Annie's Mailbox® by Kathy Mitchell and Marcy Sugar

LW1 - do your job, not Justin's. Pay attention to what you are doing & do it to the best of your ability. It is up to Justin's boss to assign work to him, not you. If Justin's boss isn't willing to do anything about Justin's job performance, then you have no leverage. PI wonder why you think yours & Justin's ages are facts worth mentioning.
LW2 - You can not control your sister, only your own response to her. Obviously she is important to you or you wouldn't have such a strong reaction to her when she ignores you. Think about situations where she has pushed your buttons to the point that you react by trying to control her, and think of new responses, including politely walking away. Practice them in your head, and when the real situation arises, react in a new way. You could even ask your parents for advice. They have known the 2 of you for your whole lives & probably have a good idea of what's going on & how it starts. The Annie's advice to run away by spending time at your friends' & weekends at your grandparents is pretty terrible. You don't have to move out of your own home at 16, and running away & hiding are bad responses when you don't get along with family.

LW1: Most companies have at least one Justin in every department, someone who's too useless to be taking up a chair but somehow manages to keep his/her job. I suspect your boss would like to fire this loser but doesn't have the authority. It stinks, but the best you can do is focus on your job and minimize contact with this idiot. The more you get involved, the more likely your ineffectual boss is to take the problem out on you.

LW2: Go off to college? Doesn't sound like either of you is equipped to survive the first semester. Just what kind of punishment are you talking about? You should continue refusing to help her with her schoolwork. It's not your job, and depending on how much you're "helping," it might not even be ethical. Find a quieter place to study, too, or you won't keep those excellent grades for long. You're the same age, but you might have to be the bigger person. It's great that you recognize that you are part of the problem, so try to set a better example and maybe she'll follow. And if not, at least you'll know you've done the right thing. I disagree with Kai to an extent, though. Getting some time away with friends or your grandparents might be a healthful way to cope with the stress and give both of you time to calm down and respond to each other more constructively. Sometimes people expect twins to magically get along and spend all their time together, and that's a lot of pressure for a pair of teenagers who might have very different personalities.

Do your job and let the "boy" screw up. I bet he has Asperger's syndrome and has a weak short-term memory. That's why he appears to be off task and avoid responsibilities, getting overwhelmed easily.

LW2-Talk to a teacher or school counselor about this. Staying at your grandmother's over the weekend makes sense. As for your parents getting mad at you, sit them down and tell them what's going on. If they don't respond, then your parents are cowards. Graduate high school early and go off to college. Let them deal with your sister. She's their problm, not yours.

* * * * PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT * * * *

LW3 refers to the first letter on 15 January 2013.

My husband just had to fire someone like Justin, only this guy is in his 50's and has grandchildren. Age is not the issue here. You can't "mentor" (aka fix) Justin. My husband tried fo fix this guy for two years. He didn't listen, blames everyone for any mistakes he makes, and was sucky at the job. The final straw came this weekend when he texted us at 4:50 am to complain that we hadn't given him a complete breakdown of everything he did last year so he can figure out his miles for his taxes. If you're going to text your boss before the sun has come up you damn well better be having an emergency. My husband felt bad, but his business is too small to keep having incompetent people bleeding business away.
Back to the point, until he thinks he's broken Justin will not take kindly to being fixed. Don't cover for him, but don't be out to get him or you'll look bad too. Just have as little to do with him as possible.

LW1: The Annies are wrong wrong wrong and BTL is right right right.

Have as little to do with Justin as you can because his incompetence can reflect badly on you as well. Although I wouldn't hold my breath about him being fired. People like him tend to get promoted in many companies!

LW3: While it's certainly a possibility that the husband is cheating himself (or the wife, better word would be accuser), it's not always the case.

Many people accuse their spouses of cheating for a variety of reasons: past experiences (both with the current spouse and in previous relationships), deep insecurities, lack of communication, etc. To go accusing the accuser is simply continuing a bad cycle, unless there is concrete proof.

LW1 - I'm afraid there's usually a "Justin" in most offices at one time or another, and I don't think his age has much, if anything, to do with it. I've known employees like that of all ages. Just do the best you can do in your own job and let Justin alone. Sooner or later he'll either be fired or quit and then life will go on. Mentoring him as the Annies suggest will only identify you with him and reflect badly on you.

LW2: I'm not so sure that staying away from the toxic sister is a bad idea.

If the situation is causing the LW so much stress that it's affecting his health, then I think weekends at the grandparents home are a good idea. But make sure your PARENTS know exactly why. It may be a good idea for your sister to get out of the home too: maybe you and she can take turns getting out of the house on weekends? At that age I was hardly home on weekends at all: I worked a full time job and also had an active social life, which it doesn't sound like you DO have although you say you are popular. Get OUT more. Start hanging out with friends, get a job, volunteer, join the church youth group. You can also schedule time by yourself (or with friends) at the library for studying. Our library has private study rooms that you can reserve for 3 hours a shot and it's a great change from studying at home.

It sounds to me like you and her have been spending WAY too much time together and are at the age when you BOTH are defining your own personalities. Part of the fighting is you both exerting your own independence. Try talking to your parents again, preferably without your sister and maybe with your grandparents or another trusted adult.

LW2: I'm not so sure that staying away from the toxic sister is a bad idea.

If the situation is causing the LW so much stress that it's affecting his health, then I think weekends at the grandparents home are a good idea. But make sure your PARENTS know exactly why. It may be a good idea for your sister to get out of the home too: maybe you and she can take turns getting out of the house on weekends? At that age I was hardly home on weekends at all: I worked a full time job and also had an active social life, which it doesn't sound like you DO have although you say you are popular. Get OUT more. Start hanging out with friends, get a job, volunteer, join the church youth group. You can also schedule time by yourself (or with friends) at the library for studying. Our library has private study rooms that you can reserve for 3 hours a shot and it's a great change from studying at home.

It sounds to me like you and her have been spending WAY too much time together and are at the age when you BOTH are defining your own personalities. Part of the fighting is you both exerting your own independence. Try talking to your parents again, preferably without your sister and maybe with your grandparents or another trusted adult.

LW1--"I cannot think of a way to address this without being hurtful." What you're describing is the future. 'Justin' is the product of years of coddling and of the self-esteem movement. I'm sure he's a legend in his own little mind. He expected to waltz into a high paying job right out of college and become vice-president within a couple of years. He is along for the ride because he knows that if he hitches his cart to the coattails of his hardworking coworkers, they'll take him straight to the top. Instead of trying to tiptoe around the issue, document his myriad screw-ups and take it to the supervisor. Unless I miss my guess, however, the supervisor is probably not that much older than Justin and similarly afflicted with self-grandeur and aspirations of becoming chairman of the board. Be wary; if you challenge one of these incompetent kiddies, they'll cry foul with HR and YOU, not he, will wind up out on your ear. My advice is to stop giving Justin tasks and just let him play on the Internet all day. Maybe one of the clods in your management will take notice and if given enough rope Justin will hang himself.

LW2--You don't get along with your twin sister because in spite of your opposite genders, you're both too much alike. My advice is to stop taking your sister's bait and learn to bit your tongue. In a couple of years you'll both be off to college. I recommend schools on the opposite coasts!

