the US but productivity/hour is about the same. If you add to this the fact that a lot US worker don't count their overtime, you end up with a productivity which is much higher in france than in the US.

    22. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Ancil · · Score: 2, Informative

      The French and Germans.. ..productivity per capita is actually higher than in the USA.

      No it isn't.

      USA: Unemployment 6.2%, GDP per capita $37,800
      France: Unemployment 9.6%, GDP per capita $27,500
      Germany: Unemployment 10.7%, GDP per capita $27,600

      Those numbers are from the CIA World Factbook. Obviously the details fluctuate, but you get the idea.

    23. Re:Close, but misses the mark by skrysakj · · Score: 1

      De acuerdo....
      Pero que es "moderno". Pienso que tecnicas gringas no son todas buenas. En los EE.UU no todos valoran a sus empleados como deben. Tal Vez, Lo unico que hace en EE.UU es pagar mejor que en otros paises. No sé, pero presumo. Ademas de esto, no estoy seguro que moderno es el camino bueno.

      Por ejemplo, companías de technologia deben pagar para cursors con el fin de entrenar a sus empleados en lo mas nuevo. No deben despedirse de ellos para emplear otras que YA saben lo mas nuevo. Etc....

    24. Re:Close, but misses the mark by tsotha · · Score: 1
      The French and Germans have loads of holidays compared to North Americans, and yet their productivity per capita is actually higher than in the USA.

      This is a classic example of policy-making based on a misuse of statistics.

      The reason French and German workers are so productive is companies will do anything to avoid hiring one. A good example of this is the Hilton hotel chain. In New York, the kitchen employs 6 people to wash dishes whereas the in Paris they employ only two. So the French dish-washers are three times as productive as the Americans, right?

      Wrong. French workers are so expensive to employ and so hard to fire it made sense to buy a super-expensive automated dish-washing machine in Paris.

      Be careful of productivity statistics. Economists make the statistics show what they want to see just like everyone else.

    25. Re:Close, but misses the mark by clintp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Uh-huh. Maybe he was committing fraud and came in every weekend "just to cook the data" a bit to make sure he wasn't going to get caught.

      In some "secure" industries, vacations are mandatory for this reason (and others). If you're gone for a week, it's harder to keep the books cooked.

      --
      Get off my lawn.
    26. Re:Close, but misses the mark by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Actually, this article says worker-productivity in Germany and France is equal to that of the U.S.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    27. Re:Close, but misses the mark by quax · · Score: 2, Interesting

      According to these numbers the above statement is wrong - although GDP is pretty much tied. Given that the unemployment rate is so much higher and the number of vacation days almost double this does however mean that the productivity per worker per hour of labor must be higher in Germany than in the US. I.e. German workers get much more done in one work hour so that they can afford more holidays as well as subsidize such a high unemployment rate.

      Having worked both in Germany as well as the US I can attest that this difference is not theoretical at all. The German business climate is more focused with much less small talk in the office and meetings tend to be more productive and shorter.

      (What worries me much more comparing Germany to the US is that the infant mortality is so much higher in the latter. In that category even Cuba outperforms the number one superpower of the world.)

    28. Re:Close, but misses the mark by pubjames · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of posts here saying that my post is incorrect. I meant to say "productivity per hour" rather than "productivity per capita". And numerous studies show that it is the same or higher in parts of europe compared to the USA. This report, from your own government, has some details:

      http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1999/07/art3full.pdf

    29. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Wow! You had better not hire an Australian, or your head will explode in indignation!

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    30. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Mateito · · Score: 1

      Tienes toda la razon (soy australiano, pero mis textos de MBA en general son gringos).

      "Moderno" en contra de "Clasico". Los clasicos son estructuras como burocracia y idea como el hombre es solo una maquinita de trabajo. Los teorias "Modernas" entienden que hay interacciones entre los trabajadores y su foco es un controlar las interacciones, no los individuales.

      Los EE.UU. pagan mejor, pero su costo de vida es mas alta tambien. Y, hay probreza profunda en lugares como LA y sus protectorados como Puerto Rico.

      Ni una sola vez ha tenido capacitación por una empresa española, pero parace que los gringo entienden su importancia.

    31. Re:Close, but misses the mark by ev0l · · Score: 1
      The French and Germans have loads of holidays compared to North Americans, and yet their productivity per capita is actually higher than in the USA.


      It is? Can you back this up ?

      The "CIA - The World Factbook 2004" tells me other wise. Factbook summary

      According to the above link the United States has the second GDP - per capita in the world. France and Germany are 21 and 20.

      Do you have another source that will tell me diffrent?
    32. Re:Close, but misses the mark by lahi · · Score: 1

      If you add to this the fact that a lot US worker don't count their overtime,

      I thought the United States abolished slavery a long time ago?

      -Lasse

    33. Re:Close, but misses the mark by lenski · · Score: 1
      I was in a motorcycle accident 22 years ago that took me out for a month. Theoretically, I had a job on return. In reality, the *work* was gone to another worker. Fortunately for me, I had been looking for new work anyway and moved on. One is as indispensable as one is willing to be. And I understand those who are willing to work so hard. To such folks, I say two things: You *will* get tired, and it only puts off the inevitable anyway.

      Never, never depend on your job. Have >12 months minimal operational savings ready to go when you are laid off.

    34. Re:Close, but misses the mark by lahi · · Score: 1

      And he probably won't be able to reproduce, either.

      -Lasse

    35. Re:Close, but misses the mark by beef+curtains · · Score: 1

      Como una promesa eres tú, eres tú,
      como una mañana de verano,
      como una sonrisa eres tú, eres tú,
      así, así eres tú.

      Toda mi esperanza eres tú, eres tú,
      como lluvia fresca en mis manos,
      como fuerte brisa eres tú, eres tú,
      así, así eres tú.

      Eres tú como el agua de mi fuente,
      eres tú el fuego de mi hogar,
      eres tú como el agua de mi fuente,
      eres tú el fuego de mi hogar.

      Como un poema eres tú, eres tú,
      como una guitarra en la noche,
      como el horizonte eres tú, eres tú,
      así, así eres tú.

      Eres tú como el agua de mi fuente,
      eres tú el fuego de mi hogar,
      eres tú como el agua de mi fuente,
      eres tú el fuego de mi hogar.

      --
      Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.'
    36. Re:Close, but misses the mark by randyest · · Score: 1

      Wow, that would indeed be very interesting, as the credulous mod asserts with his mighty +1 of truth, were it not utter bullshit.

      See here

      Last year is representative of all the data since 1960, and as one might assume if one were to have ones eyes open at any point in this century, the US 0wns everyone in GDP per capita

      U.S. Canada Japan Korea Austria Belgium Denmark France Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Sweden U.K.
      34,960 29,489 25,587 18,177 27,902 25,769 28,050 25,578 24,813 24,894 25,938 30,882 27,118 26,039

      Or, normalized so that US = 100:

      U.S. Canada Japan Korea Austria Belgium Denmark France Germany Italy Netherlands Norway Sweden U.K.
      100.0 84.4 73.2 52.0 79.8 73.7 80.2 73.2 71.0 71.2 74.2 88.3 77.6 74.5

      I notice you decided not to cite the source of your claim. Maybe there's some other way of calculating "productivity" besides GDP (but I can't think of it.) I'm sure you'll explain and back it up with a reference.

      --
      everything in moderation
    37. Re:Close, but misses the mark by jcr · · Score: 1

      It pisses me off that Americans are branded as "fat and lazy" when I'm being paid the same as some dickhead in France, but I'm picking up HIS slack,

      How do you figure that you're picking up his slack? Are you working at a company that has operations in the USA and in France? Do you get an extra five hrs/week assigned to you that somebody in France refused to do?

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    38. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      WTF? Employees stay at one job, for life, and very rarely get fired?

      Wake up and smell the café. The French work less hours, but they work hard and for shitty money, and they can be fired just as easily as in the US. No-one in France has a job for life any more.

      But poster is right, US citizens should start fighting back to work less for more.

    39. Re:Close, but misses the mark by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      The parent is right:

      *productivity* per capita, not GDP. Productivity is the GDP per hour worked.

      Measured as the GDP per hour worked at a percent of the OECD average, you have the following figures:

      USA: 120
      The Netherlands: 121
      France: 123
      Norway: 126
      Belgium: 128
      Germany: 105

      From "Monthly Labor Review, July 1999, pp:33-41"

    40. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Ancil · · Score: 2, Informative
      Average hours worked in 2003 (source):

      USA: 1,792
      France: 1,453
      Germany: 1,446

      Per-capita GDP divided by average hours worked per year:

      USA: $38,700 / 1,792hr = $21.60/hr
      France: $27,500 / 1,453hr = $18.93/hr
      Germany: $27,600 / 1,446hr = $19.09/hr

    41. Re:Close, but misses the mark by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      There's two chickens on the table and two men; consider the followng cases
      A. One chicken each
      B. One man has two, the other none.
      AVG: a chicken per capita
      The power of statistics!
      Let me give an uneducated guess (couch economist): perhaps the US was better at taking research and scientific advancement to the market? Working 12 hr/day making corks isn't as productive as building more valuable goods?
      Pure slacking isn't good for anyone but so is living in an office mindlessly tying at a terminal. Once the target is hit go home, enjoy your life (you've only got one chance), your kids, your friends, yourself, a perfecly useless walk at the park, a book... do some self grooming, just don't make every moment of you existence a struggle (and a pain for your colleagues to endure your sourness ;-)

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    42. Re:Close, but misses the mark by ishmaelflood · · Score: 1

      Paid the same? Surely the fundamental USAn issue is that they (you) are typically paid 30% more than other first world engineers for a given amount/quality of work. I don't know if it is true for all professional and technical jobs, I certainly is for automotive engineering, which is what I do.

      Wages in France tend to be rather lower, in my experience, than the UK, for technical jobs.

    43. Re:Close, but misses the mark by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Unemployment figures are grossly misleading, as they only count people who are collecting unemployment benefits, which run out after a period. After that time, those people cease to be "unemployed", even though they might not have a job. Great, huh?

    44. Re:Close, but misses the mark by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      I think you forgot to take into account the employment rate. The average working hours are for people in current employment whereas the GDB/capita is average over the whole population.

    45. Re:Close, but misses the mark by Ancil · · Score: 1
      Well, there are two reasons for that:

      1. That's the formula you gave in your first reply. =P

      2. I refuse to call a country more "productive" for having a lousy employment rate. Sure, if unemployment is 50%, the people with jobs will be more productive. They're scared of being unemployed. But calling a country more "productive" because more of its citizens are out of work seems ludicrous to me.

      However, since you brought it up, we'll normalize to 100% employment:

      USA: $21.60 / 93.8% emp = $23.03/hr
      France: $18.93 / 90.4% emp = $20.94/hr
      Germany: $19.09 / 89.3% emp = $21.38/hr

    46. Re:Close, but misses the mark by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      As a bank employee, 1 week of my vacation had to be taken each year, and it had to be taken as 1 block of time ... effectively forcing me to take 1 week off. And the reason for that is as you stated; your co-workers will have to do your work to cover your absence, and any little schemes you had running will appear.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    47. Re:Close, but misses the mark by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Thanks for your patience,

      Sorry I didn't give any formula, just a reference, I said GDP per hour worked. Your calculation is still not correct (I think), you need to take the whole GDP, divide by the *number* of people in current employmment and by the average working hours (or really by the number of hours worked).

      Using the unemployment rate doesn't give you the correct figure because it doesn't give you an insight of what proportion of the people is meant to be employed. The US may have fewer retirees for example (in France people commonly retire at 55).

      I'm not responsible for the definition of productivity but it makes sense to me to attribute the wealth generated to the wealth-generating population. If a country has 50% employment it may be because everyone is so efficient that fewer people are needed to do the job (high productivity) or it may be that there isn't enough resources around to put people in employment (low productivity). This is the cause of unemployment that the productivity number is meant to help measure.

      Mind you I find this definition of productivity a bit suspect anyway, I don't see how unpaid overtime can be accounted for, and these days it is so prevalent in the West as to skew the statistics immensely in many country.

  5. One name ... by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 5, Funny

    Walley. (read: Dilbert.)

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:One name ... by dbleoslow · · Score: 2, Funny

      That reminds me, I have to catch up on my dilbert comics. That should keep me occupied for 30 minutes or so.

    2. Re:One name ... by dilettante · · Score: 1

      I think it's more like Peter Gibbons and his dream of doing nothing (from the movie Office Space for those without cable). This is a dream that I, and most other post mid-life crisis victims, share. If you're still gung-ho about your job, you're probably either a) young, or b) faking. Youth definitely is wasted on the young.

  6. In Slashdot? by rkrabath · · Score: 3, Funny

    Are you aware of who you're posting to?

    All we are is lazy. This post is the proof!

    --
    Who do I have to blackmail to get some representation around here!?!?!?!?
    1. Re:In Slashdot? by wan-fu · · Score: 1

      However, "grammar nazis" never slack off. The correct usage in your question is "whom" not "who."

    2. Re:In Slashdot? by The+Queen · · Score: 1

      To one-up you, he also ended with a preposition; let's fix that.

      "Are you aware to whom you are posting?"

      --

      The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
    3. Re:In Slashdot? by Strange_Attractor · · Score: 1

      And it should have been "to whom".

      --

      ----
      WWJD...For a Klondike Bar?
    4. Re:In Slashdot? by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that slashdot isn't a person, so it should be:

      "Are you aware to where you are posting?"

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    5. Re:In Slashdot? by StalinsNotDead · · Score: 1

      Actually, the really lazy ones only read. There's a coworker right next to me that doesn't post. He only reads. Now, THAT's lazy.

      --
      Thanks to the internet, we can now all die alone together! -SomeWoman
    6. Re:In Slashdot? by Carmody · · Score: 1

      Good use of the semi-colon, but it is actually acceptable in modern English to end sentences with prepositions. (cf: Churchill quotation)

      --
      God is real unless declared integer
    7. Re:In Slashdot? by Krypto420 · · Score: 1
      Actually, the really lazy ones only read. There's a coworker right next to me that doesn't post. He only reads. Now, THAT's lazy.

      Read? pffft! I just look at the words!
      ...damn you motivated people!

    8. Re:In Slashdot? by Krypto420 · · Score: 1
      Actually, the really lazy ones only read. There's a coworker right next to me that doesn't post. He only reads. Now, THAT's lazy.
      Read? pffft! I just look at the words!
      ...damn you motivated people!


      Read?... Post?... Oh.... wait a sec... doh!
  7. The title is a pun by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 4, Informative

    On the title of a very famous French book called Bonjour Tristesse (Hello Sadness).

    John.

  8. That'll lower the productivity index by grunt107 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And give businesses more excuses to outsource.

    If you are so worried about the dead-end/exiting nature of the lower/middle jobs, start kissing major butt to move into managment.

    Or maybe start your own business doing something you are interested in.

    And if you still think loafing is the way to go, please do not procreate.

    1. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by laigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What good would that do? I'm still a competent engineer, no matter how much butt I kiss. That means I can't be promoted, or they'd have to find soemone else to fill my slot. It also means I'm ineligible for pay commensurate with my abilities, because management doesn't consider anyone a "real employee" unless they're involved in hyping stock.

      Trying for middling promotions is just polishing the brass on the Titanic. We're not going into economic collapse in the US because of slacking. We're collapsing because management is viciously incompetent, and Wall Street insists on keeping them that way.

    2. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by Mateito · · Score: 2, Funny
      And if you still think loafing is the way to go, please do not procreate.

      She's on top!

    3. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by UserGoogol · · Score: 1

      But if we raise our productivity, unemployment will go up because management won't need as many people to get work done.

      --
      "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
    4. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by Mateito · · Score: 2, Insightful
      We're collapsing because management is viciously incompetent

      Hallajulah, brother!

      Then, do what I'm doing.

      After 5 years of complaining about shit managers, I arrived at "I can do better than that", so I enrolled in an tech-oriented MBA program.

      Recommend it to anyone. You can't lead tech if you don't understand tech and leadership. We are engineers, we learn from manuals. An MBA has plenty of merit. Also has plenty of bullshit and a good dose of religion... but enough hard and real stuff to justify its existance.

      An MBA isn't the problem. People who act like the jerk in the Fedex ad are the problem, and give MBAs a bad name.

    5. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by laigle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "If your manager doesn't want to pay you more, and you think you are worth more, GO FIND ANOTHER JOB. If you really are good, you'll find one."

      No you won't. Have you picked up a business paper in the last ten years? Even at the height of the dot com "boom" people were working two or three jobs just to break even. That's why all us good worker bees keep showing up for the low wages and the crappy benefits, because the alternative is living in a cardboard box.

      "If you can't find another job, you're probably not worth what you think you are."

      You misunderstand the concept of worth. In capitalism, a good or service is worth what the buyer is willing to spend for it. This price depends on market conditions and on the perceived value. In this case, the buyer (management) percieves the value as virtually nothing, because they don't care about making product, only increasing stock value. And the market is offering them a cheaper alternative due to illegal currency fixing in the Asian market, combined with hideously low standards of living. On top of this, management makes no value distinction within the engineering profession, because they don't understand engineering.

