New Job, Same as the Old Job

Six months into my new job and I have to say…not much has changed.

That fact was drilled home to me the other day when I was heading for home on a Friday afternoon after a tough week. It was the same week we switched over to a new system (with little to no instruction) and we were all frazzled, to say the least.

So, I decided to say goodbye to a co-worker and wish her a good weekend. However, as I approached her office, and without a word coming out of my mouth, she threw her arms in the air and snapped, “I can’t talk now. I’m busy!”

Kinda rude, don’t you think? I wasn’t looking for a long conversation. I had my coat on and it was obvious I was leaving for the day. So why the rather nasty reaction? Why not say something like, “Hey, can’t talk now. Have a good weekend. See ya Monday.” You know, a polite response.

I know it wasn’t my fault. Usually, I say something stupid and get reamed out for it. But in this instance, I hadn’t said a word. I understand she was stressed, but why take it out on me at that particular moment? She is not the only one who is over-worked and stressed out on the job. But most of us manage to be respectful of others even when we are under pressure.

I did not respond in kind, nor have I mentioned the incident to anyone in the office. I'll forgive and forget and chalk it up to her having a bad day.

Except...this is the second time this particular person has snapped at me when I was only wishing her a good day. OK, she’s high strung. But now I wonder if she isn’t bat-shit crazy. Best to keep my distance from her.

I know I said I would stay away from office friendships, but since when is basic courtesy a bad thing? Won’t make that mistake again.

The whole instance made me a bit sad. This is pretty much how I was treated at my former place of employment. Yes, there were times when I snapped under pressure, but I always apologized for it later. And if I didn’t there was always somebody else who called me out on my bad behavior and I did my rightful mea culpa. More times than not, I was the victim of somebody else’s rudeness than the perpetrator.

There are other aspects of this new job that make me realize the workplace is generally hostile to low-level employees. The higher-ups get to sit in their Ivory Towers and make decisions without consulting the people who are actually going to carry out those new projects. When those new projects are launched, we are given bare-boned instructions, so when something goes wrong we get blamed. Hey, why weren’t we given more time and instruction so that mistakes won’t be made? Alas, bosses have the upper hand in this employment market and we have little say. Our job is to simply take whatever is thrown at us and not complain.

Let me ask you: When was the last time you felt confident enough to stand up for yourself in the workplace? I’m even afraid to ask questions about technical things, lest I be viewed as an easily replaced dinosaur.

It’s futile to argue anyway. It’s budget season now, so surely meetings are taking place about our futures without us knowing anything about it or getting a chance to defend ourselves.

I understand that certain matters (layoffs, the sale of divisions, etc.) require confidentiality. But there is something fundamentally disturbing about other people discussing our professional futures without any input from us—the people most impacted by those decisions.

So, this is what I worked so hard for? To get back to a workplace as rude and disdainful as my former office?

Ghosts of Working Men Past

Recently, I read an interesting article about how jobs are becoming obsolete. The author argues that with technology, productivity is up so we don’t need the kind of jobs we needed back in the heyday of the Industrial Revolution.

While I agree that some jobs (like bank tellers) are becoming passé, I cannot believe that technology has become so proficient that we will not require people to perform some jobs in the future. Health care, for one, requires a human touch, unless you want your colonoscopy done by RoboPlungr.

The author does acknowledge that is not good news for the millions looking for employment. I certainly believe many unemployed people read this article and thought, “FML!” The author talks about lost jobs as if actual human beings did not perform those tasks. Like those people were ghosts.

With fewer jobs, our society requires a new way to exchange goods and services, the author contends. People produce a service somebody else or a company wants. They then exchange that product or service for something they need. So, in other words, in this Utopian society, I can exchange a chocolate cake for a Chevy? Not so sure about that. (Too be fair, the author, Douglas Rushkoff, doesn’t predict what this new jobless society will ultimately look like.)

What I am sure about is that our job-based economy has been altered, probably forever, as the result of decades of changes in how we work, aided, of course, by technology. It’s also the result of the weakening of unions and the disappearance of manufacturing jobs. At least with manufacturing, someone without an education could get a job, retire with a pension and stand firmly in the middle class. Now, only those rich to begin with can advance.

This country’s economy has historically thrived when we built things. Now, we build nothing; hence, we don’t export anything. Our economy is based on consumerism and the goods and services consumers require (that is, when they have the money to buy). Yet it seems like we are servicing only a small, upper stratum of society that afford those goods and services.

