Good thing alcohol kills germs.
While I agree that five bathroom breaks in an 8-hour period should be sufficient, I think they should all be unscheduled. First, not everyone pees on the same schedule, so I think you should trust your workers to know when THEY have to pee. Second, I would think that if everyone in the damn plant is trying to pee at the same time, it would cause a huge bottleneck that would delay people from returning to work.
Christ, let people pee when they want to, even if you feel you have to limit the number of times they can do so.
Christ, let people pee when they want to, even if you feel you have to limit the number of times they can do so.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
Or perhaps let the employees each make an individual bathroom schedule. I don't know about you guys but I tend to need a bathroom break at roughly the same time(s) each day anyway, so if I were allowed to create my own schedule and had the one "emergency" unscheduled break I'd be fine. Besides, I fail to see how this policy is much different from being in High School. I remember having to hold it for the remainder of a class a couple times, no big deal.
ZV
It's pretty obvious just how incredibly stupid this policy is. Jim is off of my to drink list now. Doesn't matter too much I guess-I'm more of a beer man-it's a more social drink.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,511
- 20,140
- 146
Exactly. And they've made it clear that there can be medical exceptions with a valid note from their doctor.
What no one here seems to understand is that this is production line work. If a person leaves their post, they MUST be replaced or the line comes grinding to a halt (costing them thousands of dollars a minute). They schedule and stagger the breaks so that the replacements can fill the required slots. If they didn't, EVERY worker would need a replacement. And that's just silly and expensive.
They are NOT sending them to the bathroom all at once. This policy is in place to KEEP them from going to the bathroom all at once.
I have a feeling the stories of workers pissing their pants are greatly exaggerated.
HomeBrewerDude
Lifer
- Jan 18, 2001
- 14,465
- 1
- 0
The problem with the policy is that it is obvious that Managment doesn't trust the staff to make even the most simplist decisions. Maybe management is justified in their mistrust, and maybe not. The point is that to have a healthly and productive organization, workers have to have a minimal amount of autonomy.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
And in grade schools, middle schools, and high schools all over the world. Read the article, sift through the anti-corporate propaganda, and notice that the policy allows for an obviously reasonable amount of breaks. If you can't go two to three hours between restroom breaks, then it should be no trouble at all to get a medical waiver.
ZV
hahaahahahahaah
rotflmao
don't think i'll drink from that company for at least a year. let all the 'bad' bottles get out of the system. i'm sure some of the employees found other places to piss in than their pants. and it would blend perfectly.
You totally missed my point...
As a grown man i should have the right to decide when i need to use the bathroom, NOBODY should decide when i need to use the bathroom but me...
I am happy that i live in a country where employees are treated with respect..
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,511
- 20,140
- 146
I'll bet you money that any production line work in your country has rules about bathroom breaks. If they didn't, the line would constantly be stopping.
And people wonder why the west is outsourcing production line work? It's ignorance like this.
The company must have had a problem with people leaving their posts too many times if they had to put in a policy like this. I see no problem with getting 4 trips in eight hours. Unless these people are consuming mass quantities of liquids then they should be able to make it two hours between breaks. And the company does allow medical waivers. I don't feel any pity for the workers, they can look for a different job if they don't like it.
True.
But it is odd that this policy only affects the workers on the bottling line at one plant.
Sounds to me like there may have been abuses by the union workers before, as tcsenter mentioned.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
If grown men and women weren't exploiting the previous unlimited bathroom break policy, the new policy would not exist. Believe it or not, companies don't just institute policies like this because of a sadistic bent, rather they resort to them as a last recourse when supposedly mature adults take advantage of and abuse more permissive policies. The workers created the necessity for this policy. They have no-one to blame but themselves.
ZV
Does that really make sense to you? Wouldn't it be more fair to warn the people who abuse the policy? Maybe the people who do "abuse" the policy actually have a reason to do so?
Pliablemoose
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 25,195
- 0
- 56
Zenmervolt, please explain how this is better than prison?
IMHO, if management can't cull the good from the bad employees, they don't belong in management, this bathroom policy is they type of distributive justice that gives capitalism a bad name...
IMHO, if management can't cull the good from the bad employees, they don't belong in management, this bathroom policy is they type of distributive justice that gives capitalism a bad name...
Read my answer to AmusedOne... To punish everyone for the wrongdoings of a few is not very smart... in the end, i think this policy will prove to be counterproductive...
How are you going to respect your employer when he has no respect for you?
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,511
- 20,140
- 146
Oh good gawd.
You have a production line with 1000 workers. To stop the line costs thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars each minute, so stopping the line is out of the question. Not one worker can leave the line without being replaced, or the line goes down. To give them the chance to take breaks, you hire 200 replacement workers who's job it is to go down the line and replace workers as they take breaks. Those 200 replacement workers ALSO need breaks. So, for all intents and purposes, you only have 150 replacement worker available at any one time.
Now, what happens if more than 150 regular line workers take a break at once?
The line comes grinding to a halt.
This has nothing to do with "bad" or "good" employees. It has to do with keeping breaks organized so that everyone gets a fair amount of breaks, and the line keeps running.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,511
- 20,140
- 146
That's the point. You cannot single out workers and make different policies for different workers unless thay have a verifiable special need. To do so will invite discrimination lawsuits. Therefore you must make your policies arbitrary and have them apply to everyone equally.
It's the same anywhere.
Or their co-workers who were abusing the system...if there is an issue with people abusing the bathroom, making a ludicrous and draconian policy will not solve the problem. It may cover it up so that the management can more easily ignore it, though.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter