Discussion
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Agree but it's social pressure now from peers. It's not expected of them but it's seen as everyone I know is going. 'everyone' in turn looks back and repeats the same. My cousin has just completed a Fashion degree. She didn't study at St Martin's so I don't know where her career lies. My Aunt talks about her uni studies non stop as though it's the highest in the land and it's great that she's proud but I feel maybe she's adding to the problem/for the future. Back when I went to Uni I worked a full on part time job to pay the bills etc. and struggled. She's off on a gap year now travelling before considering her options. There's no bitterness in what I'm saying I just see it as hiding from full reality.
My wife did a Fashion degree and lucked into a career within buying. She owed 2k when she left uni.
Thinking about it there's a classic example of pampering and not giving a millennial stronger reality news from a parent..
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You said you're touching 60, which would have put you leaving school in around 1972. It wasn't the summer or love quite but it wasn't exactly the dark ages, my mum and dad are a few years older than you and spent their late teens and early twenties hitch hiking around Europe and doing the hippy trail through northern Pakistan, Iran and afghanistan (when you could, in the good old days)Get a grip geezer you're sounding pretty daft, I know a couple of students and trust me its no cake walk, the clubs and pubs these days are filled with a mix of people, but there isn't a mass youth scene out late at nightlike there was in the nineties. Maybe you are just a saddl?
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Get a grip, if you were leaving school in the early seventies you literally had a cake walk compared to kids today, you have no idea what you're talking about.My mum and dad spent the early seventies and late teenagers hitchhiking across europe, through the middle east, northern Pakistan and Afghanistan, through Iran and Iraq and to Australia, try doing that today!
I suppose I'm what's called a baby boomer, being 63 and having left school in 1972. And from what I've read everything is the fault of my generation. I didn't think I was bright enough to go to university so I got a job and have been in employment and self-employment ever since. A number of my friends and friends that I have met since did go to university. I studied 6 years on day release, so my employer paid me 20% less than a full time employee,
we didn't have a car, foreign holidays or meals out for bloody years and when I got married we were paying about 11% interest on the mortgage.
My parents generation were skint even by my standards and had gone though WW2 and the REAL austerity that followed. My grandparents were bombed out and lost everything and they reckon they did well as nobody in their families actually died at all in the war.
I don't know exactly when tuition fees came in but I suppose about 20 years ago and students have been b
hing ever since about the fees and their debt and now they think that the fees should be scrapped. Maybe they should realise that when I started work I was paying basic rate tax at 33%, which is 65% more than now. As I then saw it me, my dad and the parents of the student at the time were paying through the nose for them to get a better education than we had and then reap the rewards. That's how it was until Thatcher reduced it to 30% and it was still at 27% until 1987. So maybe the answer is to add 65% to the basic rate for any graduate who wants a "free" degree. Maybe then they'd be happy.
Maybe I'm wrong but the current crop of youngsters (called Millennials) seem to want to have it all. End of grumpy old gits rant.
we didn't have a car, foreign holidays or meals out for bloody years and when I got married we were paying about 11% interest on the mortgage.
My parents generation were skint even by my standards and had gone though WW2 and the REAL austerity that followed. My grandparents were bombed out and lost everything and they reckon they did well as nobody in their families actually died at all in the war.
I don't know exactly when tuition fees came in but I suppose about 20 years ago and students have been b
hing ever since about the fees and their debt and now they think that the fees should be scrapped. Maybe they should realise that when I started work I was paying basic rate tax at 33%, which is 65% more than now. As I then saw it me, my dad and the parents of the student at the time were paying through the nose for them to get a better education than we had and then reap the rewards. That's how it was until Thatcher reduced it to 30% and it was still at 27% until 1987. So maybe the answer is to add 65% to the basic rate for any graduate who wants a "free" degree. Maybe then they'd be happy.Maybe I'm wrong but the current crop of youngsters (called Millennials) seem to want to have it all. End of grumpy old gits rant.
Evanivitch said:
Triumph Man said:
A sister of one of my friends has just identified As a "trans pansexual demiboy" make up your mind love!
To be blunt, what does it matter to you?MWM3 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I still think there's a confusion between working longer and working harder.