Every day on my way to work I pass by abandoned and graffiti-smudged factories standing side by side with luxury apartment and condo buildings, some of which were built using the existing structure of an old manufacturing plant. It’s a poignant commentary on how our society has devolved from an industrialized economy to one that revolves around a monied class that desires the design elements—hardwood floors, brick walls, high ceilings and windows—in those once-thriving factories. They are the only ones who can afford them. Sometimes, I can almost see the ghosts of lunch-pail-toting working men emerge from those empty factories, clad in their stiff-cotton work pants and open-necked shirts with rolled ups sleeves.

I’m not romanticizing a past that looks better in hindsight than it was in reality. Perhaps it wasn’t a sustainable economic model and was destroyed by the same people working within it. It’s just sad that way of life is gone forever.

Now, we’ve shifted to an economy based on financial services, a rollercoaster ride of an industry. It’s no coincidence that our economy began to have more mood swings than a menopausal woman off her hormone meds when Wall Street took over.

What needs to happen, and this will take decades to evolve, is new training for new technologies that, hopefully, put people back to work. But it will take a long time for our educational system to catch up and devise the training necessary for those jobs, whatever those may be.

In the meantime, it’s inevitable that our social safety net will need to expand. More and expanded jobless benefits, training funds for the long-term unemployed and increased Social Security and Medicare money in the future to financially support all those 50-somethings tossed out of work with a mortgage to pay, kids in college and zero retirement funds.

Yet the rich and the money-hoarding corporations don’t want to pay any more taxes to support those programs. Well, we all might have to. What we need are not tax cuts or increases, but tax fairness. Let’s start by getting rid of some stupid tax loopholes, like the ones for corporate jets.

How those taxes will be assessed is another matter. Do we increase taxes on income or on assets (which don’t count as income)? That’s for the politicians to decide. With the lobbyists big business and the wealthy can afford, it’s hard to believe taxes will be distributed fairly.

Which brings me to the protests on Wall Street. I’m of two minds on this. I think it’s great people are finally speaking out against corporate greed and the growing gap between rich and poor in this country. Our poverty rate is increasing at the same time Wall Street corporations are raking in record profits.

But most of the protestors seem to be young people looking for their “Vietnam” moment. I wonder, too, if they are mostly spoiled rich kids who can’t find a job after party-filled and parent-funded college years and are now upset because, as one Facebook friend said, daddy cut them off. If they were offered a six-figure job on Wall Street most would jump at the chance and switch sides so they can live in a downtown loft, far from the people who have been truly hurt the most by corporate greed: the millions of laid-off workers who have no voice and don’t have the time to protest because they are too busy trying to find work, pointlessly attending job fairs, and attempting to make ends meet.

What exactly are they protesting anyway? That Wall Streets make too much money (it always has) and has yet to do anything with that money, like create jobs that would help the middle class? Are they protesting economic inequality? Is this class warfare? A way for the left to counterbalance the Tea Party Movement on the right? Do they want a redistribution of wealth? Good luck with that. And from what I’ve seen, most of the protestors are, dare I say it, white. Where’s the diversity?

And where is the real anger? To these protestors, it’s a party, a way to show their social networking prowess. A more apt representation of middle class ire was the protests in Wisconsin when the governor tried to cut union benefits. And where did that get them?

Yet I think one of the reasons there has been relatively little anger about Wall Street greed is that there is a social safety in place that has helped the jobless through long stretches of unemployment. However, if that safety net is cut, and it surely will be, there will more anger. It’s unhealthy for a civic society to have a small, rich ruling class and a large, economically deprived underclass. At some point, those forces will clash and it may not be pretty or as relatively peaceful as the protests now on Wall Street.

Yet, count me cynical, but I don’t see much changing. Wall Street is probably laughing at the protestors, all but putting a sign out that says: “We don’t give a s**t.”

People who have jobs don’t care about the jobless and the politicians sure don’t. We’re seen as losers who are a drag on resources.

To Wall Street fat cats, the protestors are nothing more than an inconvenience on their way to their corner offices, A commentator I once heard said it perfectly: Wall Street’s job is to make money for investors, not job creation. President Obama has a hard sell on his jobs bill. With politicians of both parties beholden to Wall Street cash, it’s doubtful true financial reform will happen.

All this points to the fact we’ve become a nation of hypocrites. We want bountiful social services, but no one wants to pay the taxes that make those programs possible. We want to attack the rich, but we want to be rich like them. And how many times do we hear politicians and others tout their working class roots, yet they are part of the same system that has systematically destroyed the working middle class.

We scream “No blood for oil,” except when that oil fuels our SUVs. We don’t want one political party to control our government, yet we complain when the warring sides—which we put in place—can’t stop fighting each other long enough to get things done.

We say we want to help the working middle class, yet we’ve made them ghosts.

The Fruits of Our Labor

Another Labor Day is upon us and I’m left to ask: Do we really need to celebrate this day? Haven’t the mass layoffs of recent years and a 9.1 percent unemployment rate indicate what little regard corporations have for the average American worker? Instead of honoring workers, businesses want to get rid of us.

Sometimes it seems as if corporations are just one big patronage scheme, with executives only concerned about staying in power, surrounded by their lackeys and cushioned by big bonuses enabled in part by profits boosted by…layoffs. Instead of innovation, companies seem more intent on undertaking an Employee Resettlement Program. They can’t terminate us fast enough to keep their bottom lines flush.

Add to that the fact that no new jobs were created in August and the outlook for American workers is bleak indeed.

I’m no economist but the August job report could be due to a slow summer month. Many people take vacations in August, so no one was around to do any hiring, even if they wanted to. A better picture of the employment condition will emerge in the fall months. Companies start the budget process for the next year in September; if any hirings or firings are going to take place, it will happen later in autumn, probably November or December (the month I was laid off in). We’ll see what happens.

Given this situation, how should workers respond? We can be laid off at any time and through no fault of our own, so just how hard should we toil for any employer?

Of course, doing a crappy job is not advisable; that will surely get any employee fired, in good times or bad. But if working hard and doing a good job is no guarantee of continued employment, well, what can we do?

First, in this economy, be grateful you have a job. Many people would love to be in your shoes, so don’t dismiss it lightly or take it for granted. Any time I hear a person talk about how they only want to work for this type of a company or for some way-over-the -top salary or how they don’t want to work for anyone at all, I think how disdainful and condescending they are to the millions out of work, desperately seeking a job. While no one should take a job they would hate or stay in an abusive work situation, this is not the time to be picky. Perhaps someday when the employment market rebounds, you can find your perfect job. But that is not happening any time soon. Like they say in sports, suck it up.

Does that sound harsh? Yes, but the job market is harsh these days for people looking for work. In an ideal world, we would all get the job we want at a decent salary and more. Unfortunately, as someone who was brutally laid off and spent 16 months looking for a job, I know how unforgiving this employment market can be. So you can either look for work or go broke. The choice is yours. Remember, we are not free agents. (Ok, that was a shameless plug for another post. Forgive me.)

Second, if you have a job, do a good job. If there are days you have to work overtime to get a project done, do it without complaint.

Yet I don’t advise going the extra mile and taking on more projects in a vain attempt to impress your bosses. Trust me, you are not impressing them. They think you are a sap and are only too happy to get extra work out of you for no extra pay.

Take it from me, the mother of all saps. I actually thought that because I worked hard and did a good job for nearly two decades, my company wouldn’t let me go. Well, they did. And I was wrong to think that way, I understand that now. But I guess after so many years with the same company, emotion, not business sense, takes over. I will never make that mistake again.

So start thinking ahead to you next job, what you can learn on your present job that can help you find another position. Even if you have no immediate plans to look for another job (and in this economy, who would?), redo your résumé. It couldn’t hurt. When the ax falls, at least you have a spruced-up résumé to send out.

Network and keep in touch with former business contacts. I got my current job through a former colleague. At the very least, I know I can fall back on freelancing if this job is terminated. You can also look into training for another profession. For those with a riskier nature, you can launch your own business. Hey, you can’t fire yourself.

Remember, ultimately, you are in control of your work life, even though it may not seem that way right now.

But on this Labor Day weekend, I wonder, with corporate profits so high and wages and hirings on the down shaft, who is really reaping the fruits of our labors? Because American workers sure aren’t.

We are not Free Agents

So much talk about the Mets ability to re-sign superstar shortstop Jose Reyes has me thinking: Are average working Americans free agents?

Quite honestly, no. As much as we like to think we have the freedom to switch jobs, unless you possess extraordinarily uncommon skills, like a Jose Reyes, you are probably going to have to settle for whatever job you can get just to make ends meet. Employers know this; that’s why they know we will put up with their silly furlough days and years with no raises and doing the work of three people. Our options are limited in terms of employment.

Not so for a guy like Jose Reyes. As a Mets fan, I hope they re-sign him. A talent like Reyes comes along once in a generation. True, he’s not perfect. I sometimes think he has the hamstrings of an 80-year-old. Still, when he’s healthy, he’s a game-changer.

