Lowes

[spr1975wshs]

2nd night in a row that the skeleton crew had the limbs cut off.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

2nd night in a row that the skeleton crew had the limbs cut off.

And it's not even Halloween yet.

 

[spr1975wshs]

Glad foot traffic in the store was light tonight.

Due to no shows and call offs, I was the only cashier for self checkout and the front line registers for almost 2 hours.
I had 8 self checkout machine to myself, plus I had to open up a regular register several times.
One of our loaders covered my break.

We had one cashier each in the Garden Center and down at the Lumber end.

Both head cashiers left early. The front end department supervisor was alone at customer service after 7.

Corporate is trying to save money by cutting payroll.
Another factor is folks who take the job, but do not show up when scheduled.

 

[Louise]

Glad foot traffic in the store was light tonight.

Due to no shows and call offs, I was the only cashier for self checkout and the front line registers for almost 2 hours.
I had 8 self checkout machine to myself, plus I had to open up a regular register several times.
One of our loaders covered my break.

We had one cashier each in the Garden Center and down at the Lumber end.

Both head cashiers left early. The front end department supervisor was alone at customer service after 7.

Corporate is trying to save money by cutting payroll.
Another factor is folks who take the job, but do not show up when scheduled.

You are a loyal Lowes employee. Not right.

 

[NOTSMC]

Glad foot traffic in the store was light tonight.

Due to no shows and call offs, I was the only cashier for self checkout and the front line registers for almost 2 hours.
I had 8 self checkout machine to myself, plus I had to open up a regular register several times.
One of our loaders covered my break.

We had one cashier each in the Garden Center and down at the Lumber end.

Both head cashiers left early. The front end department supervisor was alone at customer service after 7.

Corporate is trying to save money by cutting payroll.
Another factor is folks who take the job, but do not show up when scheduled.

Gawd I HATED days like that at Lowes. I was the PTC at that store for nearly seven years and on occasion they would call me up front when we got shorthanded. I carried a pocketful of my change and bills w/me because I was constantly closing the drawer before I got out the right change and it never once balanced out when I finished. Multi-tasking was a challenge. You were expected to be pleasant, chit chat with the yappers, ring everything up quickly, AND give the right change. Pick one man...geez

 

[LtownTaxpayer]

You work for the GOV right? One of the managers that I talk to said that the GOV HR department is riddled with complaints and grievances from people who were told they need to come back to the office. Quite a few people relocated out of state even though they were supposed to remain "local" according to their telework status. Its crazy!

In many cases, it also has to do with locality pay. They got the locality pay based on the cost of living for where they live and work. If they are teleworking from somewhere else, why should they continue to get the locality pay for the work site. I had to listen to this garbage during multiple zoom meetings. It was incredibly annoying - to put it mildly.

 

[OccamsRazor]

In many cases, it also has to do with locality pay. They got the locality pay based on the cost of living for where they live and work. If they are teleworking from somewhere else, why should they continue to get the locality pay for the work site. I had to listen to this garbage during multiple zoom meetings. It was incredibly annoying - to put it mildly.

Same applies to those who never notified that they were moving to another locality yet, still being paid for this one. Isn't that theft? From what I have heard, there are/were a LOT of instances of this happening yet, HR does not seem to want to deal with it.

 

[HemiHauler]

Same applies to those who never notified that they were moving to another locality yet, still being paid for this one. Isn't that theft? From what I have heard, there are/were a LOT of instances of this happening yet, HR does not seem to want to deal with it.

The whole idea of locality pay is dumb - even for government. The salary one negotiates should be reflective of the production they can deliver to the project/profit/etc., if they live in Algiers or Avenue. Seems to be productive employees are capable of the same productivity no matter where they actually live.

So what if they are the wealthiest person/family in the smallest town of their state.

 

[SamSpade]

The whole idea of locality pay is dumb - even for government. The salary one negotiates should be reflective of the production they can deliver to the project/profit/etc., if they live in Algiers or Avenue.

Except YOU know that with government, you don't negotiate salary - it's a pay scale, and it's a grid with steps and the pay is MOSTLY *set*.

If you do a great job - tough chit. You don't GET a 5 or 10% raise. You MIGHT get a step increase for performance, but those are rare. You MIGHT get a grade increase, but in my area, most of the positions are locked into the budget - you have a certain amount per pay grade. Too damned bad.

If you're a step 10 and there's nothing open above you, you're either stuck or you have to compete at another agency - but doing a stellar job really doesn't get you much. Worse, they used to pay bonuses based on performance after your review - but the union balked at that, and now most people get the same bonus regardless of performance.

So most federal employees get pay increases a finite number of ways - step increase (which are almost entirely based on years in grade) grade increase, which are promotions, yearly increase in January, which are USUALLY a pittance and were ZERO for several years under Obama - or 1% -

Or if they're lucky, they may get locality pay.

 

[HemiHauler]

Except YOU know that with government, you don't negotiate salary - it's a pay scale, and it's a grid with steps and the pay is MOSTLY *set*.

