In defense of lazy Employees

Whenever the subject of an employer's responsibility to the employee comes up, it gets repeated time and again that a company is there to make money, that is their #1 goal and they don't care about their employee's needs. Fair enough, but that same defense can be used by lazy employees.

A person goes to a job. Their #1 goal is to make money, not flip burgers or stack boxes. They don't care about their employer's needs (a hard working employee) If a worker is smart enough to trick a company into getting hired, and is able to skate by without getting fired, why is that bad? They would be acting exactly like business owners. They get employees and pay them the lowest possible legal wage, and treat them as bad as legally possible.

So why are lazy employees looked down upon, where as these businesses that behave in the same exact manner get held up as a positive group?

When you work a job where you know there is no chance of advancement, or chance of a pay increase (millions of americans) doing the bare minimum to not get fired isn't any worse than companies that pay minimum wage.

It's a cycle, low wages breeds bad workers, breeds lower wages, breeds worse workers. It's pointless to argue about where it started, but it could be stopped by companies deciding to pay a living wage if possible, many companies do, don't claim it can't be done.

So why shouldn't the workers just start working harder and hope their masters will look fondly upon them and give them a raise? Well, aside from the fact that personal experience shows many that hard work gets you nowhere at many jobs, it's a matter of scale.

Asking a worker to work harder to influence a higher wage is asking an individual to influence policy of a large corporation. Asking a corporation to influence harder work through higher wages is asking a large corporation to influence an individual, a far more reasonable request. Do you think it's fair to ask one person to change a corporation, or a corporation to change one person?

Workers should care to do their work as good as possible regardless of what they earn as there is 100 more people willing to take their jobs, not because employer want it.

It's easy to work hard if there is progression in a business. If you know that you won't always flip burgers or stock shelves, you are likely to make sure you do it well, then do the same in the next position. Too often though, entry level jobs are also dead ends.

a reply to: James1982

No just no...lazy workers are the bane of my life...I don't get much more than minimum wage and the problem is If a lazy worker doesn't do something it means the good workers have to pick up his/her slack and do their job..while getting paid the same.
I was always taught to put 100% into whatever your job is.
I agree we should have a livingwage but in this day and age there are many people just waiting for your job and If you are lazy and do not do the job you have been hired to do you should expect to be on the dole soon.

I appreciate the replies guys but you really aren't addressing the topic.

Why is it OK for an employer to do the bare minimum, but not the employee?

^^That's this thread distilled down for anyone confused. I'd appreciate it if we could stay on topic.

a reply to: James1982

Oh and you are dead wrong low wages do not make worse workers. Just because someone is paid low doesn't mean they are going to turn lazy.

a reply to: Indigent

Goes both ways ...

Plenty of research shows that engaging your employees, respecting their opinions, and providing rewards encourages them to do better work.

Plenty of research also shows that fear has diminishing returns and only works for so long.

As much as there are entitled employees running around at the moment, there are hundreds of entitled corporations also, and they're doing it wrong. It's okay because people romanticize the heads down butts up machine like worker who they seem to think they were / are when in actual fact they probably have quite a lot of motivation for piles of reasons not related to themselves.

Prediction of this thread though:

'You're what's wrong with [insert generation here] these days, it's all about ME!'
'Why do you expect anything if you're lazy?! Entitled youth! Where is my pitch fork!'
'You're just angry because you're old'
'And you have no realistic ambitions or respect. You should be curing cancer and happy being a garbo'
'You're old and ruined the economy back in the 1860s'
'And whats the point to raising wages and investing in employees?! They just leave anyway. In my day we had loyalty.'
'Then explain Russia in world war II.'
'I wasn't including the Russians.'

Etc ... until infinity +1.

a reply to: James1982

How do you know they do not work as hard? sorry but at the job interview you agree to what you job is, you don't have to take it but you sign a document agreeing your T&C..if you don't do what is in there you can get fired.
Just because you think employers do not work as hard as the employees doesn't mean they are...they have more responsibilities and stress.

originally posted by: Pinke
a reply to: Indigent


Prediction of this thread though:

'You're what's wrong with [insert generation here] these days, it's all about ME!'
'Why do you expect anything if you're lazy?! Entitled youth! Where is my pitch fork!'
'You're just angry because you're old'
'And you have no realistic ambitions or respect. You should be curing cancer and happy being a garbo'
'You're old and ruined the economy back in the 1860s'
'And whats the point to raising wages and investing in employees?! They just leave anyway. In my day we had loyalty.'
'Then explain Russia in world war II.'
'I wasn't including the Russians.'

Etc ... until infinity +1.

Probably... I spelled it out pretty clear in my post above so hopefully people stay on topic. I'm self employed now so if I'm a lazy worker it only hurts me, hopefully people can address the issue of why it's OK for employers to give the bare minimum but not employees.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: James1982

How do you know they do not work as hard? sorry but at the job interview you agree to what you job is, you don't have to take it but you sign a document agreeing your T&C..if you don't do what is in there you can get fired.
Just because you think employers do not work as hard as the employees doesn't mean they are...they have more responsibilities and stress.

Care to address the topic of this thread?

Why is it OK for employers to give the minimum, but not employees?

originally posted by: James1982
I appreciate the replies guys but you really aren't addressing the topic.

Why is it OK for an employer to do the bare minimum, but not the employee?

^^That's this thread distilled down for anyone confused. I'd appreciate it if we could stay on topic.

Supply and demand. There's a huge pool of people that have to take whatever job they can, under whatever conditions they have to.

Any time the pool dries up, conditions and pay improve.

