Thursday, May 07, 2009
An insight into how Americans are thinking right now
CNN: Strategies for keeping your job
If your job really is in danger (and you'd rather have less money than no money) you need to address that fear head-on. Let the boss know you're willing to work, contentedly and productively, at a lower wage than you currently receive. Some possible openers: "I don't consider salary a final measure of my self-worth." Or "My friend Peter stayed on at his job at lower pay to help keep his company afloat. I really admire that." This move isn't without risk. And it won't be fun. It's hard for most of us to admit that we may be worth less to our employer than we once were. But that's exactly why signaling acceptance of a wage cut can prove effective. [Scary stuff! Across the pond this is how people are thinking! How long before British workers develop a similar attitude?]
11 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. paul said...
Problem is, lower wages are not the paradigm that Western companies work with. US and UK companies consider it much easier to cull the currently least profitable and shift the workload than negotiate lower pay with each and every employee.
In addition, getting rid of people always seems like a good idea in the short term - it doesn't really matter who the company sacks because simply the act of cutting costs will make the company look profitable.
Over the long term of course, keeping people employed makes more sense but when have US and UK companies ever considered long term implications of any decision?
Incidentally, this also partly explains why GM is facing bankruptcy and Toyota is now the largest car company in the world.
2. Si said...
Drewster it's already happening, several companies are way ahead on that curve. I know several people who have taken a paycut, some of them suggesting it.
Paul, what a cynical view! Maybe in your sector, but untrue in my experience. A company that doesn't think long term is doomed to failure.
3. doomwatch said...
This sort of thing happens all the time in the realm of contract/freelance workers. In fact, in grim times like this you can guarantee there's a slimy recruitment consultant phoning somebody's manager right now telling them "Mr/s X is just as good as your guy Jim, and they'll work for 100 a day less".
And don't even get me started on the false economy of "out sourcing".
4. matt_the_hat said...
We keep getting the American dream shoved down our throats - what a swamp
5. doomwatch said...
Matt, at 3 , not forgetting the erosion of our language with junk such as "Can I get ..."
6. matt_the_hat said...
4. doomwatch - the erosion of our language is the least of our worries, the erosion of our morals to that of a simple contract for money is the real problem - capitalism creates a dream for the many, designed to serve the few
I always remember when they 'evacuated' New Orleans because the criminal element made it too dangerous - wouldn't have happened in Houston!
7. str 2007 said...
Doomwatch
Perhaps Starbucks is self service in America.
'Can I get' a Capuccino to go.
Doesn't explain why they talk to themselves though.
Neither does it explain why whenever I hear that phrase in my mind it's said in a 'camp' way.
8. doomwatch said...
str 2007. Agreed. It does sound not at all manly. It's even more irritating when it's said in one of those bland home counties accents.
I think the Neighbours generation has had a big effect, but ultimately it's a sceptic phrase that needs to be outlawed.
While on the subject, what's with this "guys" business that young teachers are using in school these days ? Probably watching too
many episodes of Friends, another load of sh1te, where low paid employees seem to live in an Apartment that even Madoff
couldn't afford.
9. str 2007 said...
doomwatch
I used to watch Neighbours, but as yet haven't found myself making a statement but sounding like I'm asking a question.
Half of them on Friends had good jobs I though.
One at Ralph Lauren, one an actor on television. one a top chef, can't remember the other 2 exactly. But isn't it more an example of how cheap rents were in New York as against London (perhaps).
10. doomwatch said...
Str 2007. I only "watched" it a few times, but I'm pretty sure they were mostly career transients who
were temps, waitresses, and bit part actors with no work. The sort of social misfits that cities like NY & London attract, where
they've been sold the lie that buying a £300K 2 bed box flat above a dry cleaners in an "edgy" area is a great life choice, especially
with a 100% IO mortgage on 6 x salary. They actually think they've done the right thing and brag to their friends about
"owning" their own place, whilst really they are just mugs, imprisoned into mortgage slavery by the crime of their own stupidity.
11. Bubba Sparks said...
The "Friends" all rented...we should embrace them