Maybe it's how I'm (mis)interpreting things but it comes across as if 11 hours (4 unpaid) = good whilst the 7 you're paid to do = bad regardless of your productivity simply because you didn't "do more hours" so are somehow seen as not showing willing
Of course productivity should play a part in the assessment of an employee when considering promotions. However, in my experience the people who stay longer in the day, do it not because they are unproductive and have to stay longer to complete their work but because they achieve even more and want to strive to exceed targets etc. The unproductive ones are generally those that want to finish on the dot (or earlier) and don't really give a monkey if they have completed the work. Maybe it's how I'm (mis)interpreting things but it comes across as if 11 hours (4 unpaid) = good whilst the 7 you're paid to do = bad regardless of your productivity simply because you didn't "do more hours" so are somehow seen as not showing willing
I manage a small team of people and without question the unproductive ones who have no time management skills will be the ones working late every night to get done what they need to and will then be complaining when they don't get a pay rise at the end of the year which they feel they deserve due to the "...long hours they put in...".
They'll also invariably be the ones who stroll into the office at 9.15am and don't actually start doing anything for 30 minutes whilst they make a brew/have breakfast etc, and yet will never fail to take an opportunity to mention how late they worked last night, like that goes hand in hand with doing a good job.
Nezquick said:
MWM3 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I still think there's a confusion between working longer and working harder.
Maybe it's how I'm (mis)interpreting things but it comes across as if 11 hours (4 unpaid) = good whilst the 7 you're paid to do = bad regardless of your productivity simply because you didn't "do more hours" so are somehow seen as not showing willing
Of course productivity should play a part in the assessment of an employee when considering promotions. However, in my experience the people who stay longer in the day, do it not because they are unproductive and have to stay longer to complete their work but because they achieve even more and want to strive to exceed targets etc. The unproductive ones are generally those that want to finish on the dot (or earlier) and don't really give a monkey if they have completed the work. Maybe it's how I'm (mis)interpreting things but it comes across as if 11 hours (4 unpaid) = good whilst the 7 you're paid to do = bad regardless of your productivity simply because you didn't "do more hours" so are somehow seen as not showing willing
I manage a small team of people and without question the unproductive ones who have no time management skills will be the ones working late every night to get done what they need to and will then be complaining when they don't get a pay rise at the end of the year which they feel they deserve due to the "...long hours they put in...".
They'll also invariably be the ones who stroll into the office at 9.15am and don't actually start doing anything for 30 minutes whilst they make a brew/have breakfast etc, and yet will never fail to take an opportunity to mention how late they worked last night, like that goes hand in hand with doing a good job.
Also: http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20170612-why-you-...
Sa Calobra said:
Anyone notice a lot of millennials smoking?
Not really. Smoking amongst young adults has dropped from 26% to 19% in six years. They are also drinking a lot less than young people used to.I have employed a number of millenials and find them to be hard working, polite, and well-informed of the challenges that they face. Certainly a better lot than my cohort when I was their age (I'm 44)
b0rk said:
spikeyhead said:
Have you considered improving your interviewing skills?
Okay I'll bite how should I improve my interviewing skills.? Sadly you can't ask if they are going to dick about on their phone all day or rock up at whatever time they feel is appropriate at interview, well I could but HR have advised against it.
Competency can be tested and is hence the number interviewed vs hired. Those that have been let go for poor standards are perfectly capable of doing the job in terms of skills and knowledge but just don't seem to have the focus or desire to do it properly first time round. Indeed many have done excellently at the competency test.
ash73 said:
-C- said:
Why not? Clearly they are capable of doing their allocated work in the time given, just because you are the mug who will sit there until 9pm every night to fatten other peoples pockets - it could be argued you are the one who isn't competent enough.
Well I cleared my mortgage at 30 and I've been semi-retired since 40 (now 44), so thankfully I've done reasonably ok for someone who isn't competent enough 
If work/life balance is more important to you fair enough, but I wanted to get on.
ash73 said:
swerni said:
It's always been a combination of working smart and working hard.
Working hard isn't about impressing by setting at the desk the longest, that's not working hard, that's just sitting at a desk.
