Asklemmy

43945 readers

642 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

if you like doing your job and going home, how do you bear with coworkers who are lazier but more popular than you and get away with doing less? (linux.community)

submitted 4 months ago by vestmoria@linux.community to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

42 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://linux.community/post/1144192

you might be an introvert, passionate about your job, or simply old enough to disregard friendships at work because you already have enough friends and a family.

The coworkers I like the most are the ones that come to work, don't like drama, do their job and go home. That's what I try to do.

However, there are always some established cliques who know how to play the unit / supervisor and get away doing much less, even feeling entitled to order you around, even though they are not your supervisor.

To people who experience this. How do you tolerate it? Even after changing jobs, this can happen at your new workplace, maybe it happens in every workplace?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 16 points 4 months ago (2 children)

If the whole world agreed to do 20% less work I think we’d all be fine and slightly more relaxed. Progress is overrated.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Especially in business, it's like, who are we competing against - hostile aliens?? Nah, it's just us humans, trying to get by. We could be tossing eachother softballs, everyone winning, but instead there's this self-fulfilling fear of an existential threat from "rivals."

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Omg you knocked it out of the park with this one. Everything is such a race to the bottom in this system.

It's always about competitive undercutting, and what's the most ruthless cold-blooded calculations one can get away with, and this Type A disease of being obsessed with zero-sum conflict to reveal who's the absolute best of everything.

"Why can't we just chill and it'll get there when it gets there?"

"What?! Look at (for example) China! Do you see them chilling? No! They normalized 12 hour shift burnout before us, this will increase their production 3%, and then undercut us by 12% and steal all our business and we're screwed! So we need to squeeze our people harder to beat them!"

"...And then they'll squeeze their people harder...so...?"

"..."

"This might be a good time to inform you we expect you to train the new overseas team before we'll surprise ambush-fire your entire department."

...Repeat the above but for undocumented immigrant labor...then maybe child labor...then probably right back around to slavery again...

"Oh no we all agreed this would be so bad for humanity, but gee, the competition did it and we wanna stay competitive so..."

Man seriously why can't we all just be doing our own thing lol...

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 months ago

God yeah, a hundred percent, great illustration of exactly what I was alluding to. It's so short sighted. Even the benefits are nothing compared to the heights we could reach if we oriented our economics around coopération.

Cruelly, this system "works" (or at least is successful in perpetuating its existence) right up until the point of resource collapse (or revolution, if we're looking at the good ending).

Thanks for your reply. I was pretty happy with this comment, so am chuffed to hear you appreciated it.

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago

So true. "Progress" seems to be defined as an arbitrary jagged line that can never ever seem to be high enough. What's the point then? 🤔