That’s why I think the Mets will make him a good offer, probably an above-market offer. But if some dumb owner comes along and offers an astronomical contract…well, Jose can’t be blamed for taking the money. He has to think about the financial security of his family over the loyalty to a team that has played poorly the past four years and shows no signs of turning into a contender anytime soon.

A more apropos situation to what average working Americans go through is how the Yankees treated Derek Jeter when he became a free agent before this season. Let me be clear: I hate the Yankees and Jeter reminds me of robot, a cold fish. But the way the team treated him made even this Yankee-hater cringe.

The Yankee hierarchy pretty much told him to take a hike. Why? Because his agent asked for too much money in the opening rounds of contract negotiations? Hey, that’s what agents do. Because he was getting old? At age 37, he’s no spring chicken, but he’s kept himself in shape and is now playing much better after a rough start at the beginning of the season. And did the Yankees have anyone to replace him? (And, no, Yankee fans, we are not giving you Jose Reyes for A.J. Burnett.)

It was just a reminder of how employers know they have the upper hand with employees these days. Get too old? We’ll get rid of ya. (A lot of that going around.) Make too much money? Buh-bye.

Would the Yankees have won all those championships without Jeter? Probably not. I think their winning had more to do with Mariano Rivera, but Jeter was a big part of it. He’s been a good soldier for the organization and has never embarrassed himself or the team (something I cannot say about quite a few Mets). Yet the team publicly dissed him. He did sign, but for less than he wanted just to stay with the team he’s worked so hard for and that apparently has very little respect for him despite his years of loyalty. I know the feeling, DJ.

Back to the other shortstop in town: To be fair, Jose hasn’t been a jerk about his impending free agency (for that, see LeBron James). He has said numerous times that he loves playing for the Mets and playing in New York. And why wouldn’t he want to stay? There’s no better stage for an athlete than NYC and it has a large Latino population.

I would hate to see him go, but my gut feeling is he will not stay with the team.

That’s his choice. Wouldn’t it be nice if we all had the same opportunity?

Dear Corporate Fat Cats

Dear Corporate Fat Cats:

I, and so many other unemployed and put-upon workers, owe you an apology. Yes, an apology.

We never realized how hard it is for you to lay off so many workers. I remember the day when my boss had to tell several co-workers that they were being laid off due to budget cuts. He said how draining it was for him to tell those people their jobs were being terminated. Oh, he caught himself soon after and said that, of course, it was tougher on the people losing their jobs. But that was nothing compared to what he had to go through in telling people their employment, paychecks and quite possibly their careers were coming to an end.

So, I now understand how difficult it must be to lay off so many workers so profits can be kept high. Isn’t that why we were laid off, to save the company? How selfish of us to think of ourselves and not the corporation.

Yes, you must keep those profits soaring and not hire any more workers and overwork the ones you already have. How else can you rake in those big bonuses that keep you in million-dollar homes and fancy cars? Without those bonuses, your children won’t go to the expensive private schools and Ivy League colleges that will give them best chance for top-paying jobs someday. Why must they compete against people who went to state schools or—horrors!—a community college? The unfairness of it all!

And the way some in the government treat you is just so unfair. Imagine—they want corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. But how can you pile on the profits when you are asked to pay taxes? And those pesky regulations? Better we should go back to a no-oversight system like we had back in the late 19th century, when there were no unions or safety regulations. Why should workers be protected when there are corporate profits to be made?

But I must say, it’s getting harder and harder for us workers to buy goods and services on our unemployment checks or paychecks that haven’t seen a raise in a year or more. At some point, won’t our inability to purchase cut into your revenues? The workers in the factories you placed overseas to boost profits will stand idle. Corporate profits may shrink.

And I know how hard that will be for you, Mr. Corporate Fat Cat. You have my deepest sympathy.

Sincerely,

The American Worker

“It’s business, not personal”

I’ve been watching two of my favorite movies this week: Godfather, Parts I and II. I’m partial to Part II myself, but Part I has a great scene that reminds me of something I was told the day I was laid off.

It’s the scene where Sonny Corleone and Tom Hagen and others plot their next move after Virgil “The Turk” Sollozzo shot their father, Vito, the Godfather. Michael Corleone is also present, after having his jaw broken by a corrupt cop.

Hagen reminds hotheaded Sonny not to get carried away with revenge, that what Sollozzo did was “business, not personal.”

Then Michael, who has so far stayed out of the family business, chimes in, saying he should be the one to kill The Turk and the police captain. Michael insists that it’s not personal, it’s business.

