this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
102 points (95.5% liked)

Antiwork

8273 readers
2 users here now

  1. We're trying to improving working conditions and pay.

  2. We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.

  3. We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.

Partnerships:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Yayannick@lemmy.ml
uthredii@lemmy.ml
sexy_peach@feddit.de
yogthos@lemmy.ml
102
you're already extracting my surplus value don't try to extract my soul (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 1 year ago by lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml to c/antiwork@lemmy.ml
NSFW 17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DerKriegs@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

I'm a department manager where I work, so not very high on the ladder, but I run a 14 person team. That being said, I get where you're coming from. I'd never try to be my employee's friend, though I am most certainly friendly. I might grab a beer with one or two of them every now and again (usually on me, as why not?)

It's a hard line to tow, as I'd like to think of myself as a pretty agreeable person that wants to connect with people, and I've done that to an extent with my team. It has made certain work facets difficult though, especially "behavioral notices" and the like.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I manage the dev department in my company. There's about thirty people who see me as "that guy".

I am all about antiwork. I'm fighting the same fight as y'all.

I had a 2 hour meeting yesterday because one of my devs was underpaid. But in that same meeting, I had to argue to not give a raise to someone. If i had it my way, everybody would be top performers and get the highest raises. But it doesn't. Look at your own team. There's always 1-2 people that cause more problems than others.

My role is providing feedback and supporting people to become a top performer.

I know not every manager is equal, some shitty ones prefer the whip or dangle carrots. And some play favorites, which is BS too. I'm confident I have a few people who dislike me because I don't give them what they want.

I agree with this meme. We aren't your friends. Ideally your manager is there to support your growth so you can one day replace them. Because we're both here for the same reason... Making money for whatever soulless company we work at so we can go home and buy Roblox bucks.

[–] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Exactly. Unless we are on equal terms which is impossible in corporate top down structure, the relationship is transactional. Nothing more. I work, stakeholders pay me less than the value I created and pocket the difference.

[–] MxM111@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Would you rather to have an asshole manager?

[–] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

At least that would be honest

The capitalist class will throw you to the wolves without a second thought if it will help their bottom line.

[–] MechanicalJester@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I could throw you to the wolves when forced to uncarringly or I could give a fuck and put in personal effort to prepare you for it, and help you survive perhaps to thrive elsewhere.

I too can be, and have been thrown carelessly.

Luckily, my moral code is stronger than your cynicism and my kindness is and will remain free.

Certainly there's a vast difference between pretending to be your friend and BEING your friend.

Perhaps the former is hard to know but the latter is ultimately best for us both. Trust should be earned but also earnable, yes?

I've no desire to darken the world we both live in.

[–] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The entire relationship is transactional. It is top to bottom. The bottom got no vote, no rights and if the top ain't pleased the bottom gets no food housing or healthcare.

So yeah, no. If you as a manager were told by your boss that there were 'redundancies' that needed to be addressed, no problem. Fire away. But if the people below say you know maybe let's unionize, then they are usually first to be fired. I'm sure as a manager that's just common sense.

[–] MechanicalJester@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, for starters I don't tend to work in places where the employees need to unionize. I did once, and I left ASAFP.

I believe more along the lines of Ouchie's Theory Z - make sure employees are living well in and out of work etc. If every hour requires micromanaging for things to get done then it's broken and I'd want no part in that. I've negotiated for higher pay than my own for some direct reports.

So, hypothetically, you tell me you want to collectively bargain and I would be fighting to let it happen. You want me to go union busting? Then my ethics are clearly not in alignment and I would be hard at work on a GTFO plan.

I've studied the hell out of wages, wage distribution and how it graphs out over the decades and it's not pretty. It's really terrible.

I've fired a 3 person team but I gave them every chance to get on board with the newer way of doing stuff and they flatly rejected it even though it was the new industry norm and it was going to improve their resumes. It was even going to improve work life balance and limit after hours intrusive stuff down to 0. All those things happened and the new folks had no idea that before I showed up the previous team was stressed out, worn out and pissed off but couldn't handle changing even if it was a win win win.

If every manager in your field of work is awful, I would suggest trying to plot a course elsewhere. Or be a manager yourself.

A good and supportive manager gets more, higher quality output from their team than managers that are micromanaging and working through threats. The delta measured between the extremely bad and extremely good is 120% meaning that a well managed smaller team gets more done and is happier than the bigger poorly managed team.

That whole storming, forming, norming, performing thing? Hard to get to performing if the team is worried about top 3 Maslow's hierarchy needs, and impossible if the team composition doesn't stay stable.

If you need to unionize then I hope you are successful. That manager is a person too. If they are a shitty person then vote with your feet. If you need to explain boundaries definitely do. If you're an autistic introvert make it clear - they might be an autistic extrovert and unaware.

Best of luck!

[–] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You make a lot of good points. What I'm saying is simply that I don't want to be in a social situation where I am forced to befriend someone who holds the sword. The top down structure makes friendship inherently disingenuous. Friendship can only happen when you are equals.

[–] MechanicalJester@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Well, you can aim for some level of trust, support, and mutual compassion. The corporation is an uncaring machine hellbent on stockholder value.

I'm friends with quite a few former direct reports. Even a couple I had to fire. And I am friends with several former bosses.

It's a role, and a responsibility

Some filthy folk might try to know you better to manipulate or control you so having some guard up is wise.

Personally I think of people as coworkers all the way up to the CEO. We're all human.

I hope you get to work with inspiring bosses or leaders so you can recognize them when you are shopping for a new boss.

[–] MxM111@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You think assholes are honest people?

[–] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think disingenuous snakes that only pretend to give a shit are assholes.

[–] MxM111@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So, it is customary in US to smile, when you greed a stranger on a street. Some will say that it is disingenuous since clearly you do not experience joy each time seeing a random person on a street. And yet, I rather people smiled.

[–] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's a strawman argument. Of course we should be civil. WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY as George Costanza likes to remind us. I simply object to the false comradery that tries to paint a picture of caring about the workers while simultaneously reducing benefits and pay. Behind the 'social' nice mask is a machine controlled by stakeholders.

[–] MxM111@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

OK, fair enough. But most managers are employees too. They have their own managers, they have tasks given, and they are given the total budget. Most of the managers would love to increase salaries of their reports, why would not they? It is not their money.

[–] artskeit@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I don’t know how things are in the States, but here in Sweden a lot of companies don’t have top -> bottom hierarchy. I actually see myself as a friend with my boss (CEO) and know I can count on him when needed.

It’s a pity not more countries/companies follow this system as it really profits both the companies and employees.

[–] ShittyRedditWasBetter@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

It's a wonder why many of you haven't been successful in the work place.