Things that annoy you.com ,The new thread by Ad7 - HAPPY DAYS!

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Somebody Else's Problem
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
Location: Wherever you want me to be, baby

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Somebody Else's Problem » Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:39 pm

I also hate answering the phone at work.

Unfortunately I work in a contact center.

Image
User avatar
Squinty
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Norn Oirland

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Squinty » Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:39 am

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:I also hate answering the phone at work.

Unfortunately I work in a contact center.


I echo this. A small percentage of my calls are people yelling at me or folks who are suicidal.

Everytime I answer I have 'what am I going to get now' in the back of head. It's not a pleasant experience.

User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Oblomov Boblomov » Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:51 am

I actively encourage people to use their phones in order to cut down on the hideous level of email traffic we have :shifty:.

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Moggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:23 am

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:I actively encourage people to use their phones in order to cut down on the hideous level of email traffic we have :shifty:.


Are you sure that it is the director that is the psycho at your workplace?

User avatar
Errkal
Social Sec.
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings
Contact:

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Errkal » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:25 am

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:I actively encourage people to use their phones in order to cut down on the hideous level of email traffic we have :shifty:.


Instant messenger.

User avatar
Frank
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Frank » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:31 am

E-mails are a written record of conversations. I'm genuinely not sure why anyone in a work environment would choose to use a method where if anything goes wrong it's literally just your word against someone else's.

Image
User avatar
Errkal
Social Sec.
Joined in 2011
Location: Hastings
Contact:

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Errkal » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:39 am

Frank wrote:E-mails are a written record of conversations. I'm genuinely not sure why anyone in a work environment would choose to use a method where if anything goes wrong it's literally just your word against someone else's.


Message archiving. Skype for business integrates with the email system and you get both get a transcript into our conversations folder after the chat is over.

Its good for small questions and such that don't need an email or phone call, also is nice to trust people and not perpetuate a blame culture.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Moggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:42 am

Frank wrote:E-mails are a written record of conversations. I'm genuinely not sure why anyone in a work environment would choose to use a method where if anything goes wrong it's literally just your word against someone else's.


Plus they do not disturb peoples work in the same way as phone calls. When you are trying to write a letter and have to answer the phone three or four times, it really hurts your concentration.

User avatar
Frank
Member
Joined in 2009

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Frank » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:42 am

Yeah, stuff like that makes wayyyy more sense than a phonecall (@Errkal)It's usually the old bois at work who don't like emails or instant messenger or anything but it's obviously the better way of working.

Image
User avatar
Albear
Moderator
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Albear » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:44 am

Moggy wrote:
Frank wrote:E-mails are a written record of conversations. I'm genuinely not sure why anyone in a work environment would choose to use a method where if anything goes wrong it's literally just your word against someone else's.


Plus they do not disturb peoples work in the same way as phone calls. When you are trying to write a post and have to answer the phone three or four times, it really hurts your concentration.


Fixed

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Moggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:47 am

Albear wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Frank wrote:E-mails are a written record of conversations. I'm genuinely not sure why anyone in a work environment would choose to use a method where if anything goes wrong it's literally just your word against someone else's.


Plus they do not disturb peoples work in the same way as phone calls. When you are trying to write a post and have to answer the phone three or four times, it really hurts your concentration.


Fixed


Pfft like I concentrate on writing my GRcade posts.

User avatar
Drumstick
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
AKA: Vampbuster

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Drumstick » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:48 am

What seriously presses my buttons is when I have specifically requested a written account of something from someone and they try and talk to me about it over the phone. No, I requested a written record of it for a reason. One person in particular is very annoying when it comes to this.

One man should not have this much power in this game. Luckily I'm not an ordinary man.
Image Image
"economically unviable"
-Oblomov Boblomov
User avatar
Hyperion
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Beyond the wall

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Hyperion » Fri Feb 16, 2018 9:41 am

Email if it's business related and a record needs to be kept, IM otherwise. Phone never. If you want to talk to me come to my office.

Image Image
User avatar
Lotus
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Lotus » Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:17 am

All this 'women are paid less than men' bullshit being bandied about lately. Another article on the BBC website today deliberately distorting the facts to make it seem like there's a huge discrepancy and that women are being discriminated against, when in reality it's an earnings difference based on bonuses and overtime. The Guardian are guilty of this as well. Surely if you feel there's a problem and want people to recognise it/do something about it, then telling the truth is a better way of doing it than deceiving your readers.

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Moggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:30 am

Lotus wrote:All this 'women are paid less than men' bullshit being bandied about lately. Another article on the BBC website today deliberately distorting the facts to make it seem like there's a huge discrepancy and that women are being discriminated against, when in reality it's an earnings difference based on bonuses and overtime. The Guardian are guilty of this as well. Surely if you feel there's a problem and want people to recognise it/do something about it, then telling the truth is a better way of doing it than deceiving your readers.


Not quite. The article makes clear the main difference is because of bonuses and overtime. It also makes clear that there is still a pay gap when you take out bonuses and overtime.

Senior NHS female doctors are earning less than their male counterparts, a BBC investigation shows.

Of the top 100 earning consultants in England, just five are women, despite more than a third of the workforce being female.

The top-paid man earned nearly £740,000 - two-and-a-half times that of the top woman.

On average, full-time women consultants earned nearly £14,000 a year less than men - a pay gap of 12%.

Senior female doctors described the findings as "disappointing" and said it showed more needs to be done to tackle the gender pay gap in medicine.

The figures were obtained by the BBC following requests to individual health trusts, the government and NHS Digital.

◾The top earning male consultant in England earned £739,460 in 2016-17
◾The best paid woman got £281,616 by comparison
◾On average, full-time men in England earned £127,683, nearly £14,000 more than full-time women
◾When you strip out overtime and bonuses and just look at basic pay there was nearly £1,500 difference
◾Six-and-a-half times as many men as women in England and Wales get the top platinum award bonus worth £77,000 a year
◾In Northern Ireland the gap between men and women's gross earnings was over £8,000

Some doctors the BBC spoke to said some of the difference was probably down to the fact men were more likely to do overtime.

But they said it was clear some of the gap was unfair with the system of bonuses and awards weighted in favour of men.

Dr Anthea Mowat, of the British Medical Association, said despite recent progress on gender pay, the figures obtained by the BBC showed there was "clearly still a long way to go".

She said women needed more support, including leadership training, mentoring and more flexible working opportunities.

"With women making up the majority of medical graduates in recent years, it's vitally important that we address the root causes of the gender pay gap, and develop a wider programme of work to eliminate it across the medical workforce," she added.

Dr Jacky Davis, a radiologist and former chair of the NHS Consultants Association, said she was "surprised and disappointed" by the figures.

"Some of it we can explain - men are more likely to do overtime for example - but that doesn't account for it all. In my experience men are better at pushing for more money, putting the case for awards and they get them."

Dr Sally Davies, of the Medical Woman's Federation, agreed.

"We need to do more to support women. They often fall behind when they have children and have to take time off.

"By the time they get to the point where overtime is available or the awards are being handed out they find themselves behind men. It's a serious problem."

Danny Mortimer, chief executive of NHS Employers, said: "This appears to be a long-term and serious problem within the medical workforce which the government, the profession and employers are committed to resolving."

He said one of the causes was the consultants' contract - in the past it has been argued it allows high premiums to be charged for overtime and creates a bonus system that is skewed.

The government and BMA are currently in negotiations about the future of the contract.

The Department of Health and Social Care said: "We are committed to ensuring that our hardworking doctors are rewarded fairly and equally for their work — regardless of gender — and have commissioned an independent report alongside the medical profession to examine exactly how that can be achieved."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-43077465

User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by <]:^D » Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:49 am

not surprised that Lotus is railing against 'duh femanists!111' :roll:

User avatar
Lagamorph
Member ♥
Joined in 2010

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Lagamorph » Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:52 am

At least in this case they're comparing the same type of jobs, unlike that Tesco bullshit one where they're claiming unequal pay despite doing totally different jobs in totally different locations.

Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Moggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:54 am

<]:^D wrote:not surprised that Lotus is railing against 'duh femanists!111' :roll:


He doesn’t seem to like them very much. :lol:

search.php?keywords=Women&terms=all&author=Lotus&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

User avatar
Lotus
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Lotus » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:03 am

So the real story is that on average they're paid £1,500 less a year. Not sure that's worthy of an article on the BBC website, and if they're being paid less for the same role with the same hours and the same experience then yes, do something about it and address the imbalance. I just get annoyed with the hyperbolic headlines and endless 'victim' narrative, when 9/10 it's a difference in what people earn, not what they're paid.

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Moggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:08 am

Lotus wrote:So the real story is that on average they're paid £1,500 less a year. Not sure that's worthy of an article on the BBC website, and if they're being paid less for the same role with the same hours and the same experience then yes, do something about it and address the imbalance. I just get annoyed with the hyperbolic headlines and endless 'victim' narrative, when 9/10 it's a difference in what people earn, not what they're paid.


I am sure you would be delighted to be paid £1,500pa less just because of your genitals.

And that isn’t what the article says. Because of this line:

But they said it was clear some of the gap was unfair with the system of bonuses and awards weighted in favour of men.


So it is actually more than £1,500pa, because the bonuses and awards are weighted in favour of men.

The differences in overtime pay can be far enough, depending on how overtime is dealt with. Are men encouraged to do more overtime? Are women discouraged from doing it? Is the overtime available for everyone? Is it just assumed that “women have kids, they’ll never do overtime” and so they are never asked or asked less often?

Edit:

Also:

◾The top earning male consultant in England earned £739,460 in 2016-17
◾The best paid woman got £281,616 by comparison
◾On average, full-time men in England earned £127,683, nearly £14,000 more than full-time women
◾When you strip out overtime and bonuses and just look at basic pay there was nearly £1,500 difference
◾Six-and-a-half times as many men as women in England and Wales get the top platinum award bonus worth £77,000 a year
◾In Northern Ireland the gap between men and women's gross earnings was over £8,000


That's some pretty serious differences in pay. And there were also these charts attached to the article:

Image

Image

Image


Return to “Stuff”