      I understand my value very well. That's why I'm sitting at this desk, taking what I can get.

      "Think about it from management's standpoint. You are willing to take low pay and still work."

      Because my alternative is to take no pay and not work. Fairly easy decision matrix there.

      "What economic benefit is there for the company to voluntarily raise your salary, given that you are already working for the salary you have agreed to -- agreed to through your own inaction."

      They would be able to get a real work day out of their employees. They would be able to hire better employees. They would increase their customer base. They would increase the perceived value of their product in the market.

      "I've tripled my salary in 5 years by advocating for myself, so I speak from experience."

      No you haven't. Jesus, do people honestly think this type of transparent garbage convinces people? Let me guess, you're also the head of a Fortune 500 company, hold seven degrees, are married to a lingerie model, and just discovered cold fusion.

      "Show your value."

      Meaningless phrase in a capitalist system. The market sets your value, not you. Your value is set by a consumer, in this case a wantonly uninformed consumer who happens to be stuffing several items into their pocket while the cashier isn't looking.

      "Show your value. Be dependable. Be consistent. Demonstrate integrity."

      I am. I have. I do. That's why I'm locked into my job. If I weren't, I would be fired. But the same competence and professionalism that gives me job security eliminates the prospect of advancement, because I'm too valuable in my current position. And the lack of advancement insures wage stagnation.

    6. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by telbij · · Score: 1

      Christ you're bitter.

      Because my alternative is to take no pay and not work. Fairly easy decision matrix there.

      First of all, I don't know how much 'low pay' is to you, but if you need a lot of money to be happy, chances are you won't be happy with a lot of money.

      Pretending like you have no choice with what do with your life while living in America is the kind of egotistical whining that only someone who has lived in a rich, opportunity-filled country their whole life could dream up. You have plenty of choice, now get over yourself.

      On top of this, management makes no value distinction within the engineering profession, because they don't understand engineering.


      And you don't understand management. If you did, then you could communicate your worth to them. Maybe at your job you are a cog and your worth actually is that small, but not all jobs are like that, and don't pretend like your anecdote is more valid than anyone else's.

      I am. I have. I do. That's why I'm locked into my job.

      You're locked in because you choose not to find a better job. Either get off your ass and start living your life or stop complaining about it. Not because you don't have a right to complain, but because no one likes an emotional black hole. On the other hand, if bitter and lonely is your optimal lifestyle who am I to stop you?

    7. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by laigle · · Score: 1

      If and when I get the savings up to go back to school, I'm considering an MBA program. I did take some business courses back in my undergrad days, but the technical programs leave so little room for electives, and I didn't feel like sticking around for the extra time back then.

      I think the main problem with MBAs is that they gained such demand, especially in the 80s, that now every school has an MBA program, and all of them could count on a thriving student base. So there's a lot of suboptimal MBAs out there to smear the degree.

      Then again, there's a point where perception meets reality. When you have a lot of suboptimal MBAs floating around, there is a reason to be wary of people with MBAs.

    8. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by Mateito · · Score: 1

      True,

      One thing you will get from an MBA is a different way of looking at problems. We have an engineering perspective, that isn't always in harmony with the business perspective.

      It helps you supress the "WTF" when marketing make some out-there comment.

      The "Name Brand" MBAs give you contacts that the others don't. If you want to be the next Lee Scott, you need that. If you are a mortal, the knowledge gained is more valuable than the name of the MBA.

      BTW, I'm at Chifley Business School (google it :)

    9. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by blitz487 · · Score: 1

      If they're viciously incompetent, you should be able to start a company and run rings around them.

    10. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by Travoltus · · Score: 1

      You have plenty of choice, now get over yourself.
      What choices?

      There are no new white collar jobs. So what choices do you have? Your philosophy is empty because it lacks substantiation.

      If the glass is cracked at the bottom and water is pouring out, and duct tape isn't anywhere to be found, a "the glass is half full" observation is tragically wrong.

      You're locked in because you choose not to find a better job.

      You're in a desert with no oasis in sight for the next 2000 miles. You are at a fairly small oasis that will give you trickles of water.

      Do you
      a) find a better oasis
      b) stay where you are

      ?

      --
      --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
    11. Re:That'll lower the productivity index by love2hateMS · · Score: 1

      I originally wrote a very contentious response to you, but as I read what you wrote again and thought about it I realized you are just a victim of your own low expectations.

      You blame everything on "The Man" and take no personal responsibility. Where's your sense of pride?

      Good luck-- I mean it.

  9. ..why not spread gangrene.. by burgburgburg · · Score: 2, Funny
    "why not spread gangrene through the system from inside?"

    I'd have to imagine that that sounds much more attractive in the original French. Let's see what Babelfish says:

    "pourquoi gangrene non écarté par le système de l'intérieur ?"

    Yes, I was right. That sounds much more attractive. I'd like some, but without the butter.

    1. Re:..why not spread gangrene.. by hsoft · · Score: 1

      Babelfish didn't translate this well. In french, it is "Pourquoi ne pas répandre la gangrène dans le système de l'intérieur?", but I would rather say "Pourquoi de pas infecter le système de l'intérieur?"

      --
      perception is reality
    2. Re:..why not spread gangrene.. by rsidd · · Score: 1

      And Google translates that back to English as "why gangrene nonisolated by the system of the interior?" Makes sense.

  10. Ah the French... by jav1231 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Let's see, you read this, you get like 1-2 months off every year, then you piss-and-moan about Americans being more successful.

    1. Re:Ah the French... by Patik · · Score: 2, Insightful
      then you piss-and-moan about Americans being more successful.
      Gonna back that one up?
    2. Re:Ah the French... by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 5, Informative

      Insightful?! Not sure the French are complaining about the Americans being more successful, they're actually sitting on the beach going on about how productive they are...

      A much more informed view of "Europe vs. USA" can be found in a recent Economist. There's a multi-page special on the subject that boils down to:

      1. USA has higher GDP/capita than EU, but
      2. USA and EU have similar GDP/capita growth rates (in fact the same if you eliminate Germany which is having to cope with unification). How about the US tries merging with South America?
      3. GDP/work hour is similar in USA and EU
      4. US citizens have higher disposable income than EU citizens because US citizens work 40% more hours, i.e. EU citizens have same productivity as US, but work less hours, hence lower GDP/capita. Or to put it another way EU citizens have traded GDP/capita for leisure time, US citizens work much more and hence buy more stuff (TVs, cars, ...)

      So there's no fundamental difference in GDP/work hour or productivity between the two federations. Europeans just take more time off, which might have a lot to do with the better health and better life expectancy in the EU. US citizens work like crazy and hence can afford houses stuffed with electronics, appliances and multiple cars.

      I assume that you are a US citizen, perhaps you'd like to spend some of your disposable income buying the article here.

      John.

    3. Re:Ah the French... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      USA has higher GDP/capita than EU

      US citizens have higher disposable income than EU citizens because US citizens work 40% more hours

      So, Americans are more successful after all.

    4. Re:Ah the French... by pubjames · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So, Americans are more successful after all.

      Depends on your definition of success. In Europe, "having the most money" is not the sole criteria for success.

    5. Re:Ah the French... by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Are Americans actually more successful?
      No wait, I retract that...I really don't think I want to open _that_ can of worms today ;)

      --
      No Comment.
    6. Re:Ah the French... by tumbaumba · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >>US citizens have higher disposable income than EU citizens because US citizens work 40% more hours

      >So, Americans are more successful after all.


      Perhaps when you turn forty and get tired of working your butt off you will realize that there more to success than having more disposable income than your neighbor, who can actually spend some time with kids and perhaps teach them something worthwhile.

    7. Re:Ah the French... by pubjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's see, you read this, you get like 1-2 months off every year, then you piss-and-moan about Americans being more successful.

      You really don't hear many Europeans moaning about Americans being "more successful". We could be more "successful" (if your definition of success is having more money) here in Europe if we wanted to just by working more.

      However, the culture is very different here. Whereas someone like Bill Gates is looked up to in the USA, in Europe very rich people are not socially looked up to very much. In fact, they are generally looked upon as being greedy.

      Believe me, the main reason Europeans "piss-and-moan" about the USA is because of your foreign policy, especially under Bush.

    8. Re:Ah the French... by wfberg · · Score: 1

      Nor is GDP a good measure of economical success. If I go and do your housekeeping chores in my time off, and you do mine, and we pay each other $100, we just increased GDP by $200, but we didn't do anything that wouldn't otherwise have been done just as efficiently.

      US consumer spending ends up mostly in China and Taiwan and other foreign producing countries, so working less might actually be better for the US economy as a whole, and it would create jobs (one of the reasons Europeans cut down on their working hours).

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    9. Re:Ah the French... by betelgeuse-4 · · Score: 1

      AFAICR, the article actually talked about US vs The Euro Area (not the EU). Although a subtle difference to some, the fact that the UK is part of the latter, but not the former is important. The UK is a big part of the EU economy, but the shorter hours/more money trade-off probably doesn't work in quite the same way as in the Euro Area or America.

    10. Re:Ah the French... by UserGoogol · · Score: 1

      They get 1-2 months off every year. That sounds pretty successful to me.

      --
      "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
    11. Re:Ah the French... by tumbaumba · · Score: 1

      Spoken like someone who probably drives a Citroen! Le Loser.

      Nooo. A horse buggy!

    12. Re:Ah the French... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      Or to put it another way EU citizens have traded GDP/capita for leisure time, US citizens work much more and hence buy more stuff
      Which is fine by me. However a different wind is starting to blow in Europe. Politicians and companies are already campaining to increase our productivity (per capita), by bringing back the 40 hour workweek. By the way, they are not offering a corresponding increase in pay. It's "Work 40 hours/week for the same pay, which will help keep your job". Strangely, just over a decade ago the government promoted 36 or 32 hour workweeks, to (yes) "create more jobs".
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    13. Re:Ah the French... by smurf975 · · Score: 1

      You can do better then that can't you? How about European foreign policy is Bosnia and Rwanda genocides?

      --
      -- I don't buy it, I grow it.
    14. Re:Ah the French... by tumbaumba · · Score: 1

      We could be more "successful" (if your definition of success is having more money) here in Europe if we wanted to just by working more.

      Saying that "I could do something, but I don't want to do it" is just a different way of saying that "I can't".

    15. Re:Ah the French... by Mateito · · Score: 3, Funny
      Getting all of South America drunk first would be prohibitively expensive.

      No it wouldn't. South Americans are light-weights when it comes to alcohol, and every country has its native un-identifiable clear spirit that sells for a song because there's no import tax. In Peru its "Pisco", in Chile its "Aguadiente" (They also have "Pisco" but they deny stealing it from the Peruvians), in Bolivia it doesn't even have a name but its 95% alcohol and tasts like rocket fuel. I don't remember what the Brazillian one is called, but they mix into with lemons into a Cahparinha, which is really yummy.

      Disclaimer: I am an Australian with an engineering degree. I am fully qualified to talk about drinking.

    16. Re:Ah the French... by EinarH · · Score: 1
      It's a good article. For a discussion on this topic (productivity in EU vs USA) check out this pdf from a presentation by the chief economist in OECD at an Economist Conference a couple of months ago.

      But one thing that neither he or the Economist mentioned though:

      4. US citizens have higher disposable income than EU citizens because US citizens work 40% more hours, i.e. EU citizens have same productivity as US, but work less hours, hence lower GDP/capita. Or to put it another way EU citizens have traded GDP/capita for leisure time, US citizens work much more and hence buy more stuff (TVs, cars, ...)
      Much of that advantage of higher disposable income is just purly teoretical as americans "have" to use more of those money for private health care and higher education.
      IIRC Amercians used twice the amount on private health care compared to Europeans.
      --

      Melius mori in libertate quam vivere in servitute.

    17. Re:Ah the French... by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      US citizens have higher disposable income than EU citizens because US citizens work 40% more hours

      That's not true. Our actual productivity is much higher than the Europeans. While we certainly do work 40% more, that 40% is pure slack.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    18. Re:Ah the French... by PsiPsiStar · · Score: 1

      We have a foreign policy? I never knew...

      --

      ___
      It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
    19. Re:Ah the French... by berenddeboer · · Score: 1

      No fundamental difference between the US and Europe? Are you for real? I can't read the economist article as it isn't free, but I suggest you have a look at EU versus USA, a study written by Dr Fredrik Bergström and Mr Robert Gidehag:

      If the European Union were a state in the USA it would belong to the poorest group of states. France, Italy, Great Britain and Germany have lower GDP per capita than all but four of the states in the United States. In fact, GDP per capita is lower in the vast majority of the EU-countries (EU 15) than in most of the individual American states. This puts Europeans at a level of prosperity on par with states such as Arkansas, Mississippi and West Virginia. Only the miniscule country of Luxembourg has higher per capita GDP than the average state in the USA. The results of the new study represent a grave critique of European economic policy.
      Stark differences become apparent when comparing official economic statistics. Europe lags behind the USA when comparing GDP per capita and GDP growth rates. The current economic debate among EU leaders lacks an understanding of the gravity of the situation in many European countries. Structural reforms of the European economy as well as far reaching welfare reforms are well overdue. The Lisbon process lacks true impetus, nor is it sufficient to improve the economic prospects of the EU.

      How many new companies have entered the EU's top fifty the last 30 years for example? In America it's perhaps 50% or more. In Europe it might be one perhaps. For a country as Sweden it's zero for example: the last thirty years there have been no new successful companies. That could not happen in America.

      --
      If I had a sig, I would put it here.
    20. Re:Ah the French... by tumbaumba · · Score: 1

      So you can't throw yourself off a tall building?

      I don't think I can. However you are welcome to prove me wrong ;)

    21. Re:Ah the French... by furchin · · Score: 1

      I pay my nanny to take my child to a private school where the nuns will instill this knowledge in him for me.

    22. Re:Ah the French... by jav1231 · · Score: 1

      Okay, the EU. Hmm...and this from a correspondent there: Here!

    23. Re:Ah the French... by captaincucumber · · Score: 1
      IIRC Amercians used twice the amount on private health care compared to Europeans

      Not all of our extra dispoable income comes from working "40% more hours" (that math seems fuzzy to me), we also have lower taxes.

      So while we may spend twice as much on private health care, we don't pay nearly as much taxes, so it more or less evens out. It's also more efficient.

    24. Re:Ah the French... by smurf975 · · Score: 1

      I didn't want to go as far back as WWI and WWII but actually didn't the Serbs fight against the Nazis during WWII? The Croats were the friends of the Nazis and if I recollect correctly some neo-Nazi people went to Croatia to help them against the Serbians in the late Yugoslavian war.

      Serbians call them self's Slavic people (that's why they got/get support from Russia) and Croats are Germanic? So saying that Serbia and Germany formed a tight nut in the past is wrong. They are as close as Germany is to Russia.

      I think Serbs consider them self's a warrior tribe/people as they first fought of the Ottomans and then the Germans(Nazis). The Serbs say without us being such as pain in the ass too the Ottomans most of Eastern Europe would have been Islamic now.

      Basically the Serbs got in power because the other ethnics sided with the party that lost WWII (Germans) and the Serbs sided with the Russian (who won)

      Here is some info: The ottomans http://www.serbia-info.com/enc/history/conquest.ht ml/ and WWII http://www.serbia-info.com/enc/history/worldwar.ht ml/

      And about the Germans, I don't think they are not directly guilty of modern Middle East problems. Before WWII it was the English and French that drew up the borders of modern Arab states and right after WWII, when Germany had little to say, it was the USA, GB and France that granted the Jews the right to form a state (via the puppet UN), were Israel is located now.

      I personally don't blame solely the Germans for the holocaust. I think it was European culture that is to blame for it. As for one in the Netherlands there were more people that send Jews to concentration camps then Germans did in Germany (this a ratio), I'm sure it was the same in other European countries. No one forced them to betray the Jews to the Nazis but they were happy to do so, most people didn't like Germans ruling their countries but could agree with their Jew agenda. Hell every country knew that Jews were being slaughtered but they didn't care.

      But I do get your point as I read the emails from Al Quada members and Bin Laden that were posted yesterday on /. and for them (the emails) I understand its not really about the USA just about Israel and whomever stands in their way to get ride of it. (The friend of my enemy is my enemy).

      With out oil the Middle East becomes a lot less interesting to all other countries. And perhaps it will seal Israel's fate as the dominate power of the region as the oil selling nations will get less support and have no money to buy modern arms.

      --
      -- I don't buy it, I grow it.
    25. Re:Ah the French... by cruelworld · · Score: 1

      Two economists walk by a Porsche dealership. One eyes the cars inside and sighs.
      "I'd really like one of those." He says.
      The other economist pauses for a moment before replying
      "Evidently not enough"

    26. Re:Ah the French... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      So while we may spend twice as much on private health care, we don't pay nearly as much taxes, so it more or less evens out. It's also more efficient.

      Muahahahahahaha! You're kidding, right? Okay, first, read this, then read this. Oh, and maybe read this. Then, tell me again how the US system is somehow more efficient. Hell, compared to Canada, the US spends 3 times as much, per capita, on health care. And almost a quarter of that is on administrative costs alone! And, continuing the comparison with Canada, if you look at this, you'll see that, on average, an American citizen bears a greater tax burden than a Canadian.

