"Yes, the harvester-combine has been invented. No, you can't use it."
In many white-collar and no-collar office jobs that don’t pay overtime, there’s implicit pressure to stay on the premises as long as it takes to get things done. The most malleable employees embrace this, bragging about how late they stick around. In other words, how much free labor they surrendered.
“I was here until 8 last night.” “I stayed until midnight.” “Guys, I’ve been here since Saturday.”
And so continues the saddest game of one-upmanship ever. This is madness dressed as servitude. The immediate reactionary argument is, “You have to do it if you want to get ahead”, so here’s a real-world example of how futile the practice is.
Your humble blogger once worked at an ad agency (oh what the hell, it was this one. That bridge got napalmed a while ago.) At this particular agency, as at many businesses that hire lots of relatively young people, it was understood that employees were to work past the de jure end of day codified in the company handbook. Weekly, and usually several times a week, they’d remain until way past dark, finishing projects and giving of their time. Leaving on time was an anomaly and raised stares all around. Sometimes it raised more than stares, as other employees would openly question anyone who dared to leave the premises and enjoy life once that day’s employee-employer covenant had been fulfilled.
If a salaried employee honors her end of the bargain, and works productively during the hours prescribed in the company handbook, what recourse does that leave for the employer? Where does he get to exercise any discretion? Christmas bonuses, of course.
From the perspective of a ruthless and manipulative boss, this is a magnificent situation. You know that most employees are far too timid to discuss salaries with each other, nor will they even discuss any one-time only payments. Therefore you can mete out favors of varying sizes among your employees, and only you and your inner circle will know who’s getting rewarded for their service and who’s getting cold gruel.
Unless you’ve got two employees who conspire to expose the ruse.
This same business had the ludicrous practice of soliciting donations among the employees to buy Christmas gifts for the two owners, one of whom is Jewish. No joke: the executive vice president would go cubicle to cubicle, asking employees to hand over more than a few bucks (suggested donation: $20) to contribute to the fund that would buy the bosses something they’d forever treasure. This in a company that at its zenith had 160 people in its employ.
Maybe in the company’s nascence, when there were 8 employees and the bosses might have had to reach into their own pockets to cover payroll, would this have made sense. But after several profitable years, the executive vice president was still soliciting donations for this charade. That the owners played along, pretending to have no knowledge of the forced largesse being assembled on their behalf, was part of the game. Even better, they’d never utter a word of thanks. The best you could hope for was a message from the executive VP remarking on how much the owners liked their gifts, insincere emails of gratitude being beyond the owners’ capacity. Better still, the executive VP either had a poor memory or didn’t care. One year she claimed that the funds collected went to buy iPods for the owners, even though they’d received iPods the prior year. The owners almost certainly just pocketed the cash, but that didn’t stop one employee (no one connected with Control Your Cash, though we wish it were) to send an email to the executive VP, and cc everyone, asking if he could have one of last year’s iPods.
Department heads were employed as sergeants in this money grab, placing additional pressure on their underlings to cough up contributions. Most employees complied, admitting that it was because they feared that the size of their donations correlated to the size of their upcoming bonuses. In that respect, “donating” almost became an investment. Almost.
Ultimately, two employees – friends who shared an office and were close enough that they spoke candidly to each other about how much money they made – conducted an experiment. They happened to draw the exact same salary, and agreed that one would give $20 to the Christmas fund, while the other would hold his ground no matter how much he was pressured not to.
A week later, their bonuses came. And differed by $500.
Again, the consensus opinion among employees – the vast majority who didn’t leave at 5:01 every day like the building was on fire, that is – was that the only way to get ahead was to stay behind. But doing this doesn’t tell your boss that you’re upwardly mobile. It tells him that he can drastically lower his labor cost numbers when submitting bids for new business.
A little estimation showed that the average employee at this joint stayed a total of 7 hours, after hours, every week. Times 50 weeks, that’s 350 hours. Pay the necessary $20 tithe, and for a net $480 in personal profit after showing oneself to be an obedient and generous employee, the net benefit to staying late was…
$1.37 an hour.
So technically, employees weren’t giving their time away. They were merely working for less than a fifth of minimum wage.
The point isn’t that this is a story about the most heartless boss this side of Simon Legree. The point is that unless you’re his niece or son-in-law, your boss is probably doing something similar, but at least being more discreet about it. Both participants in the Bonus Test quit long ago, but the Christmas alms practice continues.
If you want to do volunteer work, give Catholic Charities or your local animal shelter a call. But don’t donate the time you spend doing what you do professionally. If you don’t value your time, why should anyone else?
Come at the assigned hour, leave at the assigned hour. Your employer is not your superior, he’s your equal partner in an exchange: your time for his money. You wouldn’t give the checker an extra 10% at the supermarket, so how is this any different?
**This article is featured at the Carnival of Personal Finance #321-The Fraud Edition**
Related posts:
What you may be missing is your performance is measured not by time, but results. If you are performing and you do not feel appreciated or just abused, you can leave. There are many more companies that take advantage of employees than do not, but you have a choice where you work. You may not be able to leave tomorrow, but you can find a better situation.
Agreed. I quit said employer for unrelated reasons, but my output was never an issue. Far from it, in fact.
The post was more about how employees operate defensively: I’d guess that most workers who take the abuse have a parent or grandparent who once said something like, “In my day, you were lucky to have a job” and thus operate out of a similar mindset.
My first job after high school was working in a grocery store. I spent more than 5 years there. I saw this happen all the time.
They’d promote a guy to the head of a department. So he’d show up at 7 and head out the door at 4. The next day the boss would find a bunch of stuff that was wrong with the department and recommend the manager stay longer. Usually the newly promoted manager would just fold and extend his hours to 10 or 11 per day. Every 6 months he’d get pissed off and try to leave on time again, only to have the whole process repeat itself.
One guy bucked the trend. He refused to work longer than 44 hours per week. They made his life so miserable that he quit in 3 months.
The average department manager got $35k. I made $18 an hour, often getting 4-8 hours per week overtime. I’d gross 40k per year. More importantly, I got paid for every minute I stayed in that store.
Management always makes a point of promoting guys (or gals) with families and kids, knowing they’re more inclined to stick around. I can’t really knock it, I’d do the same thing, especially in the grocery business.
I never understood folks who seemed to think that the number of hours spent at work somehow automatically equated to performance or value to the company. In my business, I know some engineers who provide more value to a company in an 8-hour day than some do over the course of an entire year.
If I was an employer, my main criteria for dishing out promotions and raises would be their impact on improving my bottom line — regardless of how many hours were spent behind the desk. As an employee, I expect to be evaluated in that very way. The last time an employer of mine started to take advantage of me, I left for a new employer.
All the best,
Len
Len Penzo dot Com
I agree in general, but with two caveats:
1) For some jobs, the implicit (or sometimes explicit) agreement is that employees will work significantly more than a 40 hour work week. In exchange, salary and benefits are higher than one could reasonably expect given one’s experience. Consulting, banking, and a few other professional service industries fit this description. When I hired new graduates for a consulting firm, I was quite candid about the hours we expect, and I encouraged candidates to speak to many current employees. If, after that background, they chose to join I would not be sympathetic to a “I’ve done my 40 hours” argument. That said, even there hours could be excessive if they exceeded the norms or if current employees were not straightforward in setting expectations — my point is simply that I agree that a job is a “contract of equals,” but that contract is not always 40 hours and if you walk in knowing full well what is expected of you, you should honor that agreement.
2) For many jobs, work is cyclical. If your agency had a rush of new business, I would hope you would work longer hours to contribute. On the other hand, if times were slow I would hope your employer would not argue with you taking extra time off. If those two consistently fail to balance, then ask for a raise to cover the additional work – and if you don’t get it, go somewhere else.
Enjoyed the piece as always.
Michael
If employee performance is measured by hard data then excess time spent at work turns into a negative. It just means that you’re unproductive for the results achieved.
I’m a middle manager and overtime is expected and necessary. But, I make a great salary that more than compensates for it. At my current job, we rarely stay late, unless it is necessary. In the past, I have worked in grinder factories that squeeze employees for every ounce of overtime and productivity. And, everything is always calculated in their favor. In other words, the don’t compensate in return for the extra effort. I recognize these employers now and move on quickly. Time is becoming more precious than money to me. And, I prefer contributing my talent to being forced into servitude.
As a former hourly employee of a business that made it nearly impossible to leave on time, didn’t pay overtime wages, and expected work to be done at home, this article reminded me of why I took a risk and quit. I swallowed my pride, didn’t complain, and stuck it out to help my family. I have a strong work ethic and would never consider giving less than 100% at my job. After four years of dedication, excellent work and client reviews and awards, I received… wait for it.. a card and a cupcake when I left. I think many people find that companies are far less invested in their employees and seem less inclined to reward them for good work and loyalty. It is a shame because recognition and appreciation encourage employee productivity and longevity. Just my opinion…
Amen. I was going to simply do the commenting equivalent of nodding my head, but I think you just inspired a post. Details to follow. Thank you.