LW1 - There has been a "Justin" at every place I have ever worked. Some have been young, some have not been. The current Justin in my office is a 30 year old woman who has the emotional maturity of a child. I have never in my life met someone who whined and cried so much! I now understand the saying, "Crying over spilled milk." She also lies all the time and spends a lot of the work day reading Justin Bieber's Twitter page. I kid you not. You can't do anything about it since you're not his boss. Do your own work and do your best to ignore him.

I do NOT agree with mentoring Justin. Not only are people like him a waste of time because he will not improve, but it's not your job. He's an adult...you shouldn't have to teach him to wipe his own nose and tie his own shoes. It's hard, but concentrate on yourself and your work.

LW2 - You admit you're controlling and she is, too. That's probably why you don't get along. I agree with the others here who say to ignore her as much as possible. If you truely want to be at your grandparents on the weekends, then go ahead. If you parents scold you for not helping your sister with her homework, I would be frank with them and say, "The last time I helped her, she screamed at me and hit me afterwards. Why would I continue to help her if she's going to abuse me like that?" Good luck.

LW1: Agree with the rest of the BTL. Although I wouldn't necessarily say it's because of "coddling" or the "self-esteem" movement ... although that definitely is a possibility. I would have ADDed the possibility he has attention deficit disorder (remember, the LW says "'Justin' cannot remember what was said the minute he hangs up the telephone. He doesn't pay attention to what he is doing.)

More than likely, he either has expected to be further along in his career (delusions of self grandeur) or he is just plain incompetent. Take your pick – it may just be both.

Regardless of whether he has ADD or not, he needs to pull his weight ... but unless you get promoted to be his supervisor you might not be able to do much. Eventually, he'll screw up royally and he'll be asked to pack up his office and turn in his keys.

LW2: I'll pass on this one, except to say I wish there'd be a way for the two of you to get along.

LW3: Good! Your ex sounded like someone who rather would not have married you in the first place, if you ask me. Either way, I hope he's having his fun ... and finding that doing the cooking and cleaning is a little more tasking than it seems.

@LW1: BTL has nailed it. Not much else to say.
@LW3: Short and to the point; I like it! I hope she's finding fun and happiness in her golden years, without her ex.

LW1 - Geeze, doesn't anyone in your office have the cojones to get tough with this guy? Not even the boss? He's holding everyone there hostage out of fear of his being "hurt" or making a scene. The problem with suggesting he be ignored is that if he's supposed to be part of a team, others may depend on his completing tasks. And the Annies' mentoring idea stinks - the LW already said the young man won't take direction. My suggestion? Start documenting the little prima donna's lapses and incompetence, then take it to the boss. If he won't help, go to the higher-ups. This boils down to either the entire office suffers or just the twit suffers. I know which one I'd push for. If there ARE no higher-ups and/or other co-workers don't want to document or confront, then you're out of luck. You will then have to make the decision as to whether to stay and suck it up, or look for a new job, which is not always easy at your age. Best of luck.
LW2 - The real problem here is your parents, who should be acting like responsible adults and handling this situation with fairness and restraint. Instead, they're opting out and letting the two of you make each other miserable. There are times when you have to let kids work things out themselves, but in this case it clearly isn't working and the parents should intervene. The fact that you want to escape elsewhere on weekends and can't wait to get out of the house when you're older speaks to the seriousness of this situation. You may have to ask a trusted teacher or counselor to speak with your parents.

LW1: Listen, we can all use the excuse of the "diagnosis of the week" or our pet peeve about "youth today" to try to explain Justin's behavior, but the fact of the matter is there are always people like that in every work place, and they have been ever since the first group of humans got together to do something in a community. Whether he's bored or unmotivated or doesn't have much ambition, or is ADD or was poorly parented, you'll never know, and it doesn't really matter.

It's your boss's problem, really. And, to some extent, I think you should stop obsessing so much. If he makes a critical mistake, then the boss will reprimand or fire him. If he's a real problem that your boss won't address, then your boss's boss will step in and handle both of them, frankly.

What you don't say is that his laziness is affecting YOUR work. It doesn't sound like he's ADDING to your workload -- you do say "he does his work" but you are complaining that he doesn't do any EXTRA. Well, he's not paid to do extra, and neither are you. If there is possibility for advancement and you are interested in your career, than doing extra shows initiative, but if all you want is a paycheck, then taking care of your responsibilities and meeting the tasks in your job description is sufficient.

Just because he isn't as gung-ho about taking on extra tasks in the office doesn't make him bad or even lazy; in fact, if you aren't actually getting any extra money or promotions for all the extra "initiative" you are showing, maybe what's happening is, in fact, that you are angry that you are doing more and have little to show for it.

He makes small mistakes that the boss doesn't seem all that interested in correcting. If it's not affecting your responsibilities, then you are being overly intrusive. A company ISN'T a family, it ISN'T a group of friends, it's a bunch of people hire to "do their work". So if he "does his work" and then surfs the 'net, and the boss doesn't mind, then why are you so bent out of shape? You're not his boss, you're not his dad. I think there's more going on with *you* here in this workplace dissatisfaction, and he's just an external target you are using to avoid asking yourself some hard questions.

Re: LW1, the critical phrases here are: "He just does his work and then plays on the Internet." and "He takes on no new responsibilities, which drives the rest of us crazy. "

LW2, it takes 2 to tango, and you acknowledge, briefly, that you are partially responsible for the state of affairs with your sister. So, disconnect. Stop allowing your emotions to be engaged by her and stop expecting her to act the way you want her to. It's a lesson all of us have to learn one day: that we have NO control over how other people act; the only control we have is over how we ourselves respond. So stop responding. Minimize your time with her, don't engage or interact. If your parents still insist you must help her with homework, do so -- politely, calmly, and as quickly as you can without being rude.

And then spend as much time as you can at school, with friends, or with grandparents. It may seem like a long ways off, but college will be here before you know it. Focus on your studies and your friends and picking out colleges to apply to.

And stop trying to be demanding or controlling, because that will only trigger more fighting.

Wow, were the Annies drinking too many shamrock shakes on the weekend? Their advice is a complete FAIL all the way around today.
LW1, as other have said, do NOT(!) under any circumstances attempt to mentor or teach Justin ANYTHING. That will only put YOUR job and retirement security at risk, and after 25 years of service and at the age of 55, that is far too much for you to risk losing here. If Justin has already been on the job for three years and is as much of a screw-up as you say, and especially since his job is to handle other people's money(!) then he is beyond mentoring and teaching, and spending your time on this fruitless cause will only be to the detriment of your own work. But that's the least of your concerns. If you attempt to be his trainer then when he screws up again (when, not if) you could be held equally liable, not only by your company but by anyone suing your company or demanding compensation for screwing up their money or accounts. Justin will no doubt blame you when he eventually goes down in flames ("But this is how LW told me how to do it!"). It will be his word against yours. YOU could be FIRED, lose any pension or retirement benefits you have with the company, and/or be held accountable to pay back "your share" of the screw-up.
.
Instead, what you need to do is hunker down and protect everything you've earned over the last 25 years, until you retire. Start documenting everything Justin does and how it affects your clients, especially their funds. Do not blame, complain, or criticize, simply state: "On March 18, at 3:00, Justin Lastname deposited money into account 430067 in error. This has had the effect of a incorrect credit to the account, while leaving account 57469 short." Then send it electronically to the boss, EVERY TIME, and keep a record for yourself in a safe place, including the email time stamp, and ask your boss to acknowledge receipt. Tell your boss you are not doing this to criticize, but simply to protect your own interests in the event of a discrepancy. You may even want to let your boss's boss know that you are doing this. This will not only protect you, but encourage them to get rid of Justin themselves before the clients demand. It will also make them too scared to fire you out of spite, since they will know you have the documentation to protect yourself in the event of wrongful dismissal. Five years from now, you want to be on a hot beach thousands of miles from Justin, not in a hot seat trying to defend yourself from his screw-ups. Don't touch him or help him with a ten-foot pole.
.
LW2, the Annies advice was sexist and wrong. They think because your sister is female she can't be abusive, and because you are male, you can't be abused. They live in la-la land. You are being PHYSICALLY, VERBALLY AND EMOTIONALLY ABUSED, and your parents are condoning it. Trust me, this is not just affecting your physical health, but your emotional health as well, and it will have long-term effects if you don't get out now. Call the hotline for domestic violence today (which the Annies recommend to a female even if her husband is simply being "controlling") and make your plans to be removed from this abusive home. It won't get better, so you need to get out.

