This is not a joke

  • came_apart_at_Kmart [he/him, comrade/them]
    ·
    1 year ago

    my work self-identifies as having generous sick benefits. in that, sick days earned do not expire. that's the generous part: you can bank many sick days over the years of employment.

    the other day i was listening to an elderly (<1 year from "retirement" aka medicare benefits and social security payments) colleague. she had to have a pacemaker installed (the list price for this was $200k, but she's "only" out of pocket about $900). she tentatively took 1 week off to recover and then decided to take an additional week. this triggered a vague email from HR about how she needed to have a doctor's note filled out by the doctor's office (which charges her out of pocket for this service) because it was more than 3 days in a row of sick days. sick days that she has accrued, btw.

    so she was in this panic trying to figure out this b.s. paper shuffle because the email from HR said it was to "protect her job". she contacted her supervisor, who of course knows nothing about any of this, but that person contacted someone they knew in HR, who said as long as the supervisor approves, she doesn't need the form filled out.

    i was like, "sick days are an earned part of compensation. people should be able to use them however they want and no one's supervisor should have any say in what their employees do with them to protect their health." which was passively agreed upon but recognized as not the way the institution thinks.

    this country is fucked and the continued blocking of universal healthcare is a critical mechanism for undermining labor power.

      • came_apart_at_Kmart [he/him, comrade/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        yeah, it's pretty stupid. the amount of control bosses exercise over our lives is perverse and far too much of my sanity is spent pretending to be grateful for their supposed magnanimity for not abusing me to the fullest extent allowed by the law/custom. some have absolutely no clue how much anxiety and animosity they casually generate by whimsically toying with people's real material needs.

        i was listening to some left-academic pod about a history of violence in the workplace in the US, and apparently the level of violence in the US has not really changed much over the last hundred years. people used to totally bring guns to work and shoot up the place. but the difference between then and now is how it was directed. they used to shoot supervisors/managers, and take people in charge hostage. the animosity went up the ladder, as it was recognized the bosses were the source of tension. now it's turned outward, so when american's snap they shoot other workers over whatever some newsreader on the tv or the radio told them to get maddest about. it's so grim.

        if the workers here ever recognized who their real enemies are and directed their rage and violence accordingly, it would be a feeding frenzy.

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]
          ·
          1 year ago

          It always mystifies me when people shoot up their franchise or branch office or whatever instead of going to the corporate headquarters and putting bullets in the people responsible for their misery, but i guess no or negative class solidarity or :frothingfash: :brainworms: is the explanation after all.

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        America's "labor standards" compared to almost any other industrialized countries, and even many severely marginalized countries, are appalling. And even the rights that exist on paper are often denied to workers with little or no recourse.