Well, of course, it’s personal. Anybody with a spit of Italian blood in them (like me) knows this is about as personal as it can get. Every decision Michael makes from then on is made from a sense of personal revenge, a lifelong vendetta. His enemies shot his father, killed his brother and blew up his Sicilian bimbo wife (“Michele, Michele." BOOM!). How could he not take that personally? (However, even I think he went too far when he had his brother, the poor, pitiful Fredo, killed.)

Yet, companies insist that massive layoffs are done for business reasons, not anything personal versus their employees. Yeah, right.

During my layoff meeting, I was told it was a business decision and no reflection on my work.

Well, I beg to differ. While I agree companies must cut back in hard times when revenues are lean, how those layoffs are handled bring in a personal element that is unsettling to say the least.

First, why are some people given the power to lay off other people? Why are they the chosen ones?

Any company that laid off people in late 2009, as I was, knew those tossed-aside employees were facing a difficult employment market and would be out of work for a long stretch of time, as I was (16 months). Our lives were being disrupted through no fault of our own.

When someone is out of work for that long, how can they expect to feed their families and pay their mortgages? What companies see as purely a business decision has devastating personal ramifications on the people they put out of work. How is that not personal? But I guess these corporate overlords can justify anything as long as profits are high and their bonuses keep rolling in.

As is so often the case, after I was laid off, I found out some things that made me wonder just how much of the decision to terminate my employment was based on personal, rather than purely business factors. Such as:

Another editor with less time in the company and who was making more than me was retained. Was he more valuable to the company than me? Perhaps. But perhaps he was kept on because he was the boss’s handpicked lapdog.

The day before I was let go, three of my former colleagues argued in favor of keeping another colleague scheduled to be laid off the same day I was. Why? Was it because he was popular and was one of the cool kids? (Yes, the workplace is just like high school.) Or was it because, as I later learned, one of those colleagues was lazy and afraid if they laid off this person his workload would double? So, I was thrown under the bus because of another person’s laziness?

In the two years leading up to my layoff, the head of the department systematically terminated the employment of anyone who was near him in seniority. Again, he said it was because we were making too much money. But was he afraid of having experienced people around who could replace him? After all, he was making more than any of us. Our parent company could replace him with any of us for less money. Now that there is nobody left but only his handpicked puppets and less experienced staff, his job is safe.

He was also someone who didn’t like it when co-workers, particularly women, questioned him. Was he trying to get rid of people he considered troublesome employees so he could surround himself with his personally selected acolytes? Just asking.

So you see, companies may justify their layoffs by saying it’s done for business reasons. But the impact on those they lay off is very personal. And how can we be sure that those making the layoff decisions aren’t bringing in their own personal feelings (vindictiveness? favoritism? insecurity?) into the equation rather than a purely business perspective? It’s a system ripe for unfairness and abuse. How can they expect us not to be pissed off when we get the boot?

Therefore, when a worker is called into a room and told they are being laid off for business reasons, the perfect response would be:

"Vaffanculo"

Let's Make a Deal

Frankly, I’m getting a bit sickened by what is going on in Washington, D.C. Our so-called leaders are supposed to discussing how to tame our monstrous national debt. But they seem more interested in sliming the other party instead of working out a deal.

The Republicans seem more intent on putting the blame on President Obama so they can win the next presidential election. They also seem to care more about protecting tax breaks for corporate jets than helping the average working person.

They would rather cut benefits for unemployed people and seniors than making Wall Street fat cats pay a penny more in taxes. Shameful.

Meanwhile, the Democrats aren't coming off much better. Yes, they want to protect entitlement programs, like Social Security. Good. But the deficit is out of control and some cuts must be made. Why not make Social Security and Medicare a means-tested program? Those who have more resources should pay more. Raising the retirement age is another reasonable option. Again, the Democrats aim to make the other party look bad…and the Republicans are making it easy for them, I must say.

This all brings me back to the unemployed. If a debt deal is not done, states will surely cut unemployment benefits. Not good for someone who has been out of work for a year or more with no hope of getting employed again.

Most ominous of all, if the nation defaults, companies will cut even more workers, killing a fragile recovery and pushing the unemployment rate even higher.

Some politicians, mostly Republicans, think unemployed people are lazy. Not true! We want to work. But if their corporate benefactors won’t hire, then we can’t work. We need jobs. But companies are more concerned with piling up profits, not keeping people employed.

Hey, if the NFL owners and players could get a deal done, why can’t our politicians? People will suffer all because of their political game of chicken.

So, please, get it done, guys!