LW1 -
Sorry, but if even the boss doesn't care enough about his own business to do anything, then there nothing YOU can do and nothing will change. If Justin won't look for another job (Why should he? He's snug as a bug in a rug right where he is, you're the one who's uncomfortable, not him), then YOU have to. But try to think carefully here. A new job may not work out and you may end up with none. Is this worth upsetting your own cart to the point where you may end up in deep kimchee?

It is not your responsibility or your job to assign tasks to Justin or to fix him. I would suggest you leave Justin alone and with enough rope to hang himself. Stay away from him and don't cover for him. One of of these days, he'll make a mistake too big for the boss to ignore. And definitely do NOT "mentor" him, because then his mistakes will become your fault. I don't know what the Annies were thinking. Obviously, they weren't.

LW2 -
You say "life is her way or the highway", but everything you said before that was about how controlling your are of your sister, and how it's all her fault that you feel lousy when she doesn't hop to your every demand. Which one is it?

"She doesn't respond to me, listen to me or respect me. I'm sure that's why I am so controlling"? No, siree, it's not. Even if your sister was an obedient little slave to you, STILL you wouldn't be content, and you would keep finding new ways of asserting your domination.

Now, the question is: Where exactly did you get the idea that your sister's owes you to "respect you" like you're her Lord and Master, and that you get to rule her life?

Go study with friends and spend the weekend with your grandparents. If you're not around, you can't be helping her with her homework (which you shouldn't be doing anyway), she can't scream and hit, and you can't control her. I'm sure life will become much easier for your sister too.

And don't go to the same college. Years from now, when you've matured and learned to miss each other and relate differently than as either dominant or dominated, you can hopefully resume your relationship on a different basis.

LW3 -
He hasn't just been "covering up his own guilt by accusing you". What was going on here was that God forbid you should do to him what he was doing to you, because it's only okay when HE does it. It's called a double standard, and there's a lot of that around.

@ Mike H Re: #15

Thanks for succinctly explaining why mediocrity and failure are not only tolerated but is apparently an accepted standard of the workplace. What you're advocating is basically ignoring 'Justin's' piss poor work ethic and placing all the blame on the LW for not tolerating it with a smile and a turn of the other cheek. Ridiculous!

I think I am the "Justin" of my company.

One more word about "Justin"

I have had SOOOOO many bosses like Justin, and I"m surprised nobody else here brought that up. Yesterday, I was on the phone with a former coworker (we worked for a Justin) and found out our old boss has been promoted yet again.

After shaking my head a bit, I realized that these guys manage to get promoted a LOT because they know who's ass to kiss (sorry to be graphic). Our old boss was so incompetent that it was a JOKE. His team openly laughed at him in meetings, but he didn't get the joke. And when the promotion came up? HIS manager told me "I promoted him to get him off my team."

This happens more times than people want to admit. I don't know what to do about it, it's frustrating as anything, but there it is. Justins don't only exist in the rank and file. They are in management too and that is truly frightening.

Jane - so you think a 16 year old boy should call a domestic abuse hotline because his sister hits him and yells at him when she gets mad, even though he admits to trying to control her as well. Just great. Just what domestic abuse hotlines like to waste their time on. If you advise him to overreact to that extent over this, what happens if he is ever REALLY in an abusive situation?

And could we PLEASE have a moratorium on the ridiculous "Golden Years" phrase? That was invented by young copywriters who have no inkling of what it's like to get old. Anyone who thinks that's what old age is should go into a nursing home and ask any of the residents if they would describe their present condition as their "golden years." But be quick - you might get slugged with a cane!

Yah Bobaloo! I can now recognize your posts within the first sentence.

The Annies blew it sky high today. "Mentor" the worthless Justin. What an idiotic piece of advise given that even the boss doesn't want to deal with Justin. And they tell Brother to "Ignore her sweetly" . (How do you "ignore her sweetly"?) I don't know what the Annies earn, but they are overpaid.

Lise, what are the chances that you are still angry with yourself for tolerating all the "yurunda" you always tell us about from Mr. Trinidad and Mr. Crazy Singer? And that you're projecting that every time you launch into the double standard, and God forbid a woman should...etc., etc.? Even if that sounds harsh, I don't mean it harshly because I understand that endless anger aimed at what others have done to us is often masking the anger at ourselves for putting up with it.

Re: Chris
I think what Mike is advocating is more along the lines of accepting what the LW cannot change. Since, in the absence of the boss doing anything, the only alternative for him is to change jobs at his age, I don't think this is bad advice. Both you and I advised to give him enough rope to hang himself, just in different words.

But Mike assumes the mistakes are small. They may not be, and even if they are now, they may not be forever. Both you and Jane are right - he should document everything and make sure he has an up-to-date copy of the data at home, because if he ends up being forced to leave, he won't be allowed to take anything with him.

But he should NOT go to the boss with the info just now, not unless the boss is trying to pin one of Justin's mistakes on him. The reason for this is that the boss already knows quite well how Justin is, and refuses to do anything. Rub his nose in it and the LW will end up tagged as the troublemaker. The LW cannot force the boss to do what's right. Try and do that, and the boss will get rid of HIM. Considering how badly this can backfire, the LW should document the situation but keep the info as an ace up his sleeve , and not use it unless he has to.

@Chris, so you think doing a ton of extra work that's not in your job description and that you don't get compensated for is a GOOD idea? And you say *I* am ridiculous?

You are not only getting shafted, pal, you've so swallowed this balony hook line and sinker that you are expecting everyone else to bend over and take it, too. No wonder the inequality in incomes in the US keeps rising, if workers like you don't realize how easily you are manipulated by management.

More work, no pay? And you expect all the drones to smile and excitedly take on even more work for no pay? Wow, your advice is *awesome*.

Um, they're called Golden Years because of the color of their urine, obviously. Get yo facts straight.

