What Work Moment Made You Go From Proud Employee To "I'm Just Here For The Paycheck."?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:18:41 you are describing me! Top performer year after year. “Promoted” with no title and no money but all the responsibility. Working 7 days a week... told I was “indispensable” and “irreplaceable” . But also I “don’t fit the profile to move from middle to upper management”. You can read between the lines on that one...

Looking for jobs...collecting a check while I bide my time...

Top performer in an odd way shows me you are not a team player.

My best job I enjoyed when everyone worked together and we had no top performer but also no bottom performer.

My most draining team was to “top performers” also pushing for raises, bonus, wanting praise. It is exhausting just as much as the bottom performers you have to deal with to squeeze work out of

You’ve clearly not had true bottom performers. I’ll take a superstar who occasionally demands to be rewarded for it 100x before I take a pliant bag of useless.

I had horrible bottom employees. They drain you. I only had one superstar employee he exhausted me. We were in a corporate function. Not NASA or Google

[Anonymous]

My small privately owned employer who cared so much about its employees, rewarded long-time employees with good salary increases and annual bonuses AND offered amazing benefits was acquired by a behemoth public company that cares only about profits. Everyone I know is working on their resumes. The cost of benefits alone is tantamount to a 10% decrease in salary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Saw an ex-boss cook up a "job description adjustment" that effectively ousted a long-time employee because the boss could not out-and-out fire her.

I knew then that my boss had an evil side, and that she had enough clout in the organization that she would be able to get away with stuff like this. After that I kept my head down, stayed on her good side, and NEVER trusted her about anything. I also disregarded any statements that the organization made like "we're all family." Organizations are not a family--it is simply an exchange of money for services rendered.

I believe my former boss was trying to do this to me. She and another top-level manager were bullies and when I stood up for myself they paid me back with micromanagement. She also had a favorite staffer who she started to train up with new skills he didn't require before. I realized then that she was cultivating him so he could take my job. She posted my job a few weeks ago and wow, the description changed immensely. It's obvious she tailored it for the staffer she was training. I have yet to find out if her staffer glided into the job. She couldn't fire me but she made my life hard to build the team she wanted. Based on the description, I'm no longer qualified for the job I held and excelled at for three years. She wanted to make sure I couldn't even return in a year, I guess. This was also a place that liked to declare we're all family.

[Anonymous]

Interesting debate re bottom performers vs superstars. Could be its own thread. Superstars are exhausting. Very demanding, grabby, and just don't stop so you're forced to draw boundaries in a way that should be counterintuitive. The low performers are a nightmare but at least you have to approach them, they're not always on you. Sometimes you can rehabilitate them into something acceptable but the top performers are never going to stop taking up all the oxygen in the room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting debate re bottom performers vs superstars. Could be its own thread. Superstars are exhausting. Very demanding, grabby, and just don't stop so you're forced to draw boundaries in a way that should be counterintuitive. The low performers are a nightmare but at least you have to approach them, they're not always on you. Sometimes you can rehabilitate them into something acceptable but the top performers are never going to stop taking up all the oxygen in the room.

I hope to God I never work for manager with this short sighted view of leadership. Grade A lesson on how not to lead or manage.

[Anonymous]

When "equity" was tossed around during every staff meeting.

[Anonymous]

I feel like I ebb and flow with this. Some days/weeks I am gung ho for my job and company and some days/weeks I don't care. Been there 18 years.

[Anonymous]

When the emphasis was made clear it was on getting there "on time"and not a minute later, but they really didn't care about the quality of the work.

I am now "on time" and goof off most of the day, like everyone else there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting debate re bottom performers vs superstars. Could be its own thread. Superstars are exhausting. Very demanding, grabby, and just don't stop so you're forced to draw boundaries in a way that should be counterintuitive. The low performers are a nightmare but at least you have to approach them, they're not always on you. Sometimes you can rehabilitate them into something acceptable but the top performers are never going to stop taking up all the oxygen in the room.

Ugh total opposite in my experience. I'd much rather have the superstars. The low performers, in my experience, don't improve and I wind up doing their job and mine. I was so much more productive after 2 people left and I could do all my own work instead of mine plus theirs!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn’t affect me directly but just pre-Covid our department manager was under investigation by HR and dept. employees had to be interviewed about this manager. Then afterwards the org let this same department manager push out everyone who had been interviewed by HR. Our department shrunk like 75% overnight. A few of us who the manager thought were loyal or had stayed quiet survived but we were all like Really??? Thank god for WFH as it means none of us survivors need to be around this manager.

Sounds familiar. AARP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting debate re bottom performers vs superstars. Could be its own thread. Superstars are exhausting. Very demanding, grabby, and just don't stop so you're forced to draw boundaries in a way that should be counterintuitive. The low performers are a nightmare but at least you have to approach them, they're not always on you. Sometimes you can rehabilitate them into something acceptable but the top performers are never going to stop taking up all the oxygen in the room.

Ugh total opposite in my experience. I'd much rather have the superstars. The low performers, in my experience, don't improve and I wind up doing their job and mine. I was so much more productive after 2 people left and I could do all my own work instead of mine plus theirs!

One thing I've learned -- and this is what made me squarely in the "I'm just here for the paycheck" camp -- is that the definition of a "top" vs "bottom" performer is defined primarily by how well you mesh with your supervisor, to a lesser extent how your supervisor meshes with people higher up (so they can better advocate for you) and very little, if hardly any, attention is paid to actual skill or aptitude.

[Anonymous]

i'm a service partner in biglaw and i am burned out. no idea when it happened. i still have moments where i love the job but overall i wish i were independently wealthy so i could just quit working.

don't go to law school, kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:i'm a service partner in biglaw and i am burned out. no idea when it happened. i still have moments where i love the job but overall i wish i were independently wealthy so i could just quit working.

don't go to law school, kids.

You probably already have enough $$$ to quit - just do it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting debate re bottom performers vs superstars. Could be its own thread. Superstars are exhausting. Very demanding, grabby, and just don't stop so you're forced to draw boundaries in a way that should be counterintuitive. The low performers are a nightmare but at least you have to approach them, they're not always on you. Sometimes you can rehabilitate them into something acceptable but the top performers are never going to stop taking up all the oxygen in the room.

Ugh total opposite in my experience. I'd much rather have the superstars. The low performers, in my experience, don't improve and I wind up doing their job and mine. I was so much more productive after 2 people left and I could do all my own work instead of mine plus theirs!

One thing I've learned -- and this is what made me squarely in the "I'm just here for the paycheck" camp -- is that the definition of a "top" vs "bottom" performer is defined primarily by how well you mesh with your supervisor, to a lesser extent how your supervisor meshes with people higher up (so they can better advocate for you) and very little, if hardly any, attention is paid to actual skill or aptitude.

yup it's all networking which is really just politics which is really just back in high school again

my last performance review was that I need to show more leadership.

Sorry I'm not going to do more work for the same paycheck. If you want me to lead/do more then pay me more this isn't a charity

[Anonymous]

Watching my boss promote a financial admin/billing clerk up to Manager of Procurement. This was after months of watching her husband fix boss's car, and boss bringing in his old camping gear for her son. Boss has sons - give that stuff to them. Oh, and lots of hour long behind closed door meetings about "paying suppliers".