Yes, Bottom Line is profit, Dollars and cents.
If it is a simple relation between employer and empolyee, the world
will be "great". So, how come the company dun practise OT pay but
insist the workers to work extra time but no extra pay since its
juz abt money?
How come most companies expect the workers to devote themselves
wholeheartedly to the company and yet expect them to recieve
peanuts. Come on, everybody is earning a living
I am not being ideaistic or being a saint, i am juz asking for
"fairness"(although its diffcult to be all the same).
My dad's company is earning and getting profit(boss is earning
lah)
Of course, they dun ask for few thousands or millions increment,
but juz a $50 or $100 increment and i dun see y not if the company
is EARNING.
So, if its liked wat u said, profit and nothing else, me
sympathised those who work under u, caused u lack of one
thing....
COMPASSION.
And to answer ur question, ( dunn the field of work u refer to. So
i take it as admin work)
Some older guys (ard 40 to 50) are more mature and stable in
handling situation than the (24 to 29)young man.
Regards
For those already working under u, it is in fact wise to
increase their pays etc to moltivate them to perform better.
However the situation here is not describing about workers already
working in a company. It is about companies employing "OLD" workers
into it. Why want to use the money tat can be used to better reward
your current workers on someone who did not contribute neither do
they seems to be contribute much in future ?
For your information. This forums is describing about people who
had hit beyond 50+ finding a new job. Does a 50+ years old worker
work harder and better than a 20-40 years old worker given both r
applying for the same job ?
I know compassion. But do u know wat is practical and face reality
? U may say I am being uncompassionate. But which companies do it
to such a point tat they employ old 50+ workers instead of young
workers ?
Keyword to note is tend. What's to say there aren't stupid,
arrogant, tactless, unethical even unheathly youngsters? Nuff
labelling, there are such people on both ends so stereotyping them
to back your cause is to say the least, flawed.
Point is if they can contribute value on par where biological
attributes are secondary, should employers close the door on them,
just because they have higher digits in age and more wrinkles. My
POV, honchos who do so cut themselves out on the share of
talents.
The point to note is all else being equal except experiences and
age. Is having a lot of experiences at a different companies really
more beneficial tat it covers the problems tat old age bring
?
As I said before, some jobs do requires extensive experiences in a
field. These workers will not be afraid of being kicked out of
their companies if experiences is so important. As said before, SM
Lee and the COE of UOB are already at retirement age. Do they worry
about being retrench or kicked out by companies ? The companies r
there to judge whether does tis older worker perform better than
enlisting a new one who also got 10+ years of experiences.