Jane (comment #18) wrote:
“LW2, the Annies advice was sexist and wrong. They think because your sister is female she can't be abusive, and because you are male, you can't be abused. They live in la-la land. You are being PHYSICALLY, VERBALLY AND EMOTIONALLY ABUSED, and your parents are condoning it. Trust me, this is not just affecting your physical health, but your emotional health as well, and it will have long-term effects if you don't get out now. Call the hotline for domestic violence today (which the Annies recommend to a female even if her husband is simply being "controlling") and make your plans to be removed from this abusive home. It won't get better, so you need to get out.”


You nailed it. Can you imagine what the Annies and their army of bigots would have responded if it had been a female teenager who had written in and complained about her twin brother hitting her?

We both know they would have flown off the handle and the manhaters who infest this message board would have been spewing insults left and right. But because the letter is about a female hitting a male, they ignore it – and in a few cases, they still blame the male.

MEN. They're to blame for EVERYTHING.

Re: nanchan
"Justins don't only exist in the rank and file. They are in management too and that is truly frightening."
Oh yes. Tell me about it. When I was a voice student, I used to spend my summers working vacation replacements and I was placed by temp agencies. I did that for several years. I have seen so many offices I couldn't count them, and the bosses were Justins more often than not.

Regularly doing extra work outside of your job description for zero extra compensation and without expectation of promotion is called "being taken advantage of".

@Volpe: I thoroughly enjoyed both of your posts today :) I spend so much time on this website, I may be the Justin of my company too....

LW1 - Why do you care so much? Stop gossiping, stop obsessing, and do your own work. There's a lazy Justin at every office and has been since the first cave man decided he'd stay in the cave to "hold down the fort" while the rest went out and hunted a t-rex for dinner. If Justin's habits interfere with your ability to your job, report it. If he makes a "real" mistake (not misfiling a piece of paper, but overcharges a customer or leaves personal information out in a public area), report him to your boss. Beyond that, there's nothing you can do, so your choice is either to accept it and do your job, or quit and hope there isn't another Justin at your next job.

LW2 - Are you 16, or 6? You and your sister both have a lot of maturing to do. Sounds like you have equal parts in the mess you've gotten yourself into with this "relationship" with your sister. Counseling might help, but it sounds like your parents think that ignorance is bliss. You don't have any long to go, tough it out, and avoid her when you can. And hey, next time she hits you, tell her you're going to hit her back next time, and do.

Re: Mike H

So true. Don't get me started on the idea that working overtime = dedication.

I agree that men are to blame for everything! Just this morning, my coffee burned the top of my mouth. A male co-worker makes our coffee every morning. This is his fault!

Re: Mike H (29)

Taking on extra work without being compensated for it is also the WORST way to get a promotion!

Why should ANY company pay you for work you do for "free" and then promote you? It's simple economics.

It's every company's job to get the most work for the least amount of money. Basic.

There's a possibility that Justin has become this way through the office dynamics. Especially since the person writing in seems to care about Justin's age compared to his own. I suppose, through some of the examples, I am in part my office's "Justin" (though not the lying and managing to forget what was said on the phone). I suppose I am mostly coasting along, but it's become that way after a period of time in the office.

I'm 25 and have the same job as a pretty useless 55 year old woman on the team. We have the same amount of work to do. The problem is, for someone competent and not slower than molasses, it's like 2 hours worth of work in an 8 hour day then the rest is on an 'as required' basis (answering client calls and emails... sometimes it's like 20 a day, sometimes it's 2). So am I often sitting here browsing online or doing whatever while she's moaning about how busy she is? Yes. Knowing her workload, I can't fathom how she thinks she's "busy" but that's the situation.

I used to offer to help her, take some of her work, or take all the client calls while she finishes up whatever she's working on so she won't get interrupted. I'd get various forms of refusals, but it basically boils down to she doesn't want me touching any of the work. They're HER files, it's HER client... if she had her way I wouldn't be allowed to do absolutely anything but the manager and team lead have at least given me *some* things. Not too long ago when we were both given a bunch of data corrections to make, I finished mine quickly and had to listen to her complain about how much she had to do. I offered to do some of hers and got told "Oh no dear you can't do these ones, they require a lot of thinking." After that, my attitude is, well fuck you then. I'll do my work, I'll do whatever is asked of me (several of the rest of my team, all older than I, also choose to treat me like a personal admin assistant and give me their photocopying or whatever to do - oh joy), I'll volunteer for a project or, hell, the endless stupid committees that will at least get me away from my desk for awhile, but other than that, yeah I'm "just along for the ride".

I know this isn't exactly the same as what's described in LW1, but perhaps a lot of the office started off treating Justin like a dumb kid who was incapable of doing or learning anything, so he's decided to meet your expectations.

@nanchan, exactly. That's how corporations work (and many managers promote that attitude). And its up to every worker to have enough self-respect, and respect for their contribution to the company, to make sure they are paid appropriately for the work that they are asked to do. That's the 2-way street that capitalism is supposed to be based on, but too many workers are forgetting their half of the equation.

@Alexandra, good point -- and for a lot of people, a job is just a *job*, not a career or a vocation or their true passion. And that's okay. As long as someone is actually doing the job they were hired to do and their manager isn't unhappy, it's not really *essential* to prove "dedication" (Zoe's point) by doing more for no reason and no compensation, and it's certainly not "failure" on the worker's part, either (Chris's "screw the workers" point).

Re: Chris (#20)

I don't think anybody is "tolerating" or advocating for a workplace that "tolerates mediocrity" I think what a lot of us are saying is that it is not the LW's job to evaluate or "tell" Justin what to do.

Who knows? Maybe there already is a paper trail started for Justin that will eventually lead to him being forced to resign or be terminated. And besides, now that I think about it, maybe he IS doing a good job and can do is job more efficiently than the LW (as Alexandra seems to be hinting at with her experience).

Point being: The LW may NOT know the entire situation with Justin, and it could come back to bite him in a way he might not like.

Thank you, Zoe. Instead of Brother whining to a Domestic Hotline, he should absolutely tell her he will hit her back next time and then do it. Princess Bride, as usual, can't see past his nose on this one. Sorry about all those women who rejected you, PB. It had to lead to this.

Re: Zoe
"And hey, next time she hits you, tell her you're going to hit her back next time, and do."
He might end up charged with battery - Princess Bride is right about THAT one. Especially since he's not exactly innocent as the newborn lamb here, having a history of control-tripping and even admitting himself that he sometimes pours oil over the fire. Better that he keeps himself out of the house as much as possible, thus removing the vector for drama. Library. Friends. Grandparents. Two years to go, it shouldn't be that long if he concentrates on his own business and not that of his sister.

@Alexandra, Mike H & nanchan
I have also seen many offices where initiative is NOT encouraged. Care too much about your contribution and you're treated like you're a busy-body.

@Bobaloo
Some places actually promote mediocrity, because that's all the boss knows and, being the boss, he's always right, right? Boy, I've seen so many of those... And it seems that the bigger the outfit, the more incompetent the big boss.

Especially when the big boss is a man, unfortunately. When women make it to the top, they usually had to be twice as aggressive, bitchy and back-stabbing, AND twice as competent to get where they are. Men are a different thing. Some get promoted because they're productive, but more do because they know where to suck up. And Justins getting promoted for the supervisor to get them out of their hair is actually quite common.

RE: Maggie Lawrence

You're right, of course. Violence is only wrong when it is men hitting women. When it is women hitting men, the act is justified or just usually ignored altogether.

“Sorry about all those women who rejected you, PB. It had to lead to this.”

You're right again. And I guess the Annies and all the sexist women on here have been rejected by many, many men for them to be so darn bitter.

Remember: MEN. They're to blame for EVERYTHING.

Maggie Lawrence, so let me get this straight. Even when the Annies have OFTEN advised a woman to call a domestic violence hotline in situations where there is and has been NO violence, NO screaming, and NO real emotional turmoil, for things like "my husband won't tell me how much we have in our bank account" or "my husband checks my email and cellphone and accuses me of having affairs" you have never felt THAT was an over-reaction or a waste of the domestic violence hotline. (Meaning that clearly these meet your criteria as an "abusive situation".)
.
But here, in a situation where there IS violence, and there IS screaming and there IS enough emotional turmoil that it is making a minor physically sick, THAT is a waste of a domestic violence hotline's time? You actually say, "what happens if he is ever REALLY in an abusive situation?" Maggie, he is ALREADY in an abusive situation. Are you really saying that if a woman was being hit and screamed at by her husband that would not be abusive? Your problem is the same as the Annies--you do not believe it's possible for females to abuse males. Tell me, how do you think this 16-year-old girl is going to treat her young son one day, after learning that hitting and screaming a male is how you get them to do what you want? It is attitudes like yours that actually encourage abuse, especially child abuse. And your idea for him to hit her back will do nothing except land HIM in a detention center. And I just love how you and so many people here are saying well, he's partly responsible too, it's his fault that she's hitting him. Sickening. Can you imagine saying that to a woman who is getting hit by a male?
.
Thankfully, domestic violence hotlines do NOT agree with such backward thinking as yours. They do categorize this type of violence as domestic abuse, and will be happy to give this man far, far FAR better advice on what to do next than "hit her back!" Lol, can just imagine a domestic violence hotline giving a male THAT advice.

Have to agree that LW1 needs to back off and recognize it's his boss' problem unless:
1) it's affecting LW's own workload and/or
2) see above.

I get that it's tough to stand by and watch it (which is why I think the Annies advocated mentoring, as an alternative to doing nothing.) But it's not LW's job to mentor, and I think it's risky to align yourself with someone who doesn't seem to want to pay attention and do well at work. All too easy for that to come back & bite you.

There were 2 colleagues, over more than 30 years and in different workplaces, where I indicated to my boss that the employee was not doing his job, thus affecting mine, and the many complaints I heard from the public about that person. I always encouraged those people to call and register their complaints with Justin's boss, not me, because the boss couldn't use anything I conveyed from the public.

The first Justin was easy to fire; he was still in the first 3 months and therefore a probational hire. The second, though, was over 50 and had medical problems, so it was incredibly difficult for the boss to accrue enough complaints in the time frame necessary to fire him without fear of a lawsuit.

@Jane, I think you are confusing "domestic violence" with "domestic abuse" -- not all abuse is by necessity violent. And people who work for domestic ABUSE hotlines are usually trained to assess the caller's situation and refer people to the right agency or service that can help for that particular situation.

Including when the callers are men being abused by their male domestic partners, or men being abused by women.

@Maggie Lawrence: Not that it really matters, but why do you think PB is male? I've always assumed PB was female. I'm not sure why though (Maybe that's my own sexism showing :) I was just curious to hear another perspective.

LW1- For some reason this letter reminds me of my sister in law. She came to visit for a month (she was about 19 at the time) and one day she decided that I do the dishes too slowly. So she started doing them. She was really fast... and sloppy. I'd take a "clean" dish out of the cabinet and there would be food stuck to it. It was disgusting, to say the least. So every time she did the dishes, I'd have to re-do them because my husband and I actually want clean dishes to eat off of. I think of her whenever Chris writes about the coddled generation, because she's a textbook example... My advice to the lw is document everything, create a paper trail if Justin's mistakes are truly that glaring, and steer way clear of him. Oh, and take up a yoga routine to deal with the stress.

Re: Casey
PB suspiciously sounds like other obsessed, one-track males who have been on this site before. John P Wilson and John Dung come to mind.

There is always the possiblity that we are wrong of course, but I personally have never seen a woman so angry against women, and I've seen more than my share of sexist ones. Women usually express their mysoginy differently.

@Lise B: Ah yes. I remember both of those names. That makes sense to me. I suppose my little feeble mind was thrown off by the use of “Princess” in his user name :)

Re: Eliza167

Every generation thinks the one that came after it is coddled. It's a joke as old as time: "when I was your age, I walked 5 miles to school each day, uphill, and in a snowstorm!" It's part rose-coloured glasses, part fear/abhorrence of change, part ego, part envy ("I suffered through walking to school, not fair that you get a ride from mommy, spoiled child!"). And with the internet, we can now know about every jackass that makes a fool of himself because he's an idiot. Make no mistake: this happened before. We just didn't hear about it.

That is why I can only smile and roll my eyes when someone whines about "today's generation". Yes, there have been changes, but I work regularly with "kids" younger than me who are engineers, doctors, and working hard to advance society even if some of them still live at home or get an allowance from their parents or whatever.

There are old people today who were lazy and coddled as kids, and there are kids today who are very driven and focused. And don't forget that we mature with age. You can't expect the average 19-year-old to match the maturity of the average 40-year-old. Frankly, I think it's good that your SIL volunteered to do the dishes in the first place! Could you not just say "I really appreciate you helping out with the dishes but look at the food on these!

Re: Casey etc

I always assumed that PB was one of the regulars here, and female.

Re: Lise Brouillette

And you sound suspiciously like the other obsessed, one-track females who on this site.

You use the “sexism” angle more than anyone here.

MEN. They're to blame for EVERYTHING.

@ Mike H Re: #25

First of all Mike, I never said a word about doing "a ton of work" not in one's job description. I don't know whose post you read that said that, but it wasn't mine so I'm not going to address that comment. And for the record I also didn't say *you* were ridiculous, rather your position is. Please go back and read what I actually did write.

I am simply aghast at many of the comments I'm reading BTL here today, including yours, that seem to advocate middling job performance and simply "getting by" at the workplace because it doesn't pay to take on additional tasks, help others, or go above and beyond to ensure the success of the business. What the hell happened to having pride in one's work!!? I can honestly say that I have always gone above and beyond in all of the jobs I've ever held because frankly, I was taught to have an excellent work ethic. I don't do it because I expect pay raises or promotions or even a pat on the back. I do it because when I look in the mirror at the end of the day I can say that I gave my very best. I do it for ME. And while it's obvious that employers take advantage of those of us who are efficient and give 110%, I don't for a minute feel as though I'm being "shafted" or manipulated by management. And for the record, I have always enjoyed promotions and above average pay increases compared to my middling coworkers who skate by and don't give a damn. If corporate America is in trouble, it's not because some of its workers are putting out too much effort. It's because the masses of drones as you call them are sitting around all day posting to FaceBook, surfing the web and getting by. Evidently you're one of them and your viewpoint IS ridiculous!

@Lise, #24, sorry I missed that earlier -- I'm assuming that the mistakes are small because (a) nothing that the LW described is at all "big", and I would have expected concrete examples of big mistakes to bolster the LW's case, and (b), the boss seems too passive for these mistakes to be large.

LW's main problem seems to be that Justin isn't super-motivated to "give 110%" like the LW him/herself, but that's not a crime, nor is it even indicative of a *bad* employee -- just not a "great" employee.

I've managed enough workplace busybodies over the years to spot the signs, though, and this LW seems to be doing just that.

I'll agree it can be a problem when one co-worker's laziness or mistakes bounce back onto you: adding to your workload or making your office "team" look bad, for example; but barring that (and the LW makes no mention of any of those), this is not the LW's problem, despite desperately trying to MAKE it his/her problem.

That's where I'm coming from, and you're right, a large part of that is the "what can you control" argument; and part of it is the "sometimes you should mind your own beeswax" theory, too. :-)

Re: Princess Bride
Interesting that you should say that, considering I did credit you for being right once today!

Jane, just because I don't answer every ridiculous thing the Annies say doesn't mean I agree with it. I do NOT think a woman should call a domestic hotline because her husband withholds information about household finances. Criminy! I said - and I mean - exactly what Zoe said. He's a teenage boy with a teenage twin sister with whom he does not get along. He admits to trying to boss her around and she's driving him crazy. Right now they hate each other. They should avoid each other if possible, but they live in the same house. If his twit of a sister hits him for something she doesn't like - and hits first - he is justified in warning her that the next time he'll hit back. And then do it. Even Judge Judy would support him on that because the phrase is "You put your hands on him first!" And that does not mean that either one of them is going to grow up to be a child abuser. That's just an ignorant statement that you're extrapolating out of all kinds of imagination.

Casey, the use of "Princess Bride" - to make it SOUND female - and the constant, extreme, woman-hating, woman-baiting, one-note, one-trick pony that PB is makes it obvious to me that PB is a frustrated man who has been attracted to the very women whom he can't get or who reject him and he therefore takes it out on this forum. He is unable to have a rational discussion because it always devolves into the same la-la-la about men being to blame for everything, which is only his own sad little view.

Re: Chris

I don't entirely disagree where you're coming from re: work ethic, but you're overlooking some key points. First being that if everyone's performance was "excellent", then "excellent" would be "mediocre". Get my meaning? Most people are average, normal, and perform in a normal, average way. For every extra-hard working go-getter, there is a lazy Justin who is coasting. Often it is a personal choice - sometimes our performance is limited by our brains. Like "Justin" I have a very poor short term memory, and can be slow on the uptake (I need to process what I hear - it doesn't take minutes or anything, but I can't fire out a response immediately -- I blame that on being an only child). You can't expect everyone to be CAPABLE of putting forward a stellar performance all the time, let alone be willing to. Which brings me to my next point:

"I do it for ME" - the Justins of the world might say that they don't put in 110% "for THEM". I like to say I'm dedicated 9-5 (which are not my actual working hours but you get the idea). I don't check my work emails after work hours. I don't feel guilty if I take a sick day. I don't think about work at all as soon as I clock out. I don't bother others too much asking if I can help them unless I'm not very busy myself. I don't work overtime unless I truly need to - that's what "tomorrow" is for. I try to improve our processes and have the best interests of the company in mind but I don't go nuts. I do THAT for ME. I can look myself in the mirror every night and say that I'm as happy as I could possibly me with my life right now and part of that is a work-life balance that works for me. For some people working hard is how they are wired, and that's great. Others work themselves into an early grave trying to work hard enough to get that raise, or burn out after a few years because they can't handle the pressure they've put on themselves.

And before Facebook there was the water cooler. People slacking off work on a slow Friday afternoon or whatever is nothing new.

Re: Maggie

Yes. Domestic abuse hotlines have better things to do than settle slap fights between teenage siblings! Sometimes you just have to man the eff up and take care of your own bidness, right??

Re: Chris
I really don't think anyone here is questioning whether you deserve the promotions and pay rises that you got, that is not the way I have read any of the posts at all. Neither is anyone advocating mediocrity - I for one was raised with the mentality that if something deserves to be done, it deserves to be done well. In fact. taking pride in your work is often the only thing that can save someone in a dead-end job from going crazy and sinking into despair... is there anyone who remembers the scene in the flick "A Day in the Life of Denis Denisovitch", where he's all alone in the dark and the freezing cold, finishing his row of bricks because he wants to be proud of his work?

But it is a fact that there are many instances where going the extra mile not only targets you for exploitation, but can even land you in trouble. Perhaps things are different in your specific field, or you haven't seen as many offices as I have, having worked as a temp for many summers and even after I graduated... I have seen so many of them...

I have seen people do something really good for the company, only to have the credit stolen by someone else. I have seen people try to go the extra mile, thinking hat would make them appreciated, only to see the air-headed floozy be congratulated, cited and given bonuses because she was bedding the boss. I have seen the hard workers go unrecognised, while the brown noses got the promotions. I have seen incompetents playing their underlings against one another and rake in the kudos while they were the ones doing the work. Office politics can be a killer, and the people in charge are not always people with ethics.

It is one thing to take pride in your work and do it as well as humanely possible, and another thing to be sticking your neck out. Sometimes there is a very fine line between the two, and you sometimes learn that at your expense.

This being stated, I don't know if I'm one of those who scandalised you, so what I'm saying is nothing personal. ;-D

@Zoe and Maggie Lawrence: My thinking about PB was more aligned with Zoe's, but I definitely think you make a compelling case too, Maggie. That's the funny/horrifying thing about the internet. You can so easily lie about who you are. We'll never know for sure, and like I said, it's a pointless discussion; I was just curious what others thought :)

Re: Mike H #50
Oh, I agree with you that, barring an input from the other people working with both the LW and Justin, we can't know if Justin is an incompetent time-bomb with an attitude problem, about to drag everybody down, or if the LW is a bossy busybody trying to micro-manage everyone. I have seen both instances many times!

Re: Lise B

"taking pride in your work is often the only thing that can save someone in a dead-end job from going crazy and sinking into despair"

That makes me thinking of something... I have read, and believe, that everyone has a baseline "state of being" - with regards to happiness, movement, drive and ambition, fidelity etc etc. And while these can be changed over time with hard work (or maturity), most people don't or can't change their baseline once they are adults. Like your standard walking speed, the speed at which you walk when you aren't thinking about walking. You can push yourself to walk faster, but eventually you will get tired and have to walk even slower than before. Or if someone tells you to "slow down and rest", you can slow your walking, but after a while you will get bored or distracted and speed up again. You can develop your strength, learn some tips and tricks, and perhaps affect your basal speed a little bit. But not much. That's what I think this is like as well.

Re: Maggie/ Casey

My own theory on PB is that she is a regular poster here who initially chose to target Lise for her alleged sexism, and found it a fruitful one as the Annies and BTL are often guilty of it to some degree (not that I feel sorry for poor white men - gee, they have it so hard, especially if they're straight). So I think the sexism angle is one of convenience and not something based on personal experience. But who knows!

Zoe, I thought it would be obvious from the fact that she's my sister in law, but apparently it wasn't- we are of the same generation. I am a few years older than her, but there's no generational difference. Obviously there are people who have learned a work ethic among Generation Y, but compared to, say, the Greatest Generation, the difference is stark, imo.

Re: Eliza

Ah, I did assume you were at least late 20s because you are married, have your own house, etc, that you were skirting the border between Gens X and Y with your SIL firmly in Y (this is also assuming the dirty dishes incident was within the last few years).

Honestly thought, if you don't think that the currently young people are up to snuff, I'd say you're hangin' with the wrong crowd. Or maybe I'm just hanging with the right one. As some of you know I am a conference planner - I have worked on a number of medical / scientific conferences and for many of them, the majority of the registrants are hard working smart kids younger than I am. It's really hard to kvetch about "young people today" when there are 400 of them in front of you discussing the relative merits of this or that sciency thing (clearly I am not cut out to be among them)!

Do you not that think there were a ton of shit-for-brains kids in the "Greatest Generation" who were full up with booze, deviancy, sexism and racism? Average IQ is higher today than it was then. The kids today are good too - the stupid ones are just louder.

Re: Zoe
I agree with you there. Therte are idiots and on-the-ball people in every generation. And every generation kwetches about the last one because the new one doesn't do things the way the old one did. Sometimes that's good, sometimes that's bad.

"its up to every worker to have enough self-respect, and respect for their contribution to the company, to make sure they are paid appropriately for the work that they are asked to do. That's the 2-way street that capitalism is supposed to be based on, but too many workers are forgetting their half of the equation"
-
Mike H, I love your contributions to the BTL conversation -- you are reliably thoughtful, wise and patient -- but this one gave me pause. Can you see this happening in your local Walmart, for example?
-
Perhaps capitalism is *supposed* to be a 2-way street, with employes and employee negotiating for an outcome advantageous and fair to both, but there are too many power imbalances and too much concealed information to really expect that it *is* a 2-way street.
-
Kind of like the free-market myth, where companies compete honestly and a price reflecting market demand is the result, you know?
-
There's theory, and then there's the world we actually live in.

My generation comparison is mostly based on a generational comparison including my husbands family and my own family. What our grandparents did compared to me, my husband, his four siblings, and our various cousins (by around age 30). My husband and I would fit in with the kids you are hanging out with, Zoe, but we are unusual in *both* of our families in that we went to college and graduated, own a home, are married, etc. We are unusual in our stability. I realize this is not a scientific sampling, but in my defense, I am working with the same gene pools. I have a 21 year old cousin who really has her sh*t together who regularly comments to me "I just don't get our generation" and my husband who can't figure out how he became the responsible one out of his siblings. In other words, this is a regular topic of conversation among the more responsible of the Ys.
I hope this helps everyone get where I'm coming from. I'd write more, but I've run out of time. Have a good evening, BTL! :)

Re: KC
Hm... When the employee and the employer both have a fair deal, it pretty much becomes socialism... in principle, of course, as we all know that between principle and practice, anything can happen! ;-D

@Chris, pish tosh.


Your lament that I should go back and read what you wrote seems a bit “pot, kettle” to me, since your initial post responding to mine was quite obviously a deliberate, exaggerated misreading of my comment, in order to give you your daily springboard for yet-another-in-an-infinite-series of your patented “get off my lawn” grumpy old man rants. But this time, not only were you reaching, but you're quite off-the-mark.

A shopkeeper who regularly gave away more food than his customers paid for would soon be out of business and thought a fool; but in your formulation a worker should be happy, nay, excited to give more effort than they were hired for, for no extra reward, simply to show how “proud” they are.

Again I say, pish-tosh. Pride doesn't put food on the table. And few would consider “being taken advantage of by your boss” to be something to be particularly proud of.

Most people aren't in their dream jobs. Most people aren't passionate about their careers, but are simply working to pay the bills. There's absolutely no shame in that; in fact, it's responsible and adult and mature and we shouldn't denigrate such people, since they are the majority of employees in this country.


So someone who is hired to do tasks A, B, and C, and then goes on to do tasks A, B, and C in such a manner that their supervisor isn't overly distressed by their performance, they re doing *exactly* what they were hired to do -- and again, there's no shame in that. Just because they don't excitedly go “above and beyond” for no reward doesn't make them lazy, or slackers, or destroy the American workplace.


In fact, despite your rant, you still get it wrong: regular studies show the average American worker is more productive and more hard-working than most other comparable workers in first-world nations. And American workers get less vacation time than their foreign counterparts as well.

On the flip side, over the past 50 years corporations haven't exactly been going “110%” for the workers; pensions have been eliminated, health care costs are being shifted to the worker, full time jobs eliminated to create part-time no-benefit ones... and they have also created this environment of “you need to do extra work for no pay” just to keep your job.

I'm not “advocating” getting by, but I'm also not denigrating it -- a point you seem to have missed from the get-go (but then again, you aren't always the most nuanced poster). MOST workers are average, Chris. Most drivers are average. Most students are average. That's what average is. There are very few superstars in any field.

This person the LW is complaining about, by the LW's own admission, IS doing the work he was hired to do. And the mistakes aren't serious enough for the supervisor to reprimand the employee (nor are any examples of mistakes offered for us to judge). An employee who does their job, in a mediocre way, is fine. Not great, but certainly not worth your scorn, either. And not worth the Gladys Kravitz treatment from the LW.

If you are in your dream job, or starting off in your dream career, knock yourself out -- going 110% might help, maybe the extra work will get you noticed (but as nanchan quite rightly warns, it might also keep you stuck at your level if they realize they get more than what they pay for keeping you where you are).

But it's quite wrong for you to expect that everyone needs to “give extra” just to feel good about themselves, because that's just silly. And most people prefer not to be taken advantage of. And feel quite good about themselves when they stand up for themselves.


So YOU like it, you feel you can look in the mirror and feel good that your boss got work out of you that they didn't have to pay for, that's great. For you. But don't expect everyone else to sign up for that “drank-the-koolaid and keep on bending over for the 1%” nonsense. As if “pride” is something you get for NOT standing up for yourself and insisting that you get paid what you are actually worth based on what you are actually doing for your company.

Still, I will say, workers like you make managers like me look *great*. I get tons of productivity out of you, and I get to keep my payroll low... and then I get a bonus for my excellent management skills.

So, on behalf of the managers of the world, I should thank you Chris. And maybe I should just keep quiet and let other people drink your koolaid too, now that I think about it....

@KC, sure, I can see it happening, although under the current conditions its not likely. Because too many politicians are in the pocket of anti-worker donors. And so unions have been weakened, worker protection laws have been weakened, and more and more of the advantages are being given to corporations -- creating an imbalance where there should be a balance.

(And it's not actually socialism to have that balance, Lise, it's still capitalism -- just not laissez faire capitalism).

One of the early theoretical advantages of capitalism was that it was supposed to be empowering to labor as well as the owners of the capital. But because the rich owners of the capital seem to have more control, the system really worked against the workers, especially in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. (If you've never read Upton Sinclair's “The Jungle”, it's a good place to start).

That's why government has a role in keeping the balance between labor and capital more fair -- you don't want so much regulation that innovation and competition is suppressed, but you do need a reasonable amount of regulation to make sure there isn't abuse or a wild imbalance. We've spent the last few decades in the “not enough regulation” camp and are unfortunately paying the price as a society.

Hopefully as more people understand how going too far away from progressive values and policies actually hurts us all, we'll see the pendulum swing back to more reasonable levels of regulation, at least for a while.

Mike,

I agree with almost of everything you have said. If you are managing a group of people, depending on the kind of corporate culture, of course, the majority of the employees may very well just want to do what they are hired to do, go home and live their lives and pay their bills. Nothing wrong with that.

