On 05/08/2012 3:07 PM, Eero Ahonen wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>>

>>
>
> Depends on many, many things. But for now, I do feel that is the case. :-)
>

Good! I'm a "it's time to fill up my glass again" type of person, myself.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 00:54:50 -0400, waggy wrote:

> Jim Henderson  wrote:
>> On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 18:57:27 -0400, waggy wrote:
>> > Doesn't that depend on how much they're paying and how desperate you
>> > are?
>>
>> Personally, I don't think so.  But I've never been so desperate as to
>> have to compromise my principles for pay.
>>
> I hope you never are.
> 
> Although being just shy of living on the streets did help me figure out
> exactly what my principles are, before selling a few.

I can say that I've come close - I nearly had my house foreclosed on many 
years ago when I was forced to resign from a particularly ugly job.

>> > Consider the financial services industry.  They appear to value,
>> > very,
>> > very highly, those who can think up new and creative ways to defraud
>> > people.
>>
>> I don't think I could work in that industry at all because of that - I
>> wouldn't even consider looking at it as a career option because it's an
>> industry that's all about greed, and I don't see greed as a virtue.
>>
> Stay away from the US health care industry, too.  "Pay us money or you
> and your loved ones will suffer and die needlessly," is pretty much the
> definition of extortion.

Indeed it is.  The job I mention above?  A benefits administration 
company.  Right on the edge of the health care industry.

Fortunately, in the actual care facilities, there are many compassionate 
people who do what they can even for those who cannot pay for it.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 07:14:44 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 05/08/2012 5:05 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> Doesn't that depend on how much they're paying and how desperate you
>>> >are?
>> Personally, I don't think so.  But I've never been so desperate as to
>> have to compromise my principles for pay.
>>
>>
> Lucky you.

Indeed, I recognise that I'm pretty lucky in that respect.

I had a chat with a software developer in Bangalore several years ago - 
he hadn't compromised on principles, but he really didn't like developing 
software.  But it was a way for him to afford to feed and clothe his 
family.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 10:10:03 +0200, Le_Forgeron wrote:

> Le 05/08/2012 06:08, Jim Henderson nous fit lire :
>>  I clearly had the skills, but not the
>> "passion for their company or product"
> 
> You were expected to work double time for free. You are a picky a*****e
> to have ask a salary.

The first project to be worked on was on a relatively short timeframe for 
the work to be done, so it would have certainly required > 40 hour weeks 
to meet the objective.

> A glass of water and the opportunity of working for them should have
> been enough to sustain you for the ten first years!

LOL

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 04:57:21 -0400, Warp wrote:

> Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
>> You were expected to work double time for free. You are a picky a*****e
>> to have ask a salary.
> 
> Technically speaking it's illegal here (and I'm sure in most civilized
> countries) to ask an employee to work extra hours without pay, and it's
> also quite illegal to fire them just because they refuse. Yet it happens
> all the time here.

Not in the US.  Salaried employees are paid for the job, regardless of 
the hours it takes to get it done.  Some employers take advantage of 
this, and the so-called "at will" employment laws in many US states mean 
that the employer can fire an employee at any time for cause - or even no 
reason at all.

The laws are very heavily in favor of the employers, with a few notable 
exceptions (it's damned near impossible to get a tenured teacher fired 
for incompetence, for example).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:57:24 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

> I got my current job because daddy put in a good word with the bosses,
> and they were absolutely desperate. If it weren't for that, I'd
> presumably have been unemployed for the last ten years...

No, chances are you would have found something.  You've got skills, and 
eventually someone would have taken a chance on them.

There's no way to know for certain what would've happened.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 5-8-2012 10:57, Warp wrote:
> Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
>> You were expected to work double time for free. You are a picky a*****e
>> to have ask a salary.
>
> Technically speaking it's illegal here (and I'm sure in most civilized
> countries) to ask an employee to work extra hours without pay, and it's
> also quite illegal to fire them just because they refuse. Yet it happens
> all the time here.
>
> Finnish law protects employees from being fired at a whim, without a good
> reason (monetary problems or employee misconduct are good reasons; the
> refusal of an employee to work extra hours for free certainly isn't). Even
> when the employer does have a good reason to fire the employee, the
> employer must give a three-month notice (except in special circumstances).
>
> Employers get around this tiny problem with a trick: Rather than employ
> people indefinitely, they employ them a few months at a time, always
> renovating the employment contract at the end of the previous one. This
> way they can "soft-fire" someone by simply not renovating the contract.
> This is *technically* legal (because they are not firing anybody), yet
> achieves practically the same effect as firing someone at a whim.

Here you can not do that. Your third consecutive contract can not be a 
temporary contract, nor can you have someone on temporary contracts for 
3 years in a row (or 5, details change sometimes and I am not following 
this closely, though I should). Moreover you can not hire somebody via 
an agency and then the same person consecutively via another to 
circumvent these rules. It is the hiring party that counts, not the agency.
However, these rules can not explain why I am working for more than 23 
years now in the same hospital, doing the same work, on a string of 
temporary contracts.


-- 
Women are the canaries of science. When they are underrepresented
it is a strong indication that non-scientific factors play a role
and the concentration of incorruptible scientists is also too low

Post a reply to this message

On 05/08/2012 6:44 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 07:14:44 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> Lucky you.
>
> Indeed, I recognise that I'm pretty lucky in that respect.
>

Well I've worked for multi-national oil companies. So you could say what 
principles?

What a change from when I was in my twenties. A dope smoking, hair down 
to my arse, hippy type.

> I had a chat with a software developer in Bangalore several years ago -
> he hadn't compromised on principles, but he really didn't like developing
> software.  But it was a way for him to afford to feed and clothe his
> family.
>

Most people I meet don't like working. They do it like your friend, to 
put bread on the table.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 05/08/2012 6:47 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 04:57:21 -0400, Warp wrote:
>
>> Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
>>> You were expected to work double time for free. You are a picky a*****e
>>> to have ask a salary.
>>
>> Technically speaking it's illegal here (and I'm sure in most civilized
>> countries) to ask an employee to work extra hours without pay, and it's
>> also quite illegal to fire them just because they refuse. Yet it happens
>> all the time here.
>
> Not in the US.  Salaried employees...

Now there's the rub.

Hourly paid workers work their hours. Salaried staff work untill the job 
is done.
I have worked several ghosters (two shifts of 12 hours). Twice when the 
clocks went back, making a twenty five hour day. The first time I was a 
contractor and got paid for it. The second time, by the grace of my 
supervisor got eight hours off. That still did not stop them from making 
me redundant when it suited them. LOL



-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 05/08/2012 06:49 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:57:24 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>
>> I got my current job because daddy put in a good word with the bosses,
>> and they were absolutely desperate. If it weren't for that, I'd
>> presumably have been unemployed for the last ten years...
>
> No, chances are you would have found something.  You've got skills, and
> eventually someone would have taken a chance on them.

Having skills is a vastly different thing than /proving/ you have 
skills. Therein lies the problem.

> There's no way to know for certain what would've happened.

Well, yes, that's ultimately true of everything in life.

Post a reply to this message