Workers have not only different choices to improve their positions, but more than before. Beyond the permanent possibility of just changing jobs, there are others with various merits and considerations.
One is during business hours, the idea that people should
“Learn to Say “No” to Extra Work” (Jane Wells, Jane Wells Bulletin,
August 29th). It is geared
toward women, with the author claiming that they get most of the unrewarding
assignments. Whether or not that is
true, the issue is real. Most
cubicle-job workers have opportunities to take on and decline tasks, more than
many realize. Suggestions the author
cited from a book on this subject were not to accept assignments that cannot
lead to promotions, not to join a “board or committee (At Least Not
Long-Term),” not to respond at all to emails offering such tasks, and, when
such is offered at a meeting, to “mimic the behavior of… colleagues who have no
plan to raise their hands by shuffling papers, getting up to leave, refusing to
make eye contact.” Anyone who sees
themselves doing the opposites of these should consider changing tactics. The challenge is that career-strong
assignments are often not easy to identify or, especially, to obtain.
An old expression brought to the fore by our chaotic
remote-work situation is the subject of “Work-life balance matters to employees
– how to find out if it matters to a company” (Lee Hafner, Employee Benefits,
January 5). Per a FlexJobs career
services manager, one way is to ask, at interview time, “What would a typical
work week look like?” Another to ask is
“how employees are encouraged to have a work-life balance.” Job seekers should also determine if the
company has “a strong onboarding plan.”
All valuable, but it is necessary for everyone to know specifically what
“work-life balance” means personally to them.
In Yahoo News on January 3rd, Scott
Sonenshein told us that “Americans are taking more control over their work
lives – because they have to.” As the
author put it, “the pandemic accelerated a development that began years ago
when workers realized they needed to take on more responsibility for directing
their careers,” which led to “career portfolioing,” or assembling and
maintaining multiple income. sources. That is nothing new in, to name two
countries, Iceland and the Bahamas, but it is not traditionally American. The largest advantage beyond sheer money is
that “when facing difficult times at one job, people can turn to other parts of
their career portfolio for security and stability.” If, indeed, you see “a future in which
uncertainty is too high to rely on a single institution to fulfill basic
needs,” expanding into a portfolio may be for you.
One common addition to such income groupings comes with its
own hazards. To deal with them, Lee
Hafner’s May 25th Benefits News piece, “4 ways gig workers
can protect themselves from scams and lawsuits,” may help. His suggestions are to “choose the right insurance,”
as gig workers are legally vulnerable independent contractors, “consult an
insurance expert” especially one on the kind of gig work you want to do,
“invest in strong cybersecurity” to avoid being responsible for stolen
material, and “make a contract, check it twice,” with emphasis on minimizing
liability. These precautions may be more
valuable for tasks like the wood drilling pictured with the article than for
others, but are worthy of consideration.
Finally, another old thing is becoming new to some in
“Beyond ‘Quiet Quitting’: Another Workplace Trend is Making Employers Even
Angrier” (Veronika Bondarenko, The Street, May 30th). According to “a wide-scale study conducted by
consulting firm Deloitte, 46% of polled Generation Z workers and 37% of
millennials said that they worked a second part-time or even full-time job in
tandem to their main work.” Not all of
these were related to their primary field, as “some of the most popular side
hustles include selling online products, delivering food orders or working for
a ride-share company and writing marketing materials.” Per related Bankrate research, such endeavors
are “often a way for low-earning employees to keep up with the cost of living,”
with the money it brings in “essential.”
Working two jobs to make ends meet is nothing new, and employers, if it
does not involve using company resources, should tolerate it. Or they could just pay more. As coarse as that seems, it would alleviate
or totally remove many of the issues here.
Choices on these issues are not, after all, always made by workers.
No comments:
Post a Comment