Slashdot Mirror
Star Wars Sickout
Brahmastra writes "The New York Post reports that it will cost employers $628,880,000 in lost productivity on the first two days of Star Wars Episode III - Return of the Sith . How many of you are planning to skip at least part of your workday on the first two days?"
Somehow, I'm not a bit surprised. :)
It's a flawed analysis. They study implies that these people otherwise wouldn't have these days off. People who get vacation time tend to either take it when they can so as not to lose it, or they accrue it to cash in later. It's as much a part of compensation as actual pay. On the other hand, hourly employees who don't get vacation time are only costing themselves money, so there's no business loss. *Sigh*, more people who think they can model the world with incredibly flawed assumptions.
"Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman
Funny thing is, according to the short stories about the bounty hunters, Boba didn't die in the Sarlacc pit.
Most people who are salaried are usually already putting in more than 40 a week. Anyone who is on the clock won't have to be paid during the time they are not at work (unless they are dishonest, in which case they are already probably screwing their employer). And losers on government subsidies already in line outside the theatres will finally be able to get back to playing Star Wars Stratego at home instead of in the rain!
Overall I think it is better for the economy than worse.
Dude - I wish I had mod points right now.
Picking up slack for the office broad that has a "cough cough" sick kid racks up hours. Over the course of a year - in addition to her two weeks of vacation time, and the 5 sick days and a personal day, she racked up close to 130 hours of "Oh I gotta leave" time.
That's not counting her smoker time outside - which she managed to do at least ten minutes out of each hour.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
*looks at parent* *looks at your message* *looks at parent*
Huh? As far as I can tell you've read a little too far between the lines. Your message's parent seemed to just be complaining that they were expected to put in more time to make up for people with families.
In particular, I see no reason for you to complain about being expected to work as many hours as the single people do. If your job demands more hours than you can provide, get a job that doesn't, don't expect others to pick up the slack because you feel we have more time available than you.
Admittadely, flexibility may be an issue; if something needs rushed to completion, or you genuinely need to be away from work to look after a sick kid, I don't mind throwing in some extra time, but I expect for you to put in extra hours later to make up for it, and let me take it easy for a bit.
On a related note; for those of us who are single, particularly long term single, free time for our social lives is key to changing that. Or would you prefer we stay single so we can continue to spend more time at work so you can keep a job that expects more hours than you have available?
You can't ride a bike or hike in those fancy shoes if the people decide to not work the factories anymore. Most people's idea of recreation requires a good deal of industry to be as enjoyable as it is. You work hard to give yourself the ability to take some time off and enjoy the fruits of humanity's labors.
"Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
Why does it always come back to the costs to business? When did they become more important to people? How about the costs to individuals caused by businesses (e.g. days cut from life-span due to job-related stress)? There's more to life than big business.
I'm also 22, and work twice as many hours a week...
Call me when you're done working 80 hour weeks for 3 years and we'll talk
I think most of us have been there, including Motherfucker. If you're not careful, you're going to burn out before you're 30. These are your prime years. Use them wisely.
And don't fool yourself, working 80 hours a week is NOT twice as productive as working 40 hours a week. Not even close.
Look when you're older and have kids, you have a good idea of what's important. Get the shit done in 8 hours. Go home and spend time doing the stuff that really matters. Anything else is probably a waste of your life.
The other guy has more experience, and figured out how to get the job done in a shorter amount of time.
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
"At least they're smart enough to realize they need a break from time to time"
Huh?! They are not in control, buddy, the ciggies are.
They are heading out like clockwork because they are *ADDICTED*.
The monkey says, "Light up! NOW!!"
I got tired of losing out on "smoke breaks", so I started taking my own breaks when I needed them - at 30 to 50 minutes per pop. Just hop up and vaporize.
Where's Juddy? Smoke break - carton at a time...
Maybe your experience is that way, but my (albeit limited) experience is the opposite. Many of my married w/ children coworkers routinely come in early, stay late, etc. Other single or just married w/o children are in the door at 7:30 and out the door at 4:00. Hourly/salary has some to do with this, but its also the type of people they are, but I usually see more salary people picking up the extra work then non-salary. Classifying all married w/ children workers as slackers is just incorrectly stereotyping us.
It also helps to have a company that actually enforces sick/personal time. I get a lump of hours to use for being sick, doctors appointments for both me AND my family. If I need to stay home with a sick kid, I lose the hours. If I need to pick him up from school early, I lose the hours. If your company doesn't enforce it, then blame your company as well.