But it is also a manager's job to develop staff with the future goals of the organization in mind. If you have a few bright lights that want to be on a career path, and do put in the extra effort, you would not be wise to take advantage of their extra efforts on a long term basis, because employee turnover costs are significant. I agree that that no employee should stick around in a situation where they are totally being taken advantage of, and if they do not get promoted based upon ability and attitude, and they are driven people, they will leave. In my experience managing, it has always been more costly to have to hire from the outside than to promote a deserving person who already has knowledge of the organization.

Short-term, Mike, you may get to keep your payroll low, but if anyone who works for you who has the drive to get ahead meets with no career prospects beyong doing A, B, and C, you will ultimately have that "average" staff across the board. If you are a manager who is not promoting career development, you will be left with the dead wood, and I don't see any advantage of that in terms of your management skills, other than low payroll costs, with no innovation.

@Carly, of course, and in large part I'm exaggerating to make a point, and I'm depending on people BTL to understand my real intent -- and that is that we should not denigrate the people who simply do their job, but find their self-fulfillment outside of the workplace.

There's nothing wrong, either, with having a job that fulfills something more for you -- that's great, even, and I think it's a wonderful thing. But it's not the only "right" way to work, and "average" workers shouldn't be looked down upon as inferior, or worse, some sort of systemic problem.

I also completely agree about a manager's role being to develop staff; it's actually something many of my former employees have thanked me for -- my closing remarks to Chris were meant to be taken more sarcastically than any expression of a personal belief. (It's one of the most rewarding parts of being a manager, actually, when you've helped mentor a younger employee and then get to watch their career blossom.)

The reality though, Carly, is that even the best and most active of managers will almost always have a *mix* of average and above average employees. The trick, I find, is making sure you make the workload engaging enough for the above average, harder-working workers, and try to give them opportunities for growth and advancement -- while at the same time not taking too much advantage of their enthusiasm. And then creatively finding ways to make use of those average, not-very-inspired employees so that at the very least the essential work is getting done.

My main objection to Chris (and to extent, the original LW) was the idea that doing more than your job description was somehow *required* in order to be considered a good employee. I think that is a misguided assumption (and one that IS encouraged by corporate America to the detriment of workers), and while I'm not saying we should overly *applaud* the "average" worker, we shouldn't denigrate that person either. There is a certain dignity and respect that should go to anyone who does the job they were hired for, even if they don't "go 110%" very often, or at all.

I should also add, the reality is that I typically push my over-achieving employees to go for trainings, promotions, and I regularly talk to them about their career path and plans -- I was really just being snarky to Chris to make a point, not saying anything about my own personal management style. However, if I *were* one of those kinds of managers, I really would be thrilled about being able to "use" someone like Chris, to get extra work I didn't have to pay for.

But the whole reason I object to Chris' attitude is because, even as a manager, I *don't* like the idea of corporate expectations of people *having* to do work beyond what their job description is, just to impress me or to keep their jobs or out of some misguided misapplication of Puritan "work ethic". I don't think it's fair and I don't think it's sustainable and I've seen it lead to burnout more than once. In fact, I'm right in the middle of having to replace a valued employee who burnt out for this very reason -- she insisted on regularly working above and beyond even when I warned her she was pushing herself too much, and that no one expected her to be reading email and answering questions on weekends. The one arena in which she failed was in listening to her manager's warning about taking on more than she needed to, and it's left me a little disgruntled because replacing her will be very difficult.

Even if you *love* your job, a healthy work/life balance is always a good idea.

Carly, you said just what was needed in this thread. Mike sounds like the average manager with average employees. However, with that style, anyone with ability and ambition will eventually leave when they see there is no growth. Like a wise man once said, "People join companies, but they leave managers."

Re: Mike H #65
"it's still capitalism -- just not laissez faire capitalism"
Meh. Capitalism never does that... But then, neither does socialism, for all that it claims to want to. I guess exploitative, greedy human nature keeps getting in the way. ;-D

"capitalism was supposed to be empowering to labor"
Ho ho ho. Isn't that exactly what socialism claims as well? But then again, you know the old Soviet joke, don't you? The comrade sitting next to the other comrade, asks:
"Comrade, do you know what's the difference between capitalism and socialism?
- You tell me.
- Well, you see, capitalism is the exploitation of man by man... Whereas with socialism, it's the opposite!"

@Carly O
"If you are a manager who is not promoting career development, you will be left with the dead wood, and I don't see any advantage of that in terms of your management skills, other than low payroll costs, with no innovation."
You are eminently right. Unfortunately, there are countless people in managerial positions out there, who have no vision and only care about the bottom line.

Mike, now that I've read your latest, I guess you're more than an average manager. Thanks for your post.

Re: Mike H
Mike,
I do appreciate your response, because you always post really thought-out, intelligent posts, and the post aimed at Chris seemed totally out of character. I sure hope you mean what you said in terms of how you treat the folks who report to you.

Re: Mike H

Mike,
I do appreciate your response, because you always post really thought-out, intelligent posts, and the post aimed at Chris seemed totally out of character. I sure hope you mean what you said in terms of how you treat the folks who report to you.

Re: JustWinBaby

I am smiling in a way. It is not that easy to challenge someone with whom you mostly always agree.

I can still quibble with him a bit, but I won't because he makes great points most of the time.

@Carly, thanks -- and I think I was assuming that most people remembered some of my other posts about work and managing people, and realizing that I was being a bit contrary just to counter Chris' point-- but of course that was a bit foolish of me to assume, since we have new people here all the time.

And I very VERY much appreciate your comments, for it gave me the opportunity to correct any misinterpretations people might have had of me today based on that last post to Chris.

Because far too often managers (and companies) DO exploit the philosophy that Chris espouses, and workers don't realize how harmful that attitude can be *to them*. As I and others have explained today, that attitude is *great* for companies (and for managers) in many ways, but it gives zero advantage to the workers who are being taken advantage of.

And I''ll fully admit that -- possibly BECAUSE of the fact I've been a manager for 2 decades -- that I *can* get a bit wound up about worker exploitation. Because it isn't right and it isn't necessary to have a productive workplace and an effective company.

As for my managing record, I don't want to seem too immodest, but I have, throughout my career, regularly been told that I'm the best boss my workers have ever had. And some have even contacted me years after they left for other workplaces that that sentiment still holds true, and that the things that I taught them -- not just about their specific job, but workplace decorum and general professionalism -- has been enormously helpful as they have developed their own careers further. I work hard to promote a cooperative and friendly work environment for all my staff, and one of my favorite questions to them is "what do you need from me to better succeed at your responsibilities?" A question I ask regularly throughout their time, not just when they begin to work for me.

Employee development -- even if they develop to the point where they leave your department for a bigger position -- is a very important part of being a manager, and not enough managers pay attention to that -- because, of course, it is better for us to get someone trained in a job and then hope they stay put *forever*. Hiring and training new people is a drain on resources and a manager's time, but it has to be considered part of the deal.

So, my "cynical manager" stance, above, is meant not to represent my own personal management style, but rather the too-frequent attitude of managers and corporations who absolutely take advantages of workers with attitudes like Chris'. It's far more frequent than I think Chris realizes.