      So, tell me again, how is the US system better?

    27. Re:Ah the French... by fbg111 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "However, the culture is very different here. Whereas someone like Bill Gates is looked up to in the USA, in Europe very rich people are not socially looked up to very much. In fact, they are generally looked upon as being greedy."

      My amateur theory on that difference is that Europe has a history of powerful people hoarding the wealth of society and justifying it using red herrings such as "divine right" and "noble blood". That was back in the time before people understood that sustained economic growth and wealth creation were possible; eg, throughout most of human history the only known way to get wealth was to take it from someone else. Hence the constant European wars, and Colonialism.

      When Industrialization rolled around, initially it was the wealthy nobles and landed gentry - the bourgeoisie - who used their historically ill-gotten capital to invest in factories, mills, mines, etc. and to hire/exploit workers. Yet they still used their power to maintain control over society's capital, drastically curtailing the class mobility that we Americans so take for granted. Marx was instrumental in critiqing this system and providing an intellectual antithesis to it, and his concepts of socialism and class struggle have dominated Europe to this day.

      On the other hand, America was formed with no aristocracy during the Industrial Revolution, and though we've had our share of colonialism, our social concept of wealth generation is based more on wealth-creation rather than on wealth-acquisition and hoarding. Whereas Europeans generally assume that the rich have gotten that way by screwing someone else, Americans generally assume the rich have gotten that way by creating something new and brilliant and selling it for lots of money - the American Dream - hence the general admiration of Bill Gates (/.'ers aside), and other successful entrepeneurs, inventors, and business people.

      This reminds me of an old parable: An Irishman and an American are walking down the road, and they pass a grand mansion inhabited by a wealthy businessman. The Irishman says, "One day I'm going to get that guy." The American says, "One day I'm going to be that guy." I think a lot of Americans look down on Europe's attitude toward the wealthy, but it helps to understand just why the European "proletariat" distrusts the wealthy. Given their history, it's not without reason or justification.

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    28. Re:Ah the French... by general_re · · Score: 1
      So, tell me again, how is the US system better?

      Relatively rich societies like the US can afford to be more wasteful than relatively poor ones like Canada. It's that simple. It's too bad you weren't around Detroit and Buffalo back in 1999 and 2000 - you could have explained to Canadian cancer patients about how being sent to the US for treatment by the absurdly backlogged Ontario government was actually a sign of the superiority of the Canadian system. I would have liked to have heard that story.

      --
      ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
    29. Re:Ah the French... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Relatively rich societies like the US can afford to be more wasteful than relatively poor ones like Canada.

      Fair enough. But I'm tired of people claiming that privatized health care is magically better, more effective, more efficient, and better for the tax payer. It's not. It's wasteful, inefficient, expensive, and discriminatory.

      Personally, I think it would be very interesting to listen to a few poor people who are fscked by HMOs on a regular basis because they can't afford to pay for their own health insurance. I'm sure they just *love* the US system.

    30. Re:Ah the French... by general_re · · Score: 1
      It's wasteful, inefficient, expensive, and discriminatory.

      It's not particularly discriminatory, but other than that, in case you didn't notice the Clinton health care fiasco of '94, nobody around here really cares. There's no incentive to change because the expense is spread out among so many payers - across my lifetime, for every dollar that's spent on my health, I'll only pay about $0.18 of it out of my own pocket. In the mean time, the BC health care system is gradually going bankrupt in an attempt to keep its doctors and nurses from fleeing for the greener pastures to the south - say what you will about the US system, but it's not likely to collapse the way BC's will eventually.

      Personally, I think it would be very interesting to listen to a few poor people who are fscked by HMOs on a regular basis because they can't afford to pay for their own health insurance.

      I deal with the poor all day long in my job, and I see how they live and how they spend their money. As you're contemplating the plight of the poverty-stricken in America, though, you might stop to wonder why it is that the average American poor person is nearly as well-off, materially speaking, as the average European....

      --
      ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
    31. Re:Ah the French... by dave420 · · Score: 1
      If "success == working yourself into an early grave", then yes. Americans are more successful.

      Personally, I think "success == living a happy life with those I love", which America isn't as successful at, as most Americans are stuck in the office.

    32. Re:Ah the French... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      How on earth do you figure that? I could get up from my chair right now, but I don't want to. Does that mean I can't get out of my chair? Obviously not. Sheesh. Get back to work.

    33. Re:Ah the French... by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1
      I think that's an overly broad generalization. At least in England characters like Richard Branson are respected by most, however if you look at the "rich lists" which are published by the weekend broadsheets periodically they almost all come from one of a few sources:

      - Inherited wealth (ie royalty)
      - Financial people, stock traders, bankers etc who nobody ever hears about
      - High-level executives (often same as the 2nd category)
      - Rare individuals like Branson who are entirely self made through business

      Most are the sort of business people who get labelled as "fat cats" by the tabloids, ie those who are perceived as being paid fabulous amounts to (often) ruin some of the nations biggest companies and organizations. This is especially true of privatized industries like gas, water, rail etc. When they inevitably get kicked out for being incompetent, greedy and generally sucking ass, they get "golden goodbye" agreements where they are paid huge amounts simply to leave. In other words financially they can't lose.

      Those kind of rich guys don't get much respect. There are a few who fall into that category who really do know what they're doing, really do turn big companies around and who probably deserve the respect - it's no easy job - but from reading the papers if often seems like they are the minority (yeah yeah, media bias i know).

      So now you know. Just my 2 pennies.

    34. Re:Ah the French... by eudas · · Score: 1

      option 3: don't have kids, and that will also increase your disposable income, and give you more money to spend on your favorite person: yourself.

      eudas

      --
      Blessed is he who expects the worst, for he shall not be disappointed.
    35. Re:Ah the French... by captaincucumber · · Score: 1
      if you look at this [nationmaster.com], you'll see that, on average, an American citizen bears a greater tax burden than a Canadian.

      Meaningless. Those numbers are in $ per person, not as a percentage of income. Like they say, lies, damn lies, and statistics.

  11. It's a trick! by Manip · · Score: 2, Funny

    She just wants everyone else to do nothing so she comes out looking all good, teachers pet! :-/

    1. Re:It's a trick! by OO7david · · Score: 1

      It's a trick?

      Get an axe.

    2. Re:It's a trick! by twitter · · Score: 1
      Looking good is what it's all about. Her tricks involve looking good without exerting effort.

      Note that she did not recommend privatization of the public utility she works for. Does she really expect opportunity in the nationalized industry that exists to employ her overeducated self? What does she expect from economics and international relations even from the country's elite National Foundation of Political Sciences, or a doctorate in psychoanalysis besides a go nowhere state job? When most of the economy is like that, the state is free to push it's victims to all sorts of stupid work and effort in exchange for fewer rewards. See the Worker's Paradise for where this kind of attitude gets you.

      --

      Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  12. That's great by Rethcir · · Score: 1, Troll

    I should move to France, I'd be a model worker!

    1. Re:That's great by phyruxus · · Score: 1
      Yeah, but you'd have to be a mime.

      Do you want to be the greatest mime ever? It's much safer here, with me.
      Where are you going?

      --
      "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
      "d'Oh!" ~Homer
  13. Ummm.... by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So a French author advocates not doing the task in front of you; merely give that so-expressive French shrug with the palms upward. I guess this explains all the French military victories. Merely look like you're fighting a war, don't overdo it! Also: "Given the difficulty of firing employees, she says, frustrated superiors are more likely to move such subversive workers up than out." Let me just say right here that France has got to be quite different from America in this aspect. The firing process in America is a smooth, well-oiled and often-used machine.

  14. Gangrene up on that azz... by Mitleid · · Score: 2, Informative

    [the author] argues that France's ossified corporate cultural no longer offers rank-and-file employees the prospect of success, so, "why not spread gangrene through the system from inside?"

    Interesting concept. Of course, I'd have to read the book to get the full explanation of this philosophy, but I think corporatist/capitalist countries have in fact gotten to the point where the corporate culture isn't one where one can aspire to promote themselves, but moreso just make sure that they're going to have a job come tomorrow morning. Business administration seems to have gotten to the point where employees have become so anonmyous and replaceable that, for the most part, it seems no one is encouraged to maintain or even develop a sense of loyalty. Maybe her suggestion to eat out these corporations from the inside could prove to light a fire under their asses. On the other hand, as I think anyone can attest to being displayed in the past, it will most likely just instill the people in charge to take away more and more rights and benefits from the employees as a means to counter-act the half-assed work they're getting in return for paying out salaries. Ah well, the door swings both ways it would seem. I guess it'd just be safe enough to admit that we're all pretty much fucked.

    --

    --
    Is it me, or did it just get fatter in here?
    1. Re:Gangrene up on that azz... by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      >Maybe her suggestion to eat out these corporations from the inside could prove to light a fire under their asses

      I think her point is that there is no point in trying to achive "corporate success". The system is built against trying to stand out and succeed.

      From the article;
      "Can we work in a corporation and contest the system," she asks, "or must we be blind and docile and adhere to everything that the corporation says?""

      I don't agree with her point or method of contesting the system. Her later point is something I think everyone should think about.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    2. Re:Gangrene up on that azz... by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      "but I think corporatist/capitalist countries have in fact gotten to the point where the corporate culture isn't one where one can aspire to promote themselves, but moreso just make sure that they're going to have a job come tomorrow morning."

      I don't think this is ENTIRELY the downfall of the culture. I think there will undoubtably be some companies who are smart enough to know this and who treasure their employees and promote the hard working ones instead of the slacking ones. Remember, if the established companies are failing because of this, there will always be another one doing something different to take its place.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    3. Re:Gangrene up on that azz... by Mitleid · · Score: 1

      I completely agree with you. I'm not a total cynic; I'd expect that there are a great deal of companies out there (both large and small) that treat their employees quite well. I just think that, majority wise, most people have a tendency to end up working for a company that is so beurocratic and "efficiency oriented" that it just completely anihilates morale and kills any desire for employees to maintain any company loyalty whatsoever.

      --

      --
      Is it me, or did it just get fatter in here?
  15. Typical, you'd think they worked hard from this. by Performer+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seems like a self fulfilling prophecy, but French socialists are the first to complain when the little guy actually gets a piece of the action from a company instead of the State.

    The fact is that in Europe tech employees don't benefit as much from options etc whether at startups or larger corporations. The typical reaction however is not to expect better rewards or demand a piece of the pie (with the corporate tax incentives that are required to encourage it) but to tax the hide off profitable corporations and wealthy individuals a.k.a. "fat cats". There are no angel investors in Europe and almost no engineer level guys who made it rich in the rank & file who are then able to comfortably start their own business.

    The typical small business starts out there with one or two guys, no cash (or a bank loan taken against your house) and maybe a grant from the EU or some development commission.

  16. she might lose her job... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...just for writing the book. I had read this BBC article a few weeks ago:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3935669.stm

  17. Wrong time of year... by Tailhook · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...as about half the French corporate workforce is on vacation right now. Probably not the best season to try to advise them.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    1. Re:Wrong time of year... by chris_mahan · · Score: 1

      Tis the perfect time. They'll read the book before they get back and have a full year to practice.

      --

      "Piter, too, is dead."

  18. Re:Caffeine by GeckoX · · Score: 3, Informative

    Those 3 statements just don't add up to an insightful comment without a) data backing up each of those points and b) something to correlate those 3 statements together.

    --
    No Comment.
  19. CHOWDA by Heem · · Score: 2, Funny

    Say it frenchy - CHOWDA

    --
    Don't Tread on Me
  20. Economist link by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 4, Informative

    Is here.

    John.

  21. Military slacking off? by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

    Actually, that's not a bad idea. If not overused, the inflatable tank technique is quite effective. :)

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  22. Vive la SI!! by Potor · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is old hat. Guy Debord's Internationale Situationniste was daubing "ne travaillez jamais" on walls back when it was formenting the Paris student riots of 1969. And they meant it, man ...

    1. Re:Vive la SI!! by Gandavyuha · · Score: 1

      Another interesting precursor to this book in French philosophy is Michel de Certeau's The Practice of Everyday Life, which discusses tactics involved in appropriating company time for personal use.

  23. as Bartleby would say ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful



    I would prefer not to.

  24. Re:Caffeine by Kenja · · Score: 1
    "We're just not physically constructed so to endure 8+ daily hours of work."

    I agree, it eats into my sleep time. To quote the late great Bill Hicks, "all I need is eight hours of sleep a night, and then another eight hours during the day, and I'm good."

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  25. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  26. Living in France... by dmayle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know it's kind of cynical, but I live in France, and this isn't vry counter-culture at all. There's a continuous struggle between those who try to take advantage of the system from the bottom (the "lazy" ones), and those who are trying to take advantage from the top (what we usually term "evil corporations"). The French are working on equitable treatment all around, and for the most part they get it. (36 hour work weeks, I get 7 weeks of paid vacation a year, great social care/ health insurace, and no, the taxes are almost exactly what I paid in the United States. They're only very sharp once you get to the 150,000 and up range.) The downside is that there are many who take advantage of this to try and bilk the system. I'm glad to be here, because they do right by me, and I try to do right by them, but the worst of the lot are really making things terrible for the companies that are trying to do the right thing, and aren't "evil".

    1. Re:Living in France... by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 1

      I really interesting book about France and the French from a North American perspective is 60 million Frenchmen can't be wrong. I read it and came away with a different impression of France and a better understanding of how and why the French think the way they do. Well worth reading if you're interested in how your preconceptions match with reality.

      John.

    2. Re:Living in France... by IBX · · Score: 1

      Having lived under late communism (= impoverished police-state socialism) I do remember some similar pieces of "wisdom":

      1) Government pretends paying us while we pretend working
      2) Who doesn't steal from government steals from his own family
      3) Overachievers endanger everyone
      4) Good deeds are punished in the end
      5) There are people for work and people for breed and those two classes can never meet

      I have sympathy for the frustrated french girl but I don't think nihilism is helpful in the end. (If she decides to slack up for her family, it is a different thing). Instead of bitching I would propose her a different job or a different country. Ireland is hiring qualified people right now.

  27. The funny thing is you have it backwards by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you'd bother to read the (very short) article at all, you'd know that actually part of the reason she proposes slacking is in fact to get ahead!

    It's very dependant on the French business climate, but basically she says that since you have no chance to advance through good work (becaue the system is very rigid and based on tenure or diplomas), instead slack off in ways that few people notice - since the system makes it almost impossible (or very unlikley) to fire you, a boss will more likley move you up somewhere else than try to deal with you!

    Now for an American slant - could you please let us all know where you work where your review determines how much you move forward? I have had a great carreer but any movements up have been more about me forcing the issue than being moved up because of good reviews. And I've seen plenty of people move up the ladder without good reviews to back them. Reviews, and pandering to them, are possibly the most pointless waste of time ever invented by humanity.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by bobthemuse · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's very dependant on the French business climate

      No, it's dependent on not being able to fire people who are useless. If you ever work for a unionized public agency in the US, you will see this. Completely incompetent people with no drive whatsoever. Most of them are determined to put in the absolute minimum. Can't fire them, so they get promoted in the hopes that the new hire won't be so bad. Ever wonder why state universities are so top-heavy?

    2. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by Lord_Frederick · · Score: 1

      Many places have to have some sort of formal review process to cover their ass. Did anybody's review come into play when getting promotions or getting picked for special projects? Nope. That was all word-of-mouth. All it takes is for one manager to mention you're good when he's having a beer with the others.

    3. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The only problem is that her suggestions and theory about workplace promotion do not add up.

      If you have X bugs to validate, verify, test and file - and you slack instead, your bosses will notice that you are not handling as many bugs as your fellow employees. And you will get fucked when it comes time to fire people.

      Maybe slacking works in service jobs where it is difficult or even impossible to quantify your work or productivity, but in a field (most tech fields) plastered with matrices and various statistical analysis of every bit of an employee's workflow, when you slack off - it is very evident.

    4. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by lahi · · Score: 1

      This is true - a good friend of mine is a fire fighter in a major city. Firing the incompetent is nearly impossible, so if you suck they promote you to where you can no longer endanger the lives of others.

      This was described by L. J. Peter in The Peter Principle. I believe this particular method is Apparent Exception #1: Percussive Sublimation.

      Mme. Maier's methods appear to be an inversion of creative incompetence.

      -Lasse

    5. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If you really want to see this, work in local/state/federal government. They're full of slackers by definition, and so paranoid about firing people because of all the wrongful termination suits that they'll just transfer you somewhere else. Sort of like passing a hot potato.

    6. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by writertype · · Score: 1
      And I've seen plenty of people move up the ladder without good reviews to back them
      So either a.) you gave an underling a bad review, and they were promoted anyway or b.) a confidential review was disclosed to you, or c.) you're talking out of your ass. Since this is Slashdot, I lean toward "c".

    7. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by 2TecTom · · Score: 1

      Sheesh ... ever wonder why corporations are so top heavy?

      Like there's no croynism, nepotism or patronism in corporate America. Oh, and well we're at it, I've never seen a senior executive or manager work as hard as I have, despite earning much more.

      I just got tired of watching the good jobs go to my overpaid boss's friends. Tell me that doesn't happen.

      The word is "apologist". Don't be one.

      --
      Words to men, as air to birds.
    8. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by Wolfger · · Score: 1
      Now for an American slant - could you please let us all know where you work where your review determines how much you move forward?

      Yes, please! It is my experience that if your boss likes you, he tends to keep you right where you are! It's only when the boss wants to replace you but can't actually fire you that you are given the chance to advance your career.
    9. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

      Reviews, and pandering to them, are possibly the most pointless waste of time ever invented by humanity.

      Reviews are like most laws. The elite keep them around in case they have to hang somebody. The review hence serves no practical function if it is positive, even glowing. It's the bad review that has a real use.

      --
      [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
    10. Re:The funny thing is you have it backwards by NaDrew · · Score: 1
      And I've seen plenty of people move up the ladder without good reviews to back them. Reviews, and pandering to them, are possibly the most pointless waste of time ever invented by humanity.
      This is why I always rate myself as "Godlike" on self-evaluations. It's not like they're actually read, anyway.
      --
      Vista:XPSP2::ME:98SE
  28. Re:Imagine... by savagedome · · Score: 1

    a beowulf cluster of people slacking off

    You just described my workplace

  29. Hmm I wish... by MGhost · · Score: 2, Interesting

    According to the article, she works 20 hours a week for $24k a year = $25/hr? I know plenty of college grads making less than that, working twice as many hours. What a hard life she must have...

    1. Re:Hmm I wish... by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      According to the article, she works 20 hours a week for $24k a year = $25/hr?

      It's a 36-hr-per-week job. She only "works" for 20 hours.

      [Remember the CB radio trucker codes from the '70s? Like "That's a big 10-4, good buddy!" Do they have a "ten code" for "Duh!" ?]

      Just wondering...

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    2. Re:Hmm I wish... by arnie_apesacrappin · · Score: 1
      [Remember the CB radio trucker codes from the '70s? Like "That's a big 10-4, good buddy!" Do they have a "ten code" for "Duh!" ?]

      Just wondering...

      I-D-10-T

      --

      Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP

    3. Re:Hmm I wish... by MGhost · · Score: 1

      Clever, but not implied by the article. If that's the thinking, she probably "works" 10 hours a week then.

  30. Self-respect by Rich+Klein · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How could I practice calculated slacking and still respect myself?

    --
    -Rich
    1. Re:Self-respect by TMB · · Score: 1

      How about if you could actually improve your overall productivity by slacking? ;-)

      [TMB]

    2. Re:Self-respect by dswensen · · Score: 1

      What?! Self-respect is just The Man telling you how to feel good about yourself!

    3. Re:Self-respect by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      How could I practice calculated slacking and still respect myself?

      Um... use a lot of weighting factors?

      That always worked for psych experiments when the raw data failed to support the hypothesis.
      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    4. Re:Self-respect by Rich+Klein · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... I might be able to save myself some money in that scenario, too!

      --
      -Rich
    5. Re:Self-respect by Rich+Klein · · Score: 1

      Hush! I think The Man is reading this!

      --
      -Rich
  31. The U.S. Version has been around for decades... by NoSelf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since the early 80's a 'zine published in San Francisco called "Processed World" has dished up biting criticism and satire of the Amerikan workplace, all with an outrageous sense of humour.

    One of their early mottos: "Time is money, steal some today."

    http://www.processedworld.com/

  32. Huh??? by TopShelf · · Score: 1, Funny

    What I don't understand is how this qualifies as countercultural in France...

    --
    Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
  33. This is an American phenomenon too... by jkiryako · · Score: 5, Funny

    "...if you don't like your job, you don't quit, you just go in every day and do it really half ass, that's the American way." - Homer Simpson

  34. Managment by Paper by rf0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you just walk around with a bit of paper in your hand you look busy and can make sure you achieve nothing.

    Rus

    1. Re:Managment by Paper by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Make sure your tie is flung over your shoulder for that real "dynamic man on the go" look. Unstoppable.

    2. Re:Managment by Paper by will_die · · Score: 1

      Our old trick if you wanted to take extended time off during the middle of the day is the get an extra set of keys, then when you want to out just put the keys near your keyboard in plain view. People that look in on you figure you must be somewhere around since your keys are there.
      work better if you carry a briefcase or hat in and out ever so often. Then put the hat of briefcase on your chair.

  35. The Stint by havoc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There was a time when factories ran around the clock and would then close down for months on end until all their stock was sold. The workers had a great solution to this problem called "The Stint," an agreed upon rate of production that no worker would go over. To quote Joanne B. Ciulla:

    Employers were constantly trying to make employees work faster. Most workplaces had a stint, and those who failed to maintain it by doing too much or too little were ostracized. Workers who upheld the stint despite the curses of their boss earned reputations as "good men" and trustworthy masters of the trade. The worker restriction of output symbolized "unselfish brotherhood," personal dignity, and "cultivation of the mind." One reason why the stint was important is that workers wanted control over the amount of time that they worked. Businesses at this time often ran factories around the clock and then shut down for months at a time.

    Another interesting part of the workingman's moral code was having a "manly bearing" toward the boss. In the nineteenth century this popular expression was an honorific signifying dignity, respect, and egalitarianism. A person earned his honorific by refusing to work while the boss was watching. It is useful to reflect on the difference between only working when the boss is watching and not working when the boss is watching. They are both gestures of defiance, but one is about keeping one's job and the other is about keeping one's dignity. The first says, "I don't want to work, but I will, because you are watching." The second says, "I'll work because I want to, not because you are watchingThere was a time when factories ran around the clock and would then close down for months on end until all their stock was sold. The workers had a great solution to this problem called "The Stint," an agreed upon rate of production that no worker would go over. To quote Joanne B. Ciulla:

    Employers were constantly trying to make employees work faster. Most workplaces had a stint, and those who failed to maintain it by doing too much or too little were ostracized. Workers who upheld the stint despite the curses of their boss earned reputations as "good men" and trustworthy masters of the trade. The worker restriction of output symbolized "unselfish brotherhood," personal dignity, and "cultivation of the mind." One reason why the stint was important is that workers wanted control over the amount of time that they worked. Businesses at this time often ran factories around the clock and then shut down for months at a time.

    Another interesting part of the workingman's moral code was having a "manly bearing" toward the boss. In the nineteenth century this popular expression was an honorific signifying dignity, respect, and egalitarianism. A person earned his honorific by refusing to work while the boss was watching. It is useful to reflect on the difference between only working when the boss is watching and not working when the boss is watching. They are both gestures of defiance, but one is about keeping one's job and the other is about keeping one's dignity. The first says, "I don't want to work, but I will, because you are watching." The second says, "I'll work because I want to, not because you are watching."

    1. Re:The Stint by mikael · · Score: 5, Funny

      He/she has doubled their productivity by posting the same reply twice in a comment. We won't hear from 'havoc' for another three months now.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    2. Re:The Stint by dr_labrat · · Score: 1

      It was imporant, but even more so because she/he fulfilled her/his stint on slashd....

      --
      The secret of success is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake those, you've got it made. (Marx)
  36. Great fodder for the execs to discuss... by eufreka · · Score: 1

    ...after their round of golf, sitting in the 19th hole, waiting for their expense account meal to be served. They can bemoan the "new laziness" of their overpaid, overbenefitted employees.

  37. Exactly by essreenim · · Score: 2

    do {
    if task=1
    do task;

    else if task=0&lab=empty {

    for x=0;x300;x++
    Surf google
    for x=0;x300;x++
    read;
    for x=0;x300;x++
    Surf /.

    }task=1;

    }while in_work=true;

  38. No loafing by Burpmaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seriously, have these businesses considered a no loafing sign?

  39. One obviosly hasn't tasted India by Neo's+Nemesis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am living in India's capital, New Delhi. And the condition of government departments here is stagnating. According to the official hours, you work from 10AM to 6PM. But the schedule goes something like this:

    10AM - Crowd bundles up at the office
    10:30 to 11:00AM - The staff arrives
    11:00 to 12:30PM - Work!
    12:30PM to 1:00PM - Closed for Lunch
    1:00 to 1:15PM - Getting-all-the-gas-out break
    Then it is followed by some work, lots of bribery, lots of chatter with friends while the common man waits for his turn and so on...

    On paper, its actually 40-45 hr weeks, but in reality its much less. And thats the situation in cities. In villages its worse than anything. No work for days, and that too only thru bribery. And OTOH, the private sector employee works his ass off till night to make himself and country proud (and also to pay off those heavy bribes). Sad and sic!

    Venality and slackness would kill Indian dreams.

    1. Re:One obviosly hasn't tasted India by Sanga · · Score: 1

      This is true of any bureaucracy. And the first task of any bureaucracy is to perpetuate itself. And the easiest way to do it is by doing its job very slllloooowwwwly. You can observe it in any part of the world.

      That said, reined-in bureaucracy is just a little more efficient way of functioning than total anarchy (rule of might; Bihar eg). So we stick with the existing system.

  40. Passive Resistance by Feneric · · Score: 1

    Passive resistance can work wonders (just ask Ghandi) but if one really wishes to effect change with this technique a message would somehow have to be communicated to the powers-that-be telling them what sorts of changes were required.

    Who knows? There are definitely some employees out there getting abused by their managers. Possibly this technique (used surgically) could help them get basic rights.

    Used haphazardly I suspect that this technique could do a lot of harm.

  41. It's my guess... by Anita+Coney · · Score: 1

    ... that the book was funded by an Indian outsourcing firm. It would be in their interest to perpetrate the notion that Western workers are lazy and ineffectual.

    --
    If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
  42. Re:Caffeine by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

    Elephants, draft horses (Percherons and Clydesdales specifically) as well as other creatures are physically constructed to work 8+ hours of work a day.

    Besides, let's be honest, just because you are at work 8 hours a day doesn't mean you are actually working (like me posting here for instance).

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  43. After RTFAing... by CarrionBird · · Score: 1

    It seems to be less of a pro-lazyness rant than a "how to get ahead by bucking the system" rant.

    --
    Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
  44. I almost missed this... by Beek+Dog · · Score: 1

    Cause I was SOOOO busy working...

    FYI: Not every company does the merit-based-raise. I'm 24, so in my company that amounts to 4% over two years. Also known as jack shit. Nevermind all of the old mainframe guys come to me with every stupid html/javascript question you can think of...

    So even though I get more done than everyone else, I try to keep it close... by reading Slashdot all of the time.

    1. Re:I almost missed this... by Beek+Dog · · Score: 1

      I was afraid one of my co-workers would read this...

      Go ahead and keep asking me the stupid questions, and I'll continue pretending you actually still do something beside cycle power.

  45. do you realize what this means? by phyruxus · · Score: 1
    *flick* *flick*

    Hey! You're getting paid for that!

    --
    "A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
    "d'Oh!" ~Homer
  46. One more outsourcing weapon by MouseR · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Gee.

    And then we're complaining about loosing our jobs to India and other countries.

  47. Re:Caffeine by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

    I think there is some humour in your post, but its been modded insightful.

    Maybe if the original poster had reworded his post into;

    "Coffee is popular because we need to extend our natural biological cycles into an unnatural 8+ work day. Look at the cycles of other animals as an example."

    But if you are commenting that the mods are on crack, I wholely agree with you.

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  48. Programmer's motto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The less code you write, the less bugs you introduce.

  49. Dilbert- comparison by panurge · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Scott Adams famously was an economist working for Bell on ISDN, who concluded it would flop because it was just made too difficult to understand. So he created Dilbert...which is all about dysfunctional corporate culture. I spent 10 years of my life being Dilbert before becoming a PHB, and Dilbert is still so true it sometimes hurts.

    So a Frenchwoman, an economic adviser to the electricity industry no less, does something similar and it's:

    • Jokes about the French (rather than useless management) on /.
    • A disciplinary hearing.
    My conclusion: We're all much the same. And my other conclusion: I hope she makes as much money as Scott Adams. It would go some way to show there is some kind of justice in the world.
    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  50. Officespace by DaRat · · Score: 1
    Er, you mean like Ron Livingston's character from Officespace?

    I actually knew someone like that at one job. Brilliant (in one sense) guy who did his work for the week in a few hours (smart). Then, he spent the rest of the week smoking and reading sci-fi novels on the balcony (not so smart). Enough people eventually complained that he got fired, but it took over a year.

  51. I claim Prior Art! by HorrorIsland · · Score: 2
    Who do I sue?

    Aw, forget it - too much work.

  52. Obligatory Office Space quote by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2, Funny
    Could a translation find a Silicon Valley audience?

    Have you seen Office Space?

    Of the Bobs: Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately.
    Peter: I wouldn't say I've been 'missing' it Bob.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  53. Re:Caffeine by stratjakt · · Score: 1

    Ever seen a sheep herding dog? Or any of the "beasts of burden"? Horses, donkeys, oxen, elephants.

    Ever seen a seeing eye monkey?

    Plenty of animals work 8+ hours a day. In fact, the entire waking adult life of most animals is spent "working" (foraging for food, building nests, etc). Hell, laying in the shade and panting is "work", since the only "job" the animals have is to stay alive.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  54. Re:Imagine... by wmaker · · Score: 5, Funny

    Imagine a beowulf cluster of people slacking off!

    slashdot?

  55. Sister Site by pdamoc · · Score: 1

    MintRubbing.ORG There is an organisation dedicated to promoting such an attitude among romanians since 2000 :o)

  56. Slacking by wmaker · · Score: 1

    This slacking thing seems like a whole lot of work if you have to read a big ole' book to figure out how to do it...

  57. Fuck you by Hard_Code · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slacking must be principled. If you have a pointless job and are going nowhere, ok, slack. On the other hand, if you have a white collar job that allows you to sit in a padded adjustible height chair and browse the internet, you are probably already better off than the vast majority of humanity. It means that some other chump has to pick up the slack because you decide to take out your ennui about the dismal nihilism of life in your workplace instead of confining such gestures to solitary binge drinking on weekends, like the rest of us schmoes do.

    And if you are going to slack, slack productively! Become an activist or a political grafitti artist or something so the rest of us slobs have something amusing to look out on through our windows.

    --

    It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    1. Re:Fuck you by idiot900 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On the other hand, if you have a white collar job that allows you to sit in a padded adjustible height chair and browse the internet, you are probably already better off than the vast majority of humanity.

      Just because someone else's life sucks worse than yours doesn't mean it's wrong to be unhappy with how things are in your own life, and want to change them for the better. If calculated slacking does that, then great.

      This "sit down, shut up, and be thankful for what you have" attitude has always bothered me. Improving the circumstances of your existence is self-improvement, and self-improvement is, IMHO, compulsory. It doesn't matter whether you are Bill Gates or some homeless guy on the street. To not try to make the life that you've been given better is a crime.

      On the other hand, you shouldn't be an ass while you're doing it. If slacking in your cushy white-collar job means some worthless paperwork won't be done on time, then great. If you are a doctor and you slack, may you rot in hell.

    2. Re:Fuck you by swordgeek · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, you shouldn't be an ass while you're doing it.

      This is a major issue.

      I just got a disciplinary phone call from my manager (who lives half a continent away) to belittle me for not having my timesheets for last week done by noon. (it was 1:00pm when the phone rang.) Amongst other insulting comments was the fact that my manager "has better things to do with his time than phone us (money-making) staff every Monday afternoon." Maybe he should fucking well do it then.

      The problem with slacking is that for the most part, slacking worker bees make life harder for the other worker bees; and slacking management makes life harder for...the other worker bees. Worse, they seem to mistake their salary for a measure of their relative worth.

      --

      "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
    3. Re:Fuck you by Hard_Code · · Score: 1
      Improving the circumstances of your existence is self-improvement, and self-improvement is, IMHO, compulsory....
      On the other hand, you shouldn't be an ass while you're doing it. If slacking in your cushy white-collar job means some worthless paperwork won't be done on time, then great. If you are a doctor and you slack, may you rot in hell.
      That is exactly what I mean. It is one thing to slack because to do otherwise would be equally pointless. It is another thing to slack just because you are disgruntled with your lot and don't want to find anything better to do, which just means everybody else has to pull your load. At that point, the least you could do is just quit. There is something I find morally repugnant about doing honest work BADLY (which is not necessarily to say I mind doing dishonest crap-work badly). For example, although I lean left and support unions, I just get a terrible odor from intentional "slowdowns". You either work, or you don't work in protest. You don't be dishonest about it and fake like your doing hard work but really just are calculatingly slacking.
      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    4. Re:Fuck you by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter whether you are Bill Gates or some homeless guy on the street. To not try to make the life that you've been given better is a crime.

      Now all I need to do is convince Bill Gates that he can improve himself [spiritually] by helping me improve myself [financially].

    5. Re:Fuck you by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      If you have a pointless job (1) and are going nowhere, ok, slack. On the other hand, if you have a white collar job (2)
      You make it sound as though 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive.