If you do a great job - tough chit. You don't GET a 5 or 10% raise. You MIGHT get a step increase for performance, but those are rare. You MIGHT get a grade increase, but in my area, most of the positions are locked into the budget - you have a certain amount per pay grade. Too damned bad.

If you're a step 10 and there's nothing open above you, you're either stuck or you have to compete at another agency - but doing a stellar job really doesn't get you much. Worse, they used to pay bonuses based on performance after your review - but the union balked at that, and now most people get the same bonus regardless of performance.

So most federal employees get pay increases a finite number of ways - step increase (which are almost entirely based on years in grade) grade increase, which are promotions, yearly increase in January, which are USUALLY a pittance and were ZERO for several years under Obama - or 1% -

Or if they're lucky, they may get locality pay.

Fair. I’ve never been on the GS scale/civil servant but sounds like the perfect way to ensure staff shows up and puts out a modicum of effort.

Serious question: aside for the ostensible satisfaction of serving the nation (which ain’t for me, but I’m aware that is a thing), what is the motivation to do any more than the bare minimum in government service?

 

[SamSpade]

Fair. I’ve never been on the GS scale/civil servant but sounds like the perfect way to ensure staff shows up and puts out a modicum of effort.

Serious question: aside for the ostensible satisfaction of serving the nation (which ain’t for me, but I’m aware that is a thing), what is the motivation to do any more than the bare minimum in government service?

There isn't any, although truth be told, some just simply have pride in their work.

And they sadly have to carry the azzhats who really do less than zero. They're damned close to impossible to fire, because they've learned every loophole, so we just - work around them. And every section usually has ONE. Sometimes, it's just a bad hire and the person is a nitwit - and they get MOVED around a lot - because they're useless and giving them work may result in LOWER productiivity - aka everyone else doing it twice.

I've seen people bring in little TVs or never make it to their desk all day while their co-workers roll their eyes and keep plugging. Or play radios - or video games. All freaking day - and the rest of us get the work done.

The upside is - I keep my job. Period. I get paid reasonably well, and my superiors make sure I get the plum assignments. They may look at my work and look the other way when I take time off.

It used to piss me off when Limbaugh, in one of his moments when I didn't like what he said, kept indicating why if government workers were so great, why didn't they go somewhere else? Well lots of them DID. The hardest people to keep were low-level techs who were really good at their jobs - within a year they were gone. And a lot of them really are terrible. For me, I DID leave - and got laid off after a couple years. I went back. With all the compensation and benefits, I'm great.

 

[spr1975wshs]

You are a loyal Lowes employee. Not right.

My loyalty is to my co-workers and my customers.

 

[OccamsRazor]

Except YOU know that with government, you don't negotiate salary - it's a pay scale, and it's a grid with steps and the pay is MOSTLY *set*.

If you do a great job - tough chit. You don't GET a 5 or 10% raise. You MIGHT get a step increase for performance, but those are rare. You MIGHT get a grade increase, but in my area, most of the positions are locked into the budget - you have a certain amount per pay grade. Too damned bad.

If you're a step 10 and there's nothing open above you, you're either stuck or you have to compete at another agency - but doing a stellar job really doesn't get you much. Worse, they used to pay bonuses based on performance after your review - but the union balked at that, and now most people get the same bonus regardless of performance.

So most federal employees get pay increases a finite number of ways - step increase (which are almost entirely based on years in grade) grade increase, which are promotions, yearly increase in January, which are USUALLY a pittance and were ZERO for several years under Obama - or 1% -

Or if they're lucky, they may get locality pay.

From what I have been told, a lot of what is required to get moved up in the GOV relies on people above you putting in the work to get you the promotion. Workers can break their backs and earn high or perfect marks on their performance reviews, handle multiple assignments, and be a stellar employee. If their bosses don't bother to fight for their promotion, then they simply get a little extra in their pay (like a couple hundred dollars for the entire year) and that's it.
My neighbor has a guy who has a primary duty, is doing 2 other side jobs for his unit, and assists another entity. This guy is working his full hours (not from home and has been in-person throughout COVID) and has received top marks on his performance reviews for the last 3 years. He has been recommended for promotion 2 times. Bupkis!

 

[SamSpade]

My neighbor has a guy who has a primary duty, is doing 2 other side jobs for his unit, and assists another entity. This guy is working his full hours (not from home and has been in-person throughout COVID) and has received top marks on his performance reviews for the last 3 years. He has been recommended for promotion 2 times. Bupkis!

(shrug) In SOME ways, not too different from the corporate world. The only hindrance is from my experience - a boss or higher up only has so much influence over selection - after that, whatever your personnel or human resources department says takes over.

Like it or not, things like affirmative action and other factors play heavily into selecting or promoting a candidate - and to be blunt, it means we have very often gotten staff that are not at all equipped to actually do the job.

