And is a worker obligated to work at a company that doesn't meet their (the worker's) needs?
I do not see the employer-employee relationship as a one-way street and would refuse to work at a company with this kind of orientation. It has never been a problem to find organizations with a different orientation.
There exists no axiom that says an employee is obligated to work at a company. For workers at a sufficient level of skill, resources, and privileges, the working relationship at a core level is centralized on the needs for both entities; there is a mutuality in regards to getting needs met.
Of course there are organizations that basically exploit and abuse their employees; many of us have the privilege and experience to be discerning such that we can completely avoid companies like that. For lesser-paying jobs, a worker's needs are still completely valid and almost always taken into consideration by both parties.
For instance, we usually require a paycheck, and we often have well-defined, quantitative needs around this. I am not going to work somewhere that pays me $0.15 per hour, to use an extreme edge case.
Some other common employee needs:
* to work somewhere with a good work-life balance.
* challenging and non-tedious work
* to be around people who aren't sociopaths.
* to work at an organization that isn't paralyzed by micro-managing pseudoprocesses.
* to work at place that doesn't require the installation of spyware or middle-managementware on our devices.
The list goes on.
How about you? Do you not have any needs in regards to where and how you are employed?
Comments
And is a worker obligated to work at a company that doesn't meet their (the worker's) needs?
I do not see the employer-employee relationship as a one-way street and would refuse to work at a company with this kind of orientation. It has never been a problem to find organizations with a different orientation.
There exists no axiom that says an employee is obligated to work at a company. For workers at a sufficient level of skill, resources, and privileges, the working relationship at a core level is centralized on the needs for both entities; there is a mutuality in regards to getting needs met.
Of course there are organizations that basically exploit and abuse their employees; many of us have the privilege and experience to be discerning such that we can completely avoid companies like that. For lesser-paying jobs, a worker's needs are still completely valid and almost always taken into consideration by both parties.
For instance, we usually require a paycheck, and we often have well-defined, quantitative needs around this. I am not going to work somewhere that pays me $0.15 per hour, to use an extreme edge case.
Some other common employee needs:
* to work somewhere with a good work-life balance.
* challenging and non-tedious work
* to be around people who aren't sociopaths.
* to work at an organization that isn't paralyzed by micro-managing pseudoprocesses.
* to work at place that doesn't require the installation of spyware or middle-managementware on our devices.
The list goes on.
How about you? Do you not have any needs in regards to where and how you are employed?