Business is all about the bottom line, maximising profits for shareholders, if a company can make one dollar more profit treating people bad then that's what the bosses have to do or the shareholders will vote them out.

a reply to: James1982

I did Iam asking you why you think employers are not working as hard as the employees? iam sure there are that do not work as hard but many do.
At the end of the day you took the job knowing the pay and just because someone else may be lazy it doesn't mean you should be also.
Money wise it is supply and demand just simple economics really we have many workers and not enough jobs...supply and demand.

a reply to: James1982

So one day you could be the employer? or are now? would you accept a lazy employee? would you just accept his lazyness because you may be paying him/her minimum wage? even If you paid more to them and they still thought they were not getting paid enough and were lazy would you still accept it?.

a reply to: James1982

Yes and no.

This has long been a hot-button issue for me--the employers abusing employees issue.

I tend to try and find out how companies, shops etc. treat their employees and then to trade elsewhere if they don't treat them at least reasonably.

WELL EDUCATED EMPLOYERS KNOW and behave accordingly that treating their employees as treasured, valued, protected, supported etc. parts of THE TEAM

WILL RESULT IN A BETTER BOTTOM LINE AND GREATER SUCCESS FOR THE COMPANY.

However, many corporations are headed by . . . ruthless, greedy, ATTACHMENT DISORDERED JERKS . . . who are determined to produce short term gains for THEIR bosses . . . whether it's the Board of Directors or the share holders or whomever.

AND, the VALUE of treating employees with quality care and respect IS HARD TO QUANTIFY for the bean-counters.

ALMOST ALL organizational and development guru's KNOW and WISE MANAGERS KNOW that it IS COSTLY to abuse employees. But it tends to be a very long term issue that drags the company down over the long term and is always very hard to impossible to cite specific figures in the corporate tally sheets.

And, in the short term, abusive treatment of employees SEEMS to produce results measurable on the bottom line. So, for many jerk managers who are dysfunctional in their psychology and their values--that's the way they choose to go.

I think it would make a larger difference if MORE CONSUMERS POINTEDLY ASKED employees how they were treated and then took their dollars elsewhere when the answers weren't up to par.

Sometimes, I've also written the corporate bosses about their treatment of employees.

Anyway--my 2 cents. Good topic. An important topic, I think.

In terms of your question . . . GIVEN A DESTRUCTIVE management style, I suppose it's . . . UNDERSTANDABLE for employees to fight back passive aggressively.

HOWEVER, I DON'T LIKE THE RESULTS OF THAT. IT RESULTS IN THE EMPLOYEES BEING AS HORRIBLE A CREATURES AS THEIR EMPLOYERS. There's enough of such folks in the world. Let's not breed them in corporations.

Let the serfs and slaves act like high class philosopher kings regardless of the costs. Perhaps an odd employer here and there can be shamed into cleaning up their act.

THEN THEY WILL BE MUCH MORE LIKELY to treat their families like high class philosopher kinds would. AND THAT is WELL WORTH IT.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Lol we agree on things twice in two days

The bottom line for me is a lazy employer will not do well in his business and lazy employees hurt business.
If your employer is lazy and he is also employed he will not be there for long...If I knew my manager was not doing her job I would complain to upper management etc.
So it is simple don't be lazy in the work you do.
When I employed people in my pubs I had an ethic...don't delegate anything to anyone you wouldn't do yourself.

I'm a business owner. I run one bar and a bar and grill. I make sure my employess are well paid. I will be firing two people this week. One for being lazy. The guy came to me a month ago and asked for a job. He is forty and said he would work the door and wanted to work his way up at the bar and grill. My employess at the bar and grill that have been there the longest and work really hard make a lot of money. They buy new houses, new cars and live a very good life. People in the community know that people that work for me get paid very well. So the guy comes to me and I hire him. I pay him $12 per hour and he gets one free meal per shift, which is a $10-15 value. His job is to sit and make sure people entering the business have proper id. Easy job. Good money, cost of living is low here. The guy,when he thinks we aren't looking doesn't check ids. My wife and I caught him three times this week not taking the time to ask for ids.

He is just being lazy. Do you think that if he were to get one of the top positions and make even more money he would stop being lazy? No way. He would still try to cut corners. I go through this all the time. One employee after another. The opportunity is there. You just have to want it and work for it. I started flipping burgers for minimum wage at age 15, by age 18 I was the closing manager. Every job I've had I've started at entry level and worked my way up. Burger flippers have the opportunity to advance. GMs of mcdonalds make great money. If your wage is to low, work your way up the ladder.

a reply to: RammerJammer

Employ me I could do that I also ran pubs here in the UK for years and know all about craft brew beers etc
Oh and good for you being a decent employer

Just because someone doesn't have pride in themselves, it doesn't mean you shouldn't. One should always take pride in their work regardless of their job title. You do your job the same if you are a millionaire real estate mogul as you would if you are flipping burgers at McD's. It's not about what someone else is or isn't doing. It's about you.

The easiest way to make sure you never rise above a sucky job position? Do the bare minimum required to not get fired. You only hurt yourself when you decide you do not want to work the job YOU chose to take for the pay YOU agreed to make.

I am sure many won't agree with this, as there seems you be some form of entitlement sickness spreading lately.

Ok James, do you want your dentist to do his best or just the bare minimum?
How about your kids school teachers?
They get paid the same right? Good job or fair job.

a reply to: James1982

Lazy employees are looked down upon because when you are the consumer buying whatever it pisses you of having to deal with a lazy worker. I have friends that do the bare minimum of their work, just enough to not get fired but complain when they are served by another just like them.
I do my job, no more no less. You won't hear anyone on their death bed saying their regret is that they wished they had worked harder.