So this leads to what you have probably seen a LOT in government - job requirements SO VERY SPECIFIC only a very few candidates could POSSIBLY meet them. And that's intentional. They have someone or a few people they seriously want to promote, but they have to open the position to any and all applicants. So they list as requirements like so many years experience on a system or project related work that just a few people will satisfy, because they know that the final decision will not be THEIRS. They can usually only recommend.

But you're right - I have seen people who are overlooked who do great work and others promoted who were clearly not ready.

I DID see something interesting years ago - a woman we were friends with - and she was fun to hang out with - but we all knew was terrible at her job and frequently took afternoons off, came in late or not at all and - well - we wondered how on earth she kept her job.

She got promoted - to management. STILL very bad at work, still not showing up or worse. I didn't know that the union pretty much can only intervene in firings for non-management - and after her next performance review, she was fired - from government.

They PROMOTED her JUST SO THEY COULD succeed in firing her. So it can happen, it's just hard to get rid of bad employees.

 

[OccamsRazor]

(shrug) In SOME ways, not too different from the corporate world. The only hindrance is from my experience - a boss or higher up only has so much influence over selection - after that, whatever your personnel or human resources department says takes over.

Like it or not, things like affirmative action and other factors play heavily into selecting or promoting a candidate - and to be blunt, it means we have very often gotten staff that are not at all equipped to actually do the job.

So this leads to what you have probably seen a LOT in government - job requirements SO VERY SPECIFIC only a very few candidates could POSSIBLY meet them. And that's intentional. They have someone or a few people they seriously want to promote, but they have to open the position to any and all applicants. So they list as requirements like so many years experience on a system or project related work that just a few people will satisfy, because they know that the final decision will not be THEIRS. They can usually only recommend.

But you're right - I have seen people who are overlooked who do great work and others promoted who were clearly not ready.

I DID see something interesting years ago - a woman we were friends with - and she was fun to hang out with - but we all knew was terrible at her job and frequently took afternoons off, came in late or not at all and - well - we wondered how on earth she kept her job.

She got promoted - to management. STILL very bad at work, still not showing up or worse. I didn't know that the union pretty much can only intervene in firings for non-management - and after her next performance review, she was fired - from government.

They PROMOTED her JUST SO THEY COULD succeed in firing her. So it can happen, it's just hard to get rid of bad employees.

And this is why I can understand how motivated people wanting to do good work and succeed can turn into the typical "lazy government worker."

 

[PeoplesElbow]

And this is why I can understand how motivated people wanting to do good work and succeed can turn into the typical "lazy government worker."

There are cases where a supervisor acts like it is their money and their job is to make sure the work can get done with the lowest paid employees possible, then there are ones that promote so they can say they supervise only high level employees or they hire a bunch of support (secretarial) types so they can say they supervise a bunch of employees.

 

[SamSpade]

And this is why I can understand how motivated people wanting to do good work and succeed can turn into the typical "lazy government worker."

I'm certainly not as ambitious as I was when I was a lot younger. That may be true of most of us.

I've seen pretty much two types of the person you described - someone who was ALWAYS going to skate on as little work as possible - and someone who used to be ambitious, but over time just lost it, largely over lack of recognition.

But when I first started at my agency, I worked with a bunch of folks who wrote SOME programs just for fun. And if they were useful, we'd let everyone use them. I worked with a guy who once wrote a simple labeling program that adjusted fonts so you could label your binders. Because he wanted to. I remember he used to scour through some of the system calls to get our editors to do more advanced features.

Back then, I wrote stuff also - mostly data tools, just for me, although once someone saw me using it, they'd ask about it.

Now - yeah - just working to get it done. I do try to make sure it's good stuff but - retirement is just a few years away, and probably the last thing I want is a much harder job just before I call it quits.

 

[1stGenSMIB]

The machine (gov't/Lowes/retail/whatever) is too big for one person or even small group to fix. IMO, the entire thing has been broken a long time.

I would like to enjoy a few years without work before I am too old and fat to enjoy it.

I had big aspirations when I was younger, but at some point everyone comes to the epiphany that your time is limited on this little blue marble, and I gave up trying to change the world about 10-15 years ago. My goal is to limit my exposure to all the a-holes and fill my life with people I like to be around.

 

[OccamsRazor]

There are cases where a supervisor acts like it is their money and their job is to make sure the work can get done with the lowest paid employees possible, then there are ones that promote so they can say they supervise only high level employees or they hire a bunch of support (secretarial) types so they can say they supervise a bunch of employees.

I've seen pretty much two types of the person you described - someone who was ALWAYS going to skate on as little work as possible - and someone who used to be ambitious, but over time just lost it, largely over lack of recognition.

I'm a firm believer in recognizing and awarding employees that go above and beyond. Without it, you only discourage that employee to work hard and then encourage them to lower their standards to the lowest common denominator.

 

[jrt_ms1995]

... and someone who used to be ambitious, but over time just lost it ...

... retirement is just a few years away ...

Sounds like me; I counted down my last 7 years. When it very nearly got to the point where I no longer cared that I no longer cared, it was time to go.