      This is false.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    6. Re:Fuck you by Hard_Code · · Score: 1

      3) If you have a white collar job you probably aren't 4) starving to death therefore 5) you are probably just WHINING and need to 6) STFU and get on with it.

      Really, if your white collar job is so bad, then give it up for a more meaningful job, like catching bullets with your body in some war, or digging ditches or farming or something. White collar workers get to whine, but they should whine in their designated avenues of beourgious art and literature.

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
  58. I am suspect... by fiftyvolts · · Score: 1

    I am suspect of a manifesto about slacking written by someone in a country where it is against the law to work more than a certain number of hours a day.

    Now I am not criticizing that kind of life style, just questioning the applicability of that kind of a document in the US. People are pretty much expected to work overtime and weekends these days.

  59. its Wally world! by palapa · · Score: 1

    "who encourages workers to adopt her strategy of calculated loafing"

    The Wally-ing of France/America

    --
    "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence, is indistinguishable from malice." Grey's Law
  60. Re:Typical, you'd think they worked hard from this by LetterJ · · Score: 1

    I know that a lot of people here and elsewhere in the US can't see past Silicon Valley, but here, too, there are no angel investors, etc. The vast majority of smally businesses in the US start just like you said (including my business).

  61. More successful? by leathered · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The French drink more, smoke more and do less than most Westerners. Yet they are third in the WHO rankings for life expectancy behind Japan and Australia while the United States languishes in 24th place. All I can say is that the French must be doing something right.

    Americans work harder for longer hours, get paid more but die earlier. The French work less hours, get more holidays and live longer. So who is really the most successful?

    --
    For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
    1. Re:More successful? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1
      Americans work harder for longer hours, get paid more but die earlier. The French work less hours, get more holidays and live longer. So who is really the most successful?


      The ones who can afford AC during summer heatwaves.
      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    2. Re:More successful? by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Er... Everytime the temprature breaks 90 in Chicago, they also drop like flies.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    3. Re:More successful? by jebiester · · Score: 1

      I'd much rather live very well and die by say 70, than live in great misery (and full of hate and viciousness) till I am 90 like the French.

      No - it'll just happen 20 years earlier. And the viciousness seems to have started already.

    4. Re:More successful? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Does that mean people in Atlanta are more successful than people in Chicago?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    5. Re:More successful? by jav1231 · · Score: 1

      You realize the WHO is a joke, right? I mean, you don't really take them seriously do you? THAT is the difference between the West and EU.

  62. Good US Gov report regarding Productivity by implex · · Score: 3, Informative

    Mentions 4 countries with greater productivity per hour worked than the US. http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1999/07/art3full.pdf

  63. From the article... by thanq · · Score: 1

    I don't think the book's message is that relevant to U.S.

    (...)Given the difficulty of firing employees, she says, frustrated superiors are more likely to move such subversive workers up than out.(...)

    She apprently didn't watch The Apprentice.

    "You're FIRED" (don't forget Trumpish arm/wrist push & pull)

  64. French productivity per capita is just 72% by mc6809e · · Score: 1

    The French and Germans have loads of holidays compared to North Americans, and yet their productivity per capita is actually higher than in the USA.

    No. Productivity per capita is actually just 72%.

    Now, productivity per hour worked IS greater than that of the USA, but this actually makes sense when you consider the extent of the welfare state in Europe. Fewer workers supporting many people MUST produce more just so they have enough left for themselves after pulling the load of everyone else.

    1. Re:French productivity per capita is just 72% by pubjames · · Score: 1

      Now, productivity per hour worked IS greater than that of the USA

      That is exactly what I meant. I should have been clearer in my original post.

  65. Rot by e.m.rainey · · Score: 4, Funny

    So her point I guess is a mental strike. Instead of fixing the rotting system from the inside by working harder and going nowhere, accelerate the rotting by doing nothing. Either they will have to give up on their socio-political HR poilicies and start basing promotion, hiring and firing on applicable indicators like skill or die by their own hand.

    I'm suprised, France, that's very capitialistic of you. And here I thought you didn't swing that way.

    --
    The next remark is false. The previous remark is true.
    1. Re:Rot by DarkMan · · Score: 1
      Either they will have to give up on their socio-political HR poilicies and start basing promotion, hiring and firing on applicable indicators like skill or die by their own hand.


      Yup.

      There is, however, an interesting side effect to this. You slack, so that the system rots, so that slacking will be punished.

      Except, the only way that this will work, is if slacking is punished (duh!), and we note that you are slacking. So, the slacker will suffer if it succeds.

      Therefore, the ideal situation is if _everyone else_ slacks off, in a serious manner, and you don't, thereby accuring the benefit of the change in system.

      My philosophy is rusty, but isn't this a prisoners dilemma? The ideal situation is for everyone else to cooperate with your plan, but for you to compete with them.
  66. Calculated loafing by MarsDefenseMinister · · Score: 2, Funny

    Not to be confused with measuring your turds.

    Sorry folks, I know it's sophomoric, but it's Monday, and I'm bored, the thought popped into my head, it made me laugh, and for some reason I decided to share it with the world.

    --
    No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
  67. Re:Caffeine by Gooba42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Personally, my theory on coffee and insomnia and all the other crap that's going on is related to the kind of work we're being made to do.

    We're tired all day because we've tuned our bodies to a life of sitting at a desk or on a production line for 8 hours. Then at the end of the day our minds are so fried that we just want to vegetate. When it gets to be "bedtime" our bodies aren't tired enough to sleep properly so we take pills or stay up late.

    Then in the morning after not having slept well, if at all, we come to work ready for another day of doing not a whole hell of a lot. To stay awake we drink our coffee and it perks us up enough to get through the way we think we're supposed to do.

    As long as employment continues to mean we sit more or less in one place for 8 or 9 hours then we really need to play harder. It'll make us sleep better which could even get us through the day better. Being barely awake enough to work and barely tired enough to sleep just doesn't seem to be cutting it.

    --
    I just found out there's no such thing as the real world. It's just a lie you've got to rise above. - John Mayer
  68. Slacking keeps unemployment down until... by Louis+Savain · · Score: 1

    Let the weenies that hate their work slack away

    You don't get it. Slacking is a good thing for the economy. Slackers decrease productivity and force employers to hire more workers to get the job done. The problem is that employers also try to find ways to automate a lot of tasks to save money and hire fewer workers. Therefore slacking indirectly increases unemployment and productivity. This forces the slackers to slack even more -> Nasty self-feeding cycle ensues. Snowbal effect. And then one day, everybody is out of work, replaced by machines.

    In conclusion, slacking is the best incentive there is to increase research in AI and automation. Which is a very good thing. So, by all means, go for it. :-)

    1. Re:Slacking keeps unemployment down until... by jcr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You don't get it. Slacking is a good thing for the economy. Slackers decrease productivity and force employers to hire more workers to get the job done.

      Broken window fallacy.

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  69. Proactive failure by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

    ...in response to dimming prospects of success for rank-and-file employees.

    The best way to avoid success as a rank-n-file employee is to follow the advice in this book. Don't chance failing in your failure, be proactive and guarantee it!

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  70. Re:Typical, you'd think they worked hard from this by pjt33 · · Score: 1
    There are no angel investors in Europe
    If you intend to include the U.K. in that then I know you're wrong, because I've met one or two Cambridge-based business angels. It may be that such as there are are clustered in places like capital cities and towns with universities with good reputations for engineering and the sciences.
  71. AHHHHOOOGAH! ALERT! by TiggertheMad · · Score: 5, Funny

    Work HARD = Work SMART, not Work LONG

    ALERT! DANGER WILL ROBINSON, DANGER! This person has uttered a Dilbert 'Pointy haired boss'-ism, and no humor or irony has been detected. Someone notify Cowboy Neil that a PHB has gained access to Slashdot, and pull the account, quick!

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:AHHHHOOOGAH! ALERT! by Mateito · · Score: 1

      Yup.. MBA, y soon CCIE.

      Management isn't total bullshit, emphasis on Total.

      We need MORE TECHS IN MANAGEMENT. Would your rather a PHB with no clue, or a PHB who can back you up when the system fails?

  72. Where is the "-1, Wrong" moderation? by general_re · · Score: 1
    The French and Germans have loads of holidays compared to North Americans, and yet their productivity per capita is actually higher than in the USA.

    Har har har - that must be why per-capita GDP in the US is 40% higher than in France and Germany.

    Don't take my word for it - go look it up.

    --
    ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
    1. Re:Where is the "-1, Wrong" moderation? by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Good... and what's your share of the pie?
      BTW, last week I got an antibiotic paid by the italian health system because of a little flu; cost? A couple euros for the prescription although the pricetag read 35... (and I've read blogs by US citizens ripping their knee tendons and living with 'em because they were uninsured).
      Hmm, it's always difficult to talk about a system you grew up into as there's a risk of developing a Stockholm Syndrome. I admint that Italy is living fairly above it's possibilities but that's more to do with the employer/ee spirit: meat vs slave driver... and no attention to reasearch (not the theoretical, I mean basic stuff like IT) but simple quick buck.
      Listen USians... in the seventies many of you folks could afford a decent home, schooling and medical care off a single wage. Today a family is skitting just abouve poverty with two fulltime jobs, no vacations and just make shure you don't catch a cold or else: there goes an income and 2-300 bucks for meds...
      I'm pretty happy over here, I'm just a bit wary for Italy and the lousy trend it's takes in the last couple of years perhaps I might move to DE... heh, think they're slumping? Yeah, but they took unto themselves old east-DE... wouldn't that slow anyone?

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    2. Re:Where is the "-1, Wrong" moderation? by general_re · · Score: 1
      Good... and what's your share of the pie?

      What difference does that make?

      BTW, last week I got an antibiotic paid by the italian health system because of a little flu; cost? A couple euros for the prescription although the pricetag read 35...

      Good for you. Just by coincidence, I picked up an antibiotic for my daughter on the way home. Cost? $3.

      Of course, I'm not so silly as to think that it really only cost $3 total to me. How about you? Do you really think that a few euros out of your pocket represents the total of what you paid for that prescription?

      (and I've read blogs by US citizens ripping their knee tendons and living with 'em because they were uninsured).

      In my numerous encounters with non-Americans, I've discovered that there appears to be an oddly common belief among them - namely, that the uninsured are (more or less) dying in the streets on a daily basis over here. Curious, but I guess it just goes to show that parochialism and ignorance are universal conditions. I'll wager that your mystery bloggers have a few details of their story that are being omitted from your one-sentence summary.

      Listen USians... in the seventies many of you folks could afford a decent home, schooling and medical care off a single wage.

      Errr, lots of people still do.

      oday a family is skitting just abouve poverty with two fulltime jobs, no vacations and just make shure you don't catch a cold or else: there goes an income and 2-300 bucks for meds...

      I assume you're describing life on Mars or some such, since what you just described bears precious little resemblance to life here in the US. I'm happy that you feel good about where you're living, and that you're happy with your way of life, but the numbers don't lie - whenever you're ready to move to a place where the people are wealthier than they are in Italy, the state of Alabama is waiting. But don't take my word for it - read what a couple of Swedish guys had to say...

      --
      ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
    3. Re:Where is the "-1, Wrong" moderation? by airgee · · Score: 1

      Today a family is skitting just abouve poverty with two fulltime jobs, no vacations and just make shure you don't catch a cold or else: there goes an income and 2-300 bucks for meds...

      I assume you're describing life on Mars or some such, since what you just described bears precious little resemblance to life here in the US.


      Population below poverty line:

      US: 12% (2003 est.)
      France: 6.5% (2000)
      Italy: unavailable
      China: 10% (2001 est.)

      Source: CIA World Factbook.
    4. Re:Where is the "-1, Wrong" moderation? by general_re · · Score: 1
      Population below poverty line:

      Poverty is a relative measure. Why not examine the standard of living for the people the government defines as "poor", to see how they stack up to the rest of the world - I think you'll find that it's hardly an exaggeration to say that America has the richest poor people in the world, and that their standard of living compares quite favorably to middle-class folks virtually anywhere else in the world. Just as an example, the average American poor household lives in a dwelling that averages 1200 square feet. The average European household - not the average European poor household, but the average household - lives in a dwelling that averages 1000 square feet. If France or Italy were states in the United States, they'd rank fifth from the bottom in terms of wealth, and that's a fact.

      --
      ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
  73. Nice try by lorcha · · Score: 3, Insightful
    the taxes are almost exactly what I paid in the United States.
    V-A-T
    --
    "Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
    1. Re:Nice try by dmayle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The parent brings up VAT (or AVT as it is known in France) which stands for Value Added Tax. He's right to point it out, because many luxury goods cost much more in Europe than they do in the U.S. In France, the AVT is 19% (imagine having to pay 19% sales tax on DVD players, TVs, etc.). It's a very valid point, however the basic cost of living is much cheaper here than in the U.S. Fresh baked loaves of bread can be had for 20 cents. Bottles of wine for 2 or 3 dollars. Going out, you aren't expected to tip the bartender a dollar for every drink, and you won't pay 8-10 bucks for a single drink at the bar. Top shelf resteraunts are just as expensive, but the quality of food you get at your average resteraunt blows away what you're used to getting in the U.S. And, to top it all of, as a way of subsidizing resteraunts in France, most employees get these vouchers called 'Ticket Resteraunt' that cost $4.50 each and have a face value of $9.00, which is just perfect for lunch at a resteraunt. Most resteraunts have lunch 'menus' (think of it as a gourmet version of McDonald's #2) that typically consist of something equivalent to a steak, a glass of wine, and an after dinner coffee at this price range. (For an additional buck or two, they throw in dessert.)

      But, of course, for the geeks who want to know about the gadgets. I just bought a 120GB hard drive and it cost me 80 Euro. Blank DVDs are around 50-60 cents a piece (as opposed to the 25 cents thats starting to be common in the U.S.) SFF computers will run you about 320 Euro, and yes, these all include tax, and are all a little bit more than you pay in the U.S.

      Music is much more expensive (unless you shop iTunes Europe), and DVDs definitely run a little more expensive, though the bargain bins get to be as low as 3.00 each. All in all, I make less then I did in the U.S., but I live as comfortably, and I travel a lot more. (I've been to Spain, Ireland, and Italy already this year.)

      Well, that's France for you... A bit off topic, but maybe of interest to see what it's like to live over here...

    2. Re:Nice try by Tonytheloony · · Score: 1

      It's not AVT but TVA (taxe sur la valeur ajoutee). A tad strange you would get that wrong living in France.

      --
      The quickest way to become an atheist is to study the Bible thoroughly.
    3. Re:Nice try by dmayle · · Score: 1

      You're right, I was typing faster than I was thinking... Oh well, c'est la vie...

    4. Re:Nice try by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Damn... how difficult is it to emigrate to France? Do they not let the devil Americans in, or do they consider us poor Yanks to be political refugees? I already know I'm way too out of shape to join the Foreign Legion.

      Gotta dig up those French language tapes... je parle francais en pus... damn, needs work.

    5. Re:Nice try by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      "All in all, I make less then I did in the U.S., but I live as comfortably, and I travel a lot more. (I've been to Spain, Ireland, and Italy already this year.)"

      I have no arguments with anything you said except the above. I live in Missouri and travelled to Louisiana, Texas, and Colorado in one year. That beats the distances you mention. Just because it's all in one country doesn't mean it ain't travelling.

    6. Re:Nice try by jlanthripp · · Score: 1

      You've obviously never been in business in the US. When a company buys something for resale or as components to assemble into an item for resale, they do no pay sales tax on it. Only the final sale to the end consumer is taxed. This is why you see contractors at the hardware store giving their sales tax ID number to the clerk - the sales tax is thus not charged by the hardware store based on the price the contractor pays, but rather by the contractor based on the price his customer pays.

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    7. Re:Nice try by MonkeyCookie · · Score: 1

      I would personally much prefer to travel to Spain, Ireland, and Italy than Louisiana, Texas, and Colorado.

      Those countries are far, far more interesting than some states containing slightly different variations in U.S. culture. I must say, however, that those parts of the U.S. contain some nice scenery.

      The differences over 100km in Europe are generally far greater than the differences over 100km in the United States, which is why I find traveling there so much more interesting.

  74. Typical French (-1,Troll or +1,Insightful) by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    Yes, I am a troll. Or am I?
    This from the culture who has tried, by law, to regulate the hour of the work week. What if I want to get ahead and work more? Sorry, I guess I can't. It's the crab-bucket mentality - if any crab tries to escape, the others pull him back into the water. Or in Germany, where I was told, that its illegal to have 2 jobs, the reasoning being that you're taking one from someone else.

    The smuggled premise in THAT little gem is that everyone is equally qualified - however, since that is untrue, if you take a 2nd job, you aren't taking it from someone, that person never had a chance when compared to you anyway.
    Goodbye Europe, as I watch you sail off into the cultural, social and economic dustbins, I thank you for founding the U.S., but very little else.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  75. Hey, careful, man, there's a beverage here! by obergeist666 · · Score: 1
    I always considered The Big Lebowski to be the ultimate slacker manifesto.

    After I had a panic attack at work (there was a lot of stress), I decided to become more like the dude, and less like Walter. They don't pay me enough to suffer from a heart attack at age 35.

  76. A manifesto for Wally by ctid · · Score: 1

    This sounds like Wally's philosophy. If you need to know who Wally is, shame on you. Follow this link to the world of Dilbert and read the last month's strips before returning, suitably chastened, to Slashdot.

    --
    Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
  77. USAians forced to work more--Darwinian system by Cryofan · · Score: 1

    Americans are forced to work more because they have no welfare state to back them up. Instead the gov't backs up the businessman, the corporation. France and almost all other western nations have strong welfare states. They force the gov't to work on their side, as opposed to the side of the wealthy, at least to a much greater degree than we see here in America. The French (and Danes, Swedes, Finns, Nords, Dutch, etc., are not as worried about their future survival if they get fired: they know the govt will support them. And they do not have to fear going without medical care--it is all paid for by taxes.

    The europeans know more of how to work together to gain an advantage over the rich and the corporations. THeir advantage is based on the fact that their electoral system is more populist, as opposed to our American system, which is oligarchical--it favors the status quo.

    Read this to get some sense of what I am talking about:
    http://www.american-pictures.com/english/r acism/ar ticles/welfare.htm

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
  78. My funny story by GreenCrackBaby · · Score: 2
    When the annual review comes up the people that take pride or work hard will move ahead.


    A few years ago my job (programming) started to suck very very much. I started to slack, and I pushed to boundaries a little more every day. Over the coarse of a year I dropped from an 8-hour work day to 5-6, and most of those hours were spent surfing.

    My manager called me into his office out of the blue, and I figured the time to answer had finally come. Instead, he gives me 1,000 stock options, a certification that said "Keep up the good work", and a 5% raise.

    --

    "The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
  79. Re:NEVER in Silicon Valley. by Mateito · · Score: 1

    They don't speak French in India.

  80. Re:Typical, you'd think they worked hard from this by mvdwege · · Score: 1

    Nice that you mention options.

    Let's look at the incentive options offer: You get the opportunity to buy stock at a low price set now, but you get to buy the stock in the future when it is actually worth more than that.

    Look at the major clinching point: in the future. This means that the corporation has you tied to them for the duration of the option grant. Of course, since your options are expected to to become worth Loads Of Money(tm), you are expected to take a relative pay cut now.

    Of course, since you need the money, you had better shut up about the incompetent management, or you might lose your job, and your option rights.

    Of course, the managers have options as well. But they get bailed out if the options end under water, or they get compensatory benefits.

    Of course, these are merely options, not voting stock, so you also have no say in the running of your own workplace.

    In the end, options are a sham to keep the proletarians quiet. It's a bone thrown to a faithful dog, to make him forget his food is merely the leavings of his masters table.

    And for proof: look at one of the most succesful option grant programs in this regard: Microsoft. Guess who had to curtail option grants and move to restructuring the workforce, offering higher wages and actual stock to the employees to keep the best and the brightest?

    Keep your options. They are merely the velvet glove hiding the iron fist of management.

    Mart
    --
    "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
  81. No Good Deed Goes Unpunished by saudadelinux · · Score: 1

    My boss and I fight so many friggin' fires here, that we should go train to be smoke-jumpers. Amazing...

    --
    I didn't think the house band in Hell would play this badly.
  82. No Such Job Security in the USA by krgallagher · · Score: 1
    From the article: "a system of patronage and stiff legal protections make it difficult for employers to fire anyone."

    I do not know about you, but it has been proven to me on numerous occasions that it is easy to fire anyone in the USA. Now it may be that certain union workers -The Teamsters- might be able to get away with that, but I live in a right to work state, and here they are considered mostly a joke.

    --

    Insert Generic Sig Here:

  83. "Political grafitti artist" by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Funny

    On the other hand, if you have a white collar job that allows you to sit in a padded adjustible height chair and browse the internet, you are probably already better off than the vast majority of humanity....And if you are going to slack, slack productively! Become an activist or a political grafitti artist or something so the rest of us slobs have something amusing to look out on through our windows.

    "Oh, yes, and sir, the VP of international business development is out spraypainting our walls with 'Terrorists must die!' again."

  84. Leave it to the French... by Markgor · · Score: 1

    ...to write a book for the George Costanzas of the world.

  85. "Justice in the world"? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    It would go some way to show there is some kind of justice in the world.

    You clearly haven't read enough Dilbert.

  86. Obligatory Drew Carry Quote by eberry · · Score: 1

    "Oh, you hate your job?! There's a support group for that. It's called everyone; they meet at the bar."
    -- Drew Carry, the Drew Carry Show.

    --
    Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Lois, this isn't my Batman glass. - Peter
  87. We've Already Got by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    Bob Black's "Why Work?" as well as several other texts along those lines.

    Of course, we can always use another.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  88. Re:Caffeine by nacturation · · Score: 1

    Why is coffee so popular?

    We're just not physically constructed so to endure 8+ daily hours of work.


    So without coffee, people would be unable to work an 8 hour day? You're not from Seattle by chance, are you?

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  89. Re:Nice try [OT] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    dmayle, save your fingers. To Americans, USA is superior to all other countries in every way and always will be. It's useless to point out to them countries where things are better, they firmly plug their ears and start singing la lala lala...

    Sad, but then again, is it really that bad to let the Americans think they're the best? Let them stagnate in their hubris, the world can and will progress without them, perhaps in a much more peaceful environment.

  90. MOD PARENT UP by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    You might find a young American lawyer that "works" 100 hours a week, but he sure as hell isn't getting 100 hours of work done a week.

    I'd say that, if anything, Americans already understand the philosophy of slacking better than the French. However, the French keep resource usage in check by simply not letting you buy as many goods (require others to do as much work). In the US, you are kept at your place of employment to keep you from spending that time consuming goods.

    Relative pay depends more on the fact that the US has a more advanced set of marketers than the French, and thus generates more sales to foreign consumers.

    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP by k98sven · · Score: 1

      You might find a young American lawyer that "works" 100 hours a week, but he sure as hell isn't getting 100 hours of work done a week.

      This may be correct, to an extent. But it is more of a sad comment on american management style than a measureable economic factor.

  91. Too true by cecirdr · · Score: 2, Insightful
    What I'm guessing is....you no longer caused trouble. When you try hard to do a job right, management thinks you're a trouble maker....always in the way.

    See...they want change/success, but they don't want to do anything different about their jobs. So, they want to do the same things day in and day out and somehow the "universe" is supposed to serve them up something different. Odd how little details like cause and effect don't seem to mind to management. If business is bad AND you continue to do business in the same way, it will continue to fail. If someone wants to change things then prepare for a fight/firing.

    So, when you give up and let them be stupid or play along. Then you'll get rewarded...despite how poorly the company might be doing overall.

  92. That's the goal by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the goal of a just, modern society is workers who work less for more. The idea that we should all be furious worker bees is crap pushed on us by staggeringly greedy bastards who have been living like kings off other people's backs for as long as human society existed.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:That's the goal by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 1

      thank you. Wish I had mod points today.

    2. Re:That's the goal by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      the goal of a just, modern society is workers who work less for more. The idea that we should all be furious worker bees is crap pushed on us by staggeringly greedy bastards who have been living like kings off other people's backs for as long as human society existed.

      Future view: Did you ever watch the old Jetsons show? Ok, it was a cartoon, but there were certain attitudes present in it of a world in the future. Robots to do menial labor (Rosie did house work, Mack did building maintenance) The woman (Jane, George's wife) is still a homemaker (shops a lot, lousy driver, easily flustered - old female stereotypes) and George, who works at Spacely Sprockets. George comes home from work on day and says, "I'm beat. I had a hard day at the button." That was his job, he sat at a desk and pressed a button (I don't recall ever hearing what the button actually did, but pressing it was his only work.)

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:That's the goal by flacco · · Score: 5, Interesting
      the goal of a just, modern society is workers who work less for more. The idea that we should all be furious worker bees is crap pushed on us by staggeringly greedy bastards who have been living like kings off other people's backs for as long as human society existed.

      amen, brother.

      what's sad about it from my perspective (my hair grows grey and my knees aren't quite what they used to be) is that so many bright, energetic young people just don't recognize this fundamental truth.

      it's like reverse-idealism: in their optimistic prime, young people are more willing to spend their days, nights and weekends wading around in the shit their corporate masters pour on them, because they earnestly believe that *they* are special, and that *they* will be the ones who succeed, and they're therefore willing to accept a labor environment that's unjust and socially primitive overall.

      as time goes on, you realize how much of your life and soul you've devoted to making other people rich and comfortable, and you resent the means they've used to get you to do that... and even if you've accumulated some material wealth in the process, the balance sheet looks questionable.

      the current economic system has produced some miracles to be sure, and perhaps it may be the best that human beings can do - but don't fool yourself: an enormous price has been paid by a great many, while a relative few have paradise handed to them as a result.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    4. Re:That's the goal by kaleco · · Score: 1
      Working less for more is a little optimistic. It would be more attainable to create/provide jobs that are tailored to people's specialities. Jobs that make people productive and also give them a sense of purpose is what a modern, just society should consist of.

      A lot of people come out of retirement, not because they need the money, but because they miss the purpose they had when they were working. Hedonism doesn't create happy people.

      --
      Prosperity is only an instrument to be used, not a deity to be worshipped. Calvin Coolidge
    5. Re:That's the goal by Rimbo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "what's sad about it from my perspective (my hair grows grey and my knees aren't quite what they used to be) is that so many bright, energetic young people just don't recognize this fundamental truth."

      Yup.

      I'm really lucky in that right now, I work for a company that is well managed.

      We got a great kid, wet behind the ears, fresh out of grad school. After a couple of months, he asked me if I had any advice.

      I told him he needed to take it easier.

      I learned this lesson at my last job. I kinda felt I was a lazy worker, so when I got the last job offer and they told me I'd need to work hard, I went with it. We all worked ridiculous hours, and the company failed.

      What I learned from that experience was that I got more done working a 40 hour week and enjoying my time outside of work than working 60+ hours and working weekends. I actually got more accomplished that way, because my head was clear.

      This new company recognizes that, too. We're all lucky that they do; not only are we happier, it increases our odds of success. And now that I've got a position of some leadership, I want to pass that wisdom along to my co-workers.

      It's one thing to work 60+ hours a week for a brief couple of weeks to meet a deadline -- it's something else to do it all the time. Eventually, the return on investment drops to below what you had before.

    6. Re:That's the goal by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Sir I do salute you for putting it so concisely and eloquently.

      Rarely do I see here on Slashdot words of true wisdom, among these indignant expressions of exorbitant greed masquerading as phillosphy or politics.

      May I make this rather sad (or maybe amusing) observation about most believers in trickle-down economics, economic libertarianism, neo-conservatism and similiar lunacies here:

      What comes to my mind is all those Nigerian "419" advance-fee scammers. The whole premise is to use the victims greed as a weapon to lure him/her into giving up something valuable in exchange for nothing. The trick wouldnt be possible if the victim were not blinded with greed. This is exactly the same method by which the kings keep the serfs working so furiously. The masters offer the slaves what appears to be a way to join the ranks of the divine, if only the slave were to put her shoulder harder to the grind .... if only were he to spend less time with his family and more at work ... if only were he more "flexible" ... more "competetive"... just a little more .. and maybe if you work "hard" enough, you too can live on a yacht in Bahamas...

      And so says the fox to the chicken: "Oh, are you getting discouraged? No problem, here, another tabloid with a mega-star for you to worship. Now wouldnt it be great to be like him? Hard work, boy! That's how you get there! Now go finish that project on an arbitrary, impossible, deadline so I can get my well deserved millions in bonuses. And if there is a really big, and I mean REALLY big problem, you can call the bar at the golfcourse, they will flag me down when I am on the 9th hole."

      And while the fools toil, the thieves laugh all the way to the bank.

  93. Ummmm...... by DesScorp · · Score: 1

    ....where in IT have you ever seen a union shop?

    Not that I like unions much, but let's face it. Organized labor in the American IT sector just isn't much of a worry. France, a socialist country in all but name, is a different situation. But the minute US workers in IT try to organize, companies will fire them wholesale or move to India. They're already doing this anyway, which goes a long way towards explaining WHY American IT workers don't organize. They might not have ANY jobs left.

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
  94. The Internet is scaring the zillionaires? by Cryofan · · Score: 1

    I think some of them are afraid of the dissent that is bubbling on up the net. Look at this thread: 10 years ago, it would have been almost unheard of for this many people to be questioning the system at once, while in communication together.
    And we what are fighting against is not a conspiracy--it is just a small segment of people who are powerful and who act in their own best interests. And sometimes they organize to better achieve their goals.

    And of course there are those ordinary people who mistakenly think that they themselves are of that group, or they think that someday they will be of that group.

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
  95. We're going into an economic sollapse by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    because our standards of living have risen too high for our rulers' liking. Why pay some one $40,000 a year when you can pay them $5,000 and buy that nice new car, or house, or boat? People are greedy, stupid, uncaring bastards. The cold war was shielding us from this fact by keeping businesses stuck in the US. Well, that's all over, and so is America. We'll be as bad as Mexico in a generation.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  96. so you're too lazy to fight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    So, it pisses you off that the French have fought for, and won, the right to be treated as humans, while Americans have capitulated and so you have to work inhumanly long hours for insultingly low wages.

    Sure, you could be angry at the French for their success. Or you could be angry at yourself and your own countrymen for your failure to follow up on anything since the Boston Tea Party.

    It's seems to me similar to people who get all angry at the unemployed for receiving welfare or unemployment benefits - "soaking up my taxes". Then they go off to their jobs to work themselves absolutely to exhaustion, doing the work of two people and earning two people's "honest day's pay" - contributing to the shortage of jobs, by helping their employer to keep their payroll rosters low, and unemployment high.

    1. Re:so you're too lazy to fight by madcow_ucsb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You took the words right out of my mouth. It's not that the French are born to be slackers. It's that we Americans are born to be workaholics.

      Frankly, very few of us do important enough work that if we put in 35 hour weeks instead of 80 the world would collapse in on itself. I mean, I take pride in what I do, but come on.

  97. Re:NEVER in Silicon Valley. by Mateito · · Score: 1

    Good point.

  98. Entrepreneur is a French Word by Orbital+Sander · · Score: 1

    ... but apparently no longer a French ethic.

    Could a translation find a Silicon Valley audience?

    The big difference is that if you're disgruntled and disenfranchised in Silicon Valley, you can start your own company and get meetings with F2500 companies to talk about your product, without the need for having been in the right school or club.

    This is IMHO one of the main things that differentiate the US from other countries.

  99. Frigging road crews... by solios · · Score: 1

    I hate penndot. So much. For exactly this reason. The companies that got the contract to build the new stadiums in Pittsburgh got that shit done almost overnight.... yet penndot does nothing but sit on their ass and occasionally repave a small chunk of road. During rush hour.

    Oh, and PA has some of the worst roads in the country. These guys could actually WORK a full shift and they'd never have to worry about running out of things to do.

    1. Re:Frigging road crews... by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Heh, actually yesterday I was coming home from a funeral in Alabama on I75, heading to Port Huron.

      Nice drive, no problems...until Toledo.

      All of a sudden, with absolutely no notice, traffic stopped.

      An hour and a half, and 2 miles later, we were through and no more problems.

      They had funnelled 3+ (on ramps and such) lanes of traffic down to 1.

      Didn't see a SINGLE worker throughout the whole ordeal.

      Why?

      So some small patches of cement could dry.
      They did ALL lanes except for 1 at once.

      If they'd at least posted a warning ONE MEASLY MILE BEFORE, I could have gone around.

      Just as I was exiting the construction zone, there was a sign proclaiming that all lanes except one would be closed from Friday at 9pm until monday at 6am. Gee, thanks guys!

      Don't know about PA, but my vote's on Michigan for worst roads.

      --
      No Comment.
    2. Re:Frigging road crews... by lightknight · · Score: 1

      And here I thought it was me...

      Why does a road crew need 30 people? You have 2 guys holding the flags ("Slow, Traffic"), 5 guys to roll the asphalt around, and maybe 4 guys to work the machines. Total: 11 people.

      Instead they're all sitting around, drinking their coffee. I drive back from the stores (30 min later), they're still drinking it. Must be one good brew.

      Not that I mind slacking, but with the build up of suburbanites (huge developments, one and two lane roads, low-cost housing), the roads are clogged with minivans come 8 AM. It's great, if I don't make it out the door by 7 AM, I call the office, and let them know I'll be in around noon. I then go and watch a movie (instead of sitting in traffic).

      What you have to understand is that they have doubled the amount of lanes (on the roads), but they haven't gotten around to painting them yet. They just drink their coffee, and wave us on...

      --
      I am John Hurt.
  100. France vs. US by lorcha · · Score: 1
    I just wasn't gonna let you get away with saying that France provided all these nifty services with the same level of taxation as the US 'cuz France has one of the highest tax burdens in the world (~45% of GDP in France vs. ~30% of GDP in the US). :-) Also, things may cost less in France, but the PPP GDP Per Capita in France is 27% lower than in the US, so y'all got less money to spend.

    Unemployment runs about 10% in France vs 6% in the US. In fairness, the percentage of people below the poverty line is ~12% in the US vs. 6% in France, so it seems French welfare pays good. It's just a different system. I don't wanna get all philosophical and stuff 'cuz IAAE, not a philosopher, but maybe in the US since we work so much harder, we have less sympathy for people who are less well-off ("I go to work every day and work my ass off... why can't you just do the same, ya bum?" type of attitude).

    Anyhow, I'm glad you're getting to travel (of course, this year I've been to Napa, Steamboat, Vegas, Lake Michigan, Chicago, NYC, DC, MN, NJ, MD... anywhere else? I can't remember, but my wife and I have the travel bug so we get out a lot. Still hoping to get over to Southeast Asia for a few weeks this fall.) You should definitely take advantage of this opportunity. Enjoy!

    P.S. Normally I don't rip on people's spelling online, but I love the irony that you misspell "restaurant", a French word, like 15 times. ;)

    --
    "Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
    1. Re:France vs. US by Paulrothrock · · Score: 1
      I just wasn't gonna let you get away with saying that France provided all these nifty services with the same level of taxation as the US 'cuz France has one of the highest tax burdens in the world (~45% of GDP in France vs. ~30% of GDP in the US).

      Maybe the tax is higher on the richest people, making the % of GDP higher, but keeping similar tax rates for the middle class.

      maybe in the US since we work so much harder, we have less sympathy for people who are less well-off

      Maybe we in the US don't share their value systems. We may be concerned with having the latest gadgets or the biggest house or the fastest car, but in France they see those as extraneous and therefore worthy of heavy taxation. They see family time, good food, and overall well-being as more valuable than money, and tax appropriately.

      I'm not saying either of these systems are right or wrong, just different. The problem arises when people in one country (me in the US) want to move to a country that shares their values, but don't have the money to do so.

      --
      I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
    2. Re:France vs. US by Jesrad · · Score: 1

      Unemployment runs about 10% in France vs 6% in the US.
      Err, no, the REAL, non-politically correct unemployment rate as calculated by interim agencies is almost 20% in France. That's why worker unions try their damnedest to outlaw firing of people entirely (which is not, IMHO, the correct solution), they know that once they're out they won't find another job.

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
    3. Re:France vs. US by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      And what's the REAL unemployment rate of the US?

      > According to the Council on International and
      > Public Affairs (CIPA), the real U.S. rate of
      > unemployment, if properly calculated, would be
      > 11.4 per cent - more than double the official
      > rate.

      According to other people it goes as high as 15%.

      The 20% figure in France is probably not off the mark though, but the situation in the US is not rosy, and being unemployed in the US truly sucks after a while.

    4. Re:France vs. US by Renaud · · Score: 1

      Oh please.

      Why not 30% while you're at it ? Sources ?
      You sound like Le Pen who routinely slips that there are 5 million unemployed in France (where it's officially 2)

      If you're gonna argue over figures, then 6% unemployment in the US ? Fine, now please add the working poor who live below the poverty line. Or talk about the retired having to flip burgers, or the single mums with 2 jobs.

      All that hardly exists in France. Living on minimum wage is no fun but it certainly doesn't leave you below the poverty line in all but the most extreme and rare cases.

      Don't even start comparing how the working class is treated between US and Europe. Or the billionnaires, for that matter.

    5. Re:France vs. US by Jesrad · · Score: 1

      Sources are INSEE, ANPE + major interim agencies (Manpower, Adecco and Vedior Bis). The REAL unemployment rate here is the official rate plus all that they left out, like:
      - unemployed people who are currently following a formation
      - interim employees who don't have a mission at the moment (over-year average)
      - unregistered unemployed workers (those who exhausted all social facilities or were discouraged), though I admit a number of them probably found un unofficial job but are too honest to claim allocations at the same time - but then I don't count unofficial jobs (au noir)
      - disabled people who can't work (obviously this includes fraudsters, but these are unemployed anyway so I count them as such)

      This might not correspond to your idea of an unemployment rate, obviously, but it accurately gives the ratio of people who don't work in the active population.

      If you're gonna argue over figures, then 6% unemployment in the US ?
      According to the other answer to my original post, the same is true in the US, where the real unemployment rate is said to be 11.4 %. That's still a lot less than 19.9%

      Fine, now please add the working poor who live below the poverty line. Or talk about the retired having to flip burgers, or the single mums with 2 jobs.
      As an aside, a lot of retired people in France live under the poverty line, in the overwhelming majority they come from the private sector. Single mums don't generally need 2 jobs like can be the case in the US, but single women with no children can't even earn a living (source: my-friggin-self !)

      You sound like Le Pen who routinely slips that there are 5 million unemployed in France (where it's officially 2)
      I take this as a compliment over open-mindedness :) I'm a anarcho-libertarian who would never vote for an authoritarian egomaniac like Le Pen, even for a few million euros.

      Yes this 19.9% rate is a pessimistic estimate because it does not account for illicit jobs and counts disabled as unemployed, but it is far more realistic than the official rate.

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
  101. Enjoy your rollovers by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 1

    Oh no! Who will flip you back over! Not I!

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  102. Sucks2BU by glrotate · · Score: 1

    I feel really bad you can't figure out a way of not having to pick up the slack, sucker.

  103. slashdot: the uber-slacker's hangout by Thimble · · Score: 1

    Her solution? Rather than keep up what she sees as an exhausting charade, people who dislike what they do should, as she puts it, discreetly disengage. If done correctly -- and her book gives a few tips, such as looking busy by always carrying a stack of files -- few co-workers will notice, and those who do will be too worried about rocking the boat to complain. Given the difficulty of firing employees, she says, frustrated superiors are more likely to move such subversive workers up than out.
    ...pffft! "carrying a stack of files"? they're even slacking at slacking! for looking busy, nothing beats typing furiously in front of a computer. hence: slashdot.

  104. damn slackers by austad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm all for trying to look busy and impress the boss, but IMO there's too much slacking going on.

    I work my ass off, I'm trying to get somewhere and do a good job at what I do. When you are surrounded by lazy people who do just enough work not to get fired, it makes it hard to get my stuff done when I am relying on other people to finish their portion of it, and it also makes others pissed at you for making them look bad.

    The job I have now is fine, but a previous job was a nightmare. 60 hour workweeks could have been 30 if others had done the job they were paid to do. Not to mention, there are a ton of incompetent people out there that should not be in the positions that they are in.

    I'm definitely not a model employee, but I want to get my work done and have a life outside of work. I make an extra effort to learn things that are useful to my job, and I expect my co-workers to do the same. Being the bad guy because you have a deeper understanding of a particular product or concept sucks.

    One of my old roomie's books from college on business management said that you can't motivate employees with more money, but you can certainly demotivate them with not enough. Maybe that's the problem, I don't know. But, in any case, if I was in a position of power at a company, slackers would be scared. Slacking off not only hurts the company's bottom line (which most people could care less about), but more importantly, you are making more work for your co-workers, hurting morale, and possibly providing the company with ammo to get rid of your lazy ass.

    Personally, I find it harder to stare at a cubicle wall than to actually just do my work that needs to get done. I've been at quite a few different jobs, and now that I think about it, the jobs that were very strict on hours were the ones that I saw the most slacking. If it takes one 2 hours to finish their work for the day, they should have the freedom to go home, go to training, etc. If they are making you be there 8 hours, and you are done with all of your work, it really doesn't give one an incentive to get it done. I guess if you treat your employees like children, they will act like it.

    --
    Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
  105. Bonjour tristesse by doru · · Score: 1

    The title plays upon Francoise Sagan's Bonjour tristesse. In case someone was interested...

  106. French secret by mehgul · · Score: 1

    You wanna know a french secret about their longevity ?

    We do care extremely much about what we eat, that's as simple as that. But honestly, you cannot understand that if you never went to France for some time to experience it by yourself. I have been living in Scandinavia for more than 5 years now, and I can see that Scandinavians are healthy, no question about that. But I am daily horrified about the food they can accept to eat here.

  107. Union schmunion! by Scottl_h · · Score: 1

    My son, a diesel mechanic, recently went to work at a union shop. His first few weeks there, he was trying to bust his a$$ to make a good impression with his new employer. One day, the union shop steward took him aside and told him to 'slow down' because he was making the other, more experienced UNION workers look bad. He was turning out over 50% more work than the UNION guys. A few months after he started, the contract between his employer and the customer whose equipment they maintain was up for bid. There was talk of pay cuts to slash the contract amount to ensure its' renewal. (note: the contract was renewed without the pay cuts)

    I guess the customer didn't feel they were getting what they paid for. No wonder, given the attitude of the UNION workers. He's a member of the union now, but doesn't yet (and hopefully never will) buy into to the "entitlement" attitude that seems to infest that shop.

    --
    Excessive drinking is fine...in moderation.
  108. WTF M8s??????? by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1
    But she works just 20 hours a week writing dry economic reports at the state electric utility, Electricite de France, for which she is paid about $2,000 a month.

    I bust my ass 6 days a week 8 hours a day for $32,000 a friggin year. STFU, I'm moving to FRANCE!!!!
    --
    I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
  109. I am French... by PhB95 · · Score: 1

    ... And I insist on working only 35 hours a week with 9 weeks off each year !
    I am 42, with a little girl to raise and a decent income. I actually prefer trading a bigger paycheck for more time with my kid. Like parent poster said, there's more to life than much money, big house and heavy car. Is it someway indecent to claim that, having a decent life standard, I do not care to enhance it by any means ?

    --
    One of those Europeans...
  110. This guy is not a troll by Travoltus · · Score: 1

    I don't agree with the "find another job" remark, since there *are* more workers than jobs, and thus even the really good people can be out of work simply because there is no work to be done, but still, this author did not intend to troll anyone.

    If the troll moderation was handed down because of the socialism remark, love2hateMS was actually right. Corporations do not like what socialist policies stand for, which is achieving a balance between corporate power and the power of workers and consumers. Even the tiniest *drop* of socialism interferes with maximizing shareholder returns on investment, and that's harmful to a "business climate" in which shareholder ROI is ~God Almighty~ and thus corporations desire ALL the power they can get their hands on.

    (This is not a corporate conspiracy, it's just a natural logical defense mechanism they have to ensure their own survival and prosperity.)

    I must thus protest the modding of love2hateMS as a troll even though I disagree somewhat with him/her.

    --
    --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
  111. Huh? by lorcha · · Score: 1
    Maybe the tax is higher on the richest people, making the % of GDP higher, but keeping similar tax rates for the middle class.
    Maybe? Did you go through college writing theses like, "Maybe US citizens drive too many SUVs?" What is this maybe crap? Is Frances tax system more progressive than the US's or is it not? "Maybe", indeed!

    I'll tell you this: according to the US IRS website, the top 10% of wage earners payed 65% of federal income tax. The top 50% of wage earners paid 96% of federal income taxes in 2001. If France is more progressive than that given their 19% VAT (VAT is regressive), I'd love to see a study that shows it. Until then, I'm sure you've figured out where you can stick your "maybes".

    I'm not saying either of these systems are right or wrong, just different. The problem arises when people in one country (me in the US) want to move to a country that shares their values, but don't have the money to do so.
    That's what I was saying. Neither is right or wrong, just different.

    Anyhow, what's with the cop-out? Where do you want to go that you think you can't afford to go? You are not trapped. If you really want to go somewhere don't tell yourself you can't afford. Find a way to afford it. You can only live once, my friend. Make it count.

    --
    "Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
    1. Re:Huh? by Paulrothrock · · Score: 1
      Drink. Decaf. Mkay? :-)

      I should rephrase: I don't have the money to leave the US yet. I just graduated college, and I have a negative net worth. Once I get out of debt and a few years of experience under my belt, I'll be looking for a tech position in Denmark.

      Where I really want to go is Mars. I can't afford it, and my country won't send me.

      Why Mars? Because I'll be able to archive civilization while the rest of you destroy it.

      --
      I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
    2. Re:Huh? by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      I very much doubt your debt would follow you to Europe. Just a thought...

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  112. US Flag? by Biff+Stu · · Score: 1

    I guess the editors were too lazy to make an Icon for a French flag.

  113. A quote by soliptic · · Score: 1
    Suppose that, at a given moment, a certain number of people are engaged in the manufacture of pins. They make as many pins as the world needs, working (say) eight hours a day. Someone makes an invention by which the same number of men can make twice as many pins: pins are already so cheap that hardly any more will be bought at a lower price. In a sensible world, everybody concerned in the manufacturing of pins would take to working four hours instead of eight, and everything else would go on as before. But in the actual world this would be thought demoralizing. The men still work eight hours, there are too many pins, some employers go bankrupt, and half the men previously concerned in making pins are thrown out of work. There is, in the end, just as much leisure as on the other plan, but half the men are totally idle while half are still overworked. In this way, it is insured that the unavoidable leisure shall cause misery all round instead of being a universal source of happiness. Can anything more insane be imagined?

    -Bertrand Russell

    1. Re:A quote by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      I'll have to remember that one...

      The fact is that technology keeps leading to increases in productivity. If we wanted we could carefully regulate workweeks while still producing a slow productivity increase, and as a result we wouldn't have to work so long eventually.

      Of course, the way it really works is that the employer who owns the pin-making machine doesn't want to pay people to not work as long. They'd rather fire half the crowd, and use the oversupply of qualified workers to force down wages, and up their profits.

      In the modern world, the best person to be is the guy who can afford to buy the machiens...

    2. Re:A quote by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      The fact is that technology keeps leading to increases in productivity. If we wanted we could carefully regulate workweeks while still producing a slow productivity increase, and as a result we wouldn't have to work so long eventually.

      By and large this is what has happened. Productivity has steadily increased, but so has liesure time. (What, you mean the example of the overworked lawyers and coders? They make a sufficient salary that they can either retire early or keep their children in education for a long long time--both of which are "liesure" in a capitalist sense.)

    3. Re:A quote by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Uh, most Americans work over 40 hours per week and only get a few weeks vacation after many years of employ.

      That is hardly a surplus of leisure time. Based on productivity figures we could all be working 5 hour weeks and probably still have as much wealth as we had back in the 60's...

    4. Re:A quote by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Uh, most Americans work over 40 hours per week and only get a few weeks vacation after many years of employ.

      Got a reference?

      I don't know ANYONE who works more than 40 hours a week on a regular basis. The people I know who put in the most hours on a job were EMTs -- and their job consisted of "be ready for calls and take care of the equipment." Many times, they woudl get paid simply to sit and wait on the couch.

      And, conversely, I don't know anyone who slaves away for twelve hour days in a factory, or struggles all their lives on a farm.

      Even if I accept your "most americans" claim, the simple counter is that "most americans" also retire at age 60 or 65 and never work again--and more and more Americans are retiring sooner, and staying in college longer.

  114. Author's employer sanctioned her for the book by imAlive · · Score: 1

    EDF, the author's employer sanctionned her for

    "Non-observance of the obligation of honesty expressed on several occasions: to read the newspaper in meeting, to leave the meetings of group, revealing of the individual strategy clearly posted in the work Bonjour Paresse, aiming at gangrener the system of the interior."

    (google's translation)

    whole article here here

  115. Go France! by jridley · · Score: 1

    I think it's an excellent idea for workers in France to slack off; in fact I think those in India, particularly programmers and call center people, should do so as well.

    1. Re:Go France! by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      Damn right! i think its time for oparation job-security: we gotta get all out-sourced workers hooked on MMORPGs or Doom 3, then give them Friends and Simpsons to further reduce productivity. Finally introduce them to Slashdot and blogging. Ha! they'll be so useless they'll start out-sourcing back to us!

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  116. good luck moving to france by Cryofan · · Score: 1

    If you can get a job there, you can stay there a while, but you do not have all the benefits of a citizen, and becoming a citizen is rather hard.

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
    1. Re:good luck moving to france by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      You can get many of the benefits of French workers by gaining citizenship in any of the EU member countries. If you have any British ancestry it probably wouldn't be too hard to get UK citizenship.

      Also to get French citizenship the easiest way is to marry some French and live there for a while.

  117. Yay highways. by solios · · Score: 1

    Haven't been to Michigan, but urban and near-urban PA roads are pretty bad. Rural isn't horrible- it's either DIRT or PAVED- and a couple of the major arteries (route 15 comes to mind) are in startlingly good repair.

    But then you get stretches like Fifth Avenue in Pittsburgh. I've lived here for almost ten years and this is THE FIRST TIME I've seen road crews on fifth- which in Oakland is a four lane road, three lanes inbound with the bus lane outbound.

    They peeled up the asphalt prior to smacking down the new coat a couple of weeks ago. Normally this makes for a REALLY bumpy ride if you're not used to it.... but I didn't even notice. :P

    They ARE fairly good about announcements and detours, but road work seems to take MONTHS. MONTHS. Why the hell does it take six weeks to repave a mile and a half of street? :|

  118. Ayn Rand Cited? by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    I can't help but notice a remarkable similarity between this book, and Ayn Rand's book/manafesto/rant, 'Atlas Shrugged'. The primary philosophy of both seems to be that the weight of the system will eventually crush itself, so why fight it? Interesting that the Author is refering to a French government agency that has very socialistic traits, and Ayn was frothing about how lassier-faire ecenomics is the only way to save the world from decay.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  119. Re:Typical, you'd think they worked hard from this by Performer+Guy · · Score: 1

    LOL good one. I don't offer squat, but I have made money from this, & I know others who have. I also get paid a shit load more after moving to America. You see where I come from even white collar tech workers are seriously undervalued in every respect.

  120. Re:Typical, you'd think they worked hard from this by Performer+Guy · · Score: 1

    I was speaking in general terms. In the USA there is a proliferation, but mainly I'm thinking of peopel who can afford to take a risk starting their own business because they made some money. This has a snowball effect that is never going to happen in europe because once you have a house you are a wage slave unless you want to gamble with everything you have.

  121. Yeah.. by samantha · · Score: 1

    Let the West learn to slack off even more than is already done. No problem. Asia will simply eat our lunch. That part of the world already is averaging on the order of 10x the number of engineering and science degrees.

    Think about it.

  122. Re:Typical, you'd think they worked hard from this by Performer+Guy · · Score: 1

    Yup, I hear you, OTOH I just worked for a bunch of pricks that instituted mandatory 80+ hour weeks at their company, they paid for 40, if you worked say 80 hours come Saturday and took Sunday off, come Monday you'd get chewed out. I know *productive* guys this happened to. They finished the project recently and fired a whole bunch of guys who'd been working their asses off like this for months, some of those guys were their best IMHO. The reason given in one case I know about... "too expensive", and no he wasn't even close to expensive.

    I got out earlier before it got really bad, fortunately I landed on my feet. But I have never worked for such incompetent and amoral S.O.B.s and have a lot more sympathy for labor laws after a career of viewing them with disdain. I've worked my tail off at great companies and enjoyed it, but some places are clueless and don't know what that kind of company culture is like or how to get there, they just screw people and it's employers like that we need labor laws for. AFAIK nothing they did was illegal or came close to being actionable.

  123. I'd read it... by Money+for+Nothin' · · Score: 1

    ...but I'm too lazy.

  124. Ritz Camera by Max+Threshold · · Score: 1

    We already do this at Ritz Camera. Fully two years into the massive surge in digital sales, my store still cannot produce 4x6 from digital for under $3 (yes, three dollars) per print. The local competitor has seen such a surge in digital business that he was able to cancel his advertising budget and apply the savings to stealing our city contracts representing 40% of our remaining film business. For want of a $5000 printer, we lost a $2000/mo. contract, plus incalculable and permanent losses in customer loyalty. We warned our DM and RM of exactly this scenario over 18 months ago, yet it's our fault business is down.... riiight. So we just don't give a fuck anymore. We have no customers left, so we're free to lounge around all day reading fantasy novels and surfing the Web on our laptops. Can't beat $8 an hour for that!

  125. Recipe for success ... by fygment · · Score: 1

    ... is to find a very common circumstance and write about it. Presentation is everything and it helps to neglect accuracy in presenting your background as witnessed here

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  126. A Change of Heart by CiXeL · · Score: 1

    I've been there. I've busted my ass time and time again, working harder than my coworkers because i enjoyed what i was doing. I am definitely slacking off now if I get another job. I'm tired of bending over for a company and taking it again and again. After experiencing many many poor managers knowing i could do a million times better than them if i had the change and doing better than my lazy coworkers and making them look bad for being lazy leading to them setting me up for falls. I'm tired of working hard and getting nowhere. Fuck the system. If passive-aggressive is the way we have to fix things SO BE IT.

  127. 'Just' society philosophy by kylef · · Score: 2, Interesting
    the goal of a just, modern society is workers who work less for more.

    Hmmm... I suppose quality of life and life expectancy just aren't enough anymore, eh? That we eat more, enjoy our time off more (our current buying power is unparalleled), and live longer than any other human beings in the history of civilization is apparently not sufficient proof by your standards that the current system works.

    Let's pass laws to stop the greedy bastards who are living like kings, so that we're all equal! That is a very novel and just idea (especially since we're inherently equal). Profit incentives can be replaced with state mandates! Why haven't we tried this before?

    Or maybe... JUST maybe... we don't realize how good we've actually got it? Perhaps life in the idyllic past was actually more brutish and short than we can remember? And perhaps, just perhaps... the recent century's progress away from those abhorrent standards of living can be traced somewhat to the advent of industry and worldwide trade?

    Nah, you're right. Life sucks, things are inevitably getting worse, and the greedy bastards are keeping us down and away from the success that we deserve because we are members of society.

    1. Re:'Just' society philosophy by Jason+Ford · · Score: 1
      Does earning more necessarily make us happier? How do you explain the observed increase in the rates of depression among people in industrialized nations? (Disclaimer: study is from 1989.)

      Or, for a more partisan spin, take this quiz.

      Perhaps you enjoy eating more, buying more, and living longer than your ancestors. However, I may not choose the same metric as you. Perhaps I would like to work less time, spend less money, and spend more time with my family and friends. Please don't assume that we share the same values.

      I agree with you that things tend to get better. However, this is only because some people have actively fought to improve the conditions around them. Just like your bedroom, if you do not put in the effort to keep it clean, it will become dirty.

      --
      I did not become a vegetarian for my health, I did it for the health of the chickens. --Isaac Bashevis Singer
  128. I started my own business - now finding success. by wayoutwest · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That is precisely what I have done - and five years later, we are looking at our second profitable year in a row (last years profits were less than $1000, and we paid no salary).

    We lost everything in the great dot com bubble burst - our 401k lost 80% of its value and stock options weren't worth the paper they were penned on. I was not laid off, but my days were certainly short - the company, Global Crossing, went down the tubes less than 6 months after I walked away from my comfy System Admin position and fat salary.

    My husband and I decided to live inexpensively and search for a niche market that we could be happy working in. We fell in love with the rugged back country of South East Utah. We tried several business models - one failed - some didn't get off the drawing board - and two are actually creating jobs for more than just myself and my husband. And two other business concepts are simmering and need employees to take off - I can only do so many jobs at once.

    We did it all with no financial backing from banks, govt or venture capitalists. We sacrificed all the comforts that most people could not live without.

    We purchased a modest home in a remote rural town for $38,000 and we've been building our skills and dreams ever since. We've worked low skill near-minimum wage jobs to ensure the house payment gets made. We've raised chickens and gardens to supplement our food stores. I've not had a car with air conditioning for nearly 5 years now. Did I mention I live in a desert?? One of our cars was purchased for $300 the other for $100. We work seven days per week and 14+ hours per day. But no one is going to lay us off. And the fruit of our labors is just beginning to ripen.

    I formed a business incubator to help my business through low cost office space ($10/year). We've recently moved out of the incubator and into our own office. Business this month is 200x better than it was one year ago.

    As for employees, I am just starting to search for the right people to help expand our business endeavors. I get to learn all about employee taxes and insurance. Now, my biggest obstacle is finding talented and intelligent people out in the styx ( the gene pool is a wee bit shallow out here), or luring compentent people out from the various silicon valleys - people who are sick of working for something that has no lasting value. Guess how many I've get beating down my door to take a huge paycut - so far, zero. I plan to post an internship on Craigslist this fall, I hope to find someone smart enough and worthwhile of my time and investment to further grow our business.

    Until now, we haven't been able to expand or offer jobs that are guaranteed to pay the bills. I asked a couple dozen different friends to come out and put a stake in what we are building. No one came. But we have made this happen without all those things that are generally listed as needed to build a business. It CAN be done. Not by just anyone, but by those that are willing to make huge sacrifice and a long term commitment to making it happen.

  129. Parent provides Very Solid Advice. by Gallowglass · · Score: 1
    Lumme, mate! I wish I'd heard that 25 years ago! (All you young'uns pay attention to what the man says.)


    God, I wish I had mod points left! I wish I could mod it up to 6!

  130. Not quite... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    So I guess you're (d) new to business.

    In fact I had one person who worked under me, and myself and another person agreed he was not ready for promotion. Then he got moved to a different group, and against our protests was promoted ahead of a number of people.

    This was not even a case of nepotism or favoritism. I happen to know that he was just constantly badgering every manager he was under about when he would be promoted, and managed to find one where it annoyed them less to promote him than listen to him whine.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  131. They do in France though by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Her whol point is that in France, it really is the case where you can slack off all you like and it's just about impossible to get fired. It's all about the heirarchy and looking good, and firing underlings does not make YOU look good. It raises questions, and the last thing anyone at a company wants is to have people asking them questions or to have people under them generating questions. That's pretty much about the size of things.

    Heck, in the US at any medium to large sized company it's just about as hard to really be fired! I have seen people who had to WORK at it for months when it was a goal! No kidding.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:They do in France though by ikkonoishi · · Score: 1

      Yes in many cases it is actually illegal to fire someone in France. The government tells the companies that they can't lay people off so in most cases they only hire the absolute minimum of people.

      Even in times when they could make a lot of money due to an upswing in the market they will usually give up any chance of capitalizing on the boom because if it fails they will never be able to get rid of the excess employees.

  132. I don't like the idea by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    of people so pathetic they need thier jobs to give them a sense of purpose. I think those people are just being intellectually lazy. They don't want to spend the time and effort of do things they like, so they bury themselves in work instead. It makes them feel big and important without having to actually do anything big and important. There's nothing wrong with going through your life accomplishing basically nothing, as long as you're OK with that. I want people who can be OK with that when it turns out they lack the rare genious and true drive needed to do things truely worth doing. Really, stop and think about how dumb it is to work hard for the sake of hard work. If you're still in doubt, go dig a few holes on your day off and fill them in.

    If I sound mad it's because I am. Idiots who want to spend their whole lives working drag the rest of us along for the ride. Those content to spend their lives quitly enjoying their hobbies get caught up in a society of 40+ hour work weeks when automation should have done away with that a decade ago.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  133. No, it's not by rsilvergun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    because our system's about to come crashing down. The signs are all there if you care to look. Every reputable scientist agrees we're gonna run out of oil soon ('soon' in the historical sense, i.e. in time for it to be a disaster). There's not enough metals for China and India to industrialize, and when their economies start bumping up against the limitation there's going to be a _really_ nasty war ala WWII until the same damn stupid thing happens that did in the 40s (enough people die that the survivors can live pretty well).

    And ask any one of those rich fucks that's sending jobs overseas: you've never got it so good that you couldn't have it better. And besides, most of the rest of the world still has those abhorrent standards of living. You see what's going on the the Congo lately? How about any part of Africa? And wait till the oil runs out in the Middle East and they're suddenly worthless lumps of dirt again.

    Life doesn't suck, but it's going to. Dear God, is it going to. Maybe not for you and me, but for our children certainly. The worst thing is, anyone with half a brain and an internet connection can see it comming, but _nobody's_ doing a damn thing about it.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:No, it's not by kylef · · Score: 1
      Every reputable scientist agrees we're gonna run out of oil soon ('soon' in the historical sense, i.e. in time for it to be a disaster).

      No! They *do* expect us to run out of oil, but they do NOT expect it to cause a disaster! The reason is basic economics. As the shortage of world oil worsens, the price of oil will increase. This will not cause crisis.

      The inevitable oil shortage will cause a natural balance of resources: people who really need the oil will be willing to pay more for it. If the oil is more valuable to party A, then party A will pay a premium over party B. Party B will naturally cut back on consumption, because it is not worth it to them to pay the price that A is willing to pay. This will not cause shortages, because there will ALWAYS be enough oil for those willing to pay for it! Only price caps (which some will inevitably call for, trust me) can cause true shortages because the natural supply-demand-price balance is articifically disrupted by government meddling.

      The gas shortages of 1972-1973 were a direct result of Richard Nixon's price control policy, which guaranteed that supplies would be exhausted by buyers eager to consume more at the government-mandated low price. These policies continued throughout the Ford and Carter administrations (leading to more shortages in 1979) and were only overturned by Reagan's government in 1981. There has been no shortage since then, although prices certainly fluctuate to indicate the current supply/demand situation.

      But in the meantime, as oil prices go up with depleted reserves, other energy sources will naturally look more attractive in price. Right now, oil and natural gas are far and away the cheapest energy resources known. As it becomes harder and harder to extract oil from the ground (we will probably never, in fact, run completely out of oil: it will simply grow too expensive to use as our primary means of energy production), the price of oil will gradually overtake that of harnessing wind and solar energy. Currently it is simply not cost-effective to build wind generators or use solar panels: the equipment cost dwarfs the resulting energy production. One day, the reverse maybe true. Or better yet, there will be a new form of cheap energy available by some other means not yet devised.

      My point is basically that people such as yourself have (incorrectly) predicted the demise of the capitalist economy since the mid-1960s. Yet each year, by virtually every statistic we measure as a society, life has gotten better despite increasing populations. The "Worldwatch Institute" is a great example of an organization that makes the same claims that you make. In the 1970s they were worried about Global Cooling (yep!), pesticides, and massive coming famines. Today it's global warming, overpopulation, and oil dependency. The issues change (because the facts inevitably prove the hack theories wrong), but the people subscribing to these theories NEVER change their pessimistic outlook, even when confronted with facts that have proven their past claims wrong.

      So basically, you may feel free to continue to believe whatever you want to believe: that the world is about to collapse (despite all evidence to the contrary), or that worldwide standards of living will decline for the first time in the past 3 centuries. But those shouts will inevitably fall on deaf ears because your fellow pessimists have Cried Wolf far too many times to have any credibility left.

  134. If you want to live on a ladder by samael · · Score: 1

    Life's a game. Sure, play hard enough to keep yourself fed and a roof over your head - but if you're going beyond that, make damn sure it's because you're doing something you really want to.

  135. Re:France's downward spiral by Tirs · · Score: 1

    > That's no doubt one reason why the French are so irrationally angry at countries like the US where the spiral continues upward.

    Excuse me... the spiral continues WHAT???

    Where do you live in the States? Bangladesh (AL)? Or maybe Shanghai (TX)?

    --
    Strength, balance, courage and reason. If you know what's this about, contact me!
  136. Re:Slacker Thee (-1, Offtopic) by uberchicken · · Score: 1

    Your sig at time of posting:
    > "Are you into dragons?" - asked of me by a stranger in a sleazy bar

    Well, this might not be so strange if you dress like Terry Pratchett.

    (Nice post about labour stuff, by the way.)

  137. Our food supply is based on oil... by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    the machines that allow 1% of our populace to grow enough food to feed the other 99% run on oil. Moreover, the trucks that cart food to cities and keep parts of our countries from starving to death run on oil. Oh, and willing to pay and able to pay are too very different animals. John Kerry and George Bush's kids will be both willing and abled, I'm not so sure about mine.

    Do a google for the phrase 'peak oil'. What's happened is the oil age has enabled our population to expand far beyond its normal limits. When the oil supply shrinks, the population needs to shrink with it. The sensible thing to do is sterilize people, but God be damned if we're gonna do that. So there'll be yet another round of war/famine/plague until nature corrects itself. I'm just sick of Mankind, an intelligent animal, following Nature's lead.

    And I don't remember predicting the demise of Capitalism. Quiet the opposite really. I see Capitalism perfecting itself into a hideous self-perpetuating system of poor who live worse than pack animals and rich who's slightest whim is carried out to the extant human ability allows. I remember once reading a magazine article where some rich fuck lamented that modern Opera houses couldn't compare to old ones, because in this day and age you couldn't get society to dedicate that much of it's resources to an Opera house while people starved. I don't expect this situation to last much longer.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  138. 1984 by Eternauta3k · · Score: 1

    Production left the country to avoid production surplus, which would improve the way of life and make people start thinking. That'd lead to the destitution of the ruling class. (Paraphrasis of "The theory and practice of oligarchical collectivism")

    --
    Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
  139. Re:Caffeine by jschottm · · Score: 1

    Back when I had a job that I really enjoyed, despite the fact that I frequently working 16+ hour, physically intensive days, I tended to bounce out of bed after 6 hours of sleep. (Don't worry, I wasn't being abused by the workplace - I had a two or three day workweek). Even at the same age, doing an office job that I was good at but not happy with, after 8 hours I ended up feeling dead and dragging by the time I got home, and only wanted to veg out. So I fully support your theory.

  140. Re:Typical, you'd think they worked hard from this by MrResistor · · Score: 1

    The typical small business starts out there with one or two guys, no cash (or a bank loan taken against your house) and maybe a grant from the EU or some development commission.

    You're deluding yourself if you think it's somehow magically different in America. The fact is most startups here don't have any "angel" investors, and if you look at what those investors typically want in return for their help you'll quickly find that they are more predator than angel.

    Most American companies start out as one or two guys with no cash, or maybe a loan against their house. Apple, HP, and even Microsoft started out that way.

    --
    Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  141. Re:I started my own business - now finding success by MBraynard · · Score: 1

    While the pay may not be as much, it looks like you've found the best kind of happiness - productive achievement and someone you love (your husband) to share in it. Good luck out there.

  142. Re:Slashdotters see the truth of it by rkrabath · · Score: 1

    Amen to that You'd have mod points if you hadn't posted this in an article, in my thread

    --
    Who do I have to blackmail to get some representation around here!?!?!?!?