Please don't think working smart is a new concept.
Exactly right.Working hard isn't about impressing by setting at the desk the longest, that's not working hard, that's just sitting at a desk.
Please don't think working smart is a new concept.
Some people on here seem to think if they work smart they don't need to work hard, or the two are somehow mutually exclusive. You need to do BOTH.
Triumph Man said:
Evanivitch said:
Triumph Man said:
A sister of one of my friends has just identified As a "trans pansexual demiboy" make up your mind love!
To be blunt, what does it matter to you?ash73 said:
I've already said it's fine if people prioritse work/life balance and are happy to stay where they are; I can't be bothered debating with people who can't read.
I can read quite well despite being a useless millenial. Your posts contradict each other, as although you said at one point it is fine they stay where they are you also have said negative things about them leaving on time and not working late. That's not being fine with them doing normal work days they are paid to do. See below for example:ash73 said:
My experience working with millennials has been quite negative, I'm shocked they are out the door by 4:30pm when I was working late (until 9pm+) nearly every day at their age. I'm semi retired and just work part time as a consultant but I'm always the last person to leave, which doesn't feel right. Their attitude seems to be it's not in their contract to do that, whereas mine was get the job done and I'll be rewarded later.
You are presumably in a position where you are pretty safe with good contacts, can choose what you want and can afford to live if you lost your job now. I know a lot of young people who have lost jobs despite them working very hard. They had done as you did (work regular overtime for free etc) yet the companies got rid of them with basically no thanks. No point in helping companies out in the hope for something good in the future given the job situation for many these days. It's often nothing to do with survival and just short term maximum profits, and so if companies put that over loyalty to their workers then why is it strange workers do what they're paid for and no more? The company I work for does look after us, so you see people are willing to help out and stay late when needed - you get back how you treat people working for you.Edited by NRS on Thursday 15th June 21:56
The expectation is definitely there. Other halfs lot were on the beach before the exams. I'm not at hers all the time but they're always out with already permanent boyfriend (WTF) or friends and parties (WTFFYC) during exam time. I'm not allowed to get angry though.
And update - lots of indifference about exams already. Well bugger me backwards ,,,
You sure as hell can't approach them directly about it either. 'I'm stressed already etc'
In the meantime my p*ss boils ..,,
And update - lots of indifference about exams already. Well bugger me backwards ,,,
You sure as hell can't approach them directly about it either. 'I'm stressed already etc'
In the meantime my p*ss boils ..,,
Edited by Dinlowgoon on Friday 16th June 02:02
Edited by Dinlowgoon on Friday 16th June 02:15
PBDirector said:
Given that there is nothing - I repeat NOTHING - more infuriating than the self-entitled, pompous, middle-class, middle-aged assholes that slowly and arrogantly meander around in Waitrose and in National Trust cafes, I can only hope that generational cultural divergence is a good thing.
It's our only time off! B210bandit said:
Not really. Smoking amongst young adults has dropped from 26% to 19% in six years. They are also drinking a lot less than young people used to.
I have employed a number of millenials and find them to be hard working, polite, and well-informed of the challenges that they face. Certainly a better lot than my cohort when I was their age (I'm 44)
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/risk/tobacco#heading-TwoI have employed a number of millenials and find them to be hard working, polite, and well-informed of the challenges that they face. Certainly a better lot than my cohort when I was their age (I'm 44)
Tobacco stats by age says higher <32yrs
ash73 said:
I would never support anyone in a promotion review if I see them leaving regularly at 4pm, they should be looking for more work and responsibility, not leaving early. It's easy to establish who works remotely just by chatting to people about ongoing issues in the morning.
Our most productive employee is a mother that leaves before 5pm every day to be with her one year old son, and does a bit of work between 8pm and 10pm.Our least productive employee is an older man that sits at his desk from 7am to 6pm every day because he hates his wife and would rather sit in work doing very little than be at home.
One hopes your talent radar has a few more criteria than the damaging, outmoded and faintly ludicrous attachment to an employee's working within an arbitrary timeframe.
Edited by iphonedyou on Friday 16th June 07:13
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff