Lots of interesting news today

mommucked said:
More workers working less hours w different hours would help w the quality of the work, w tired peeps leaving and rested peeps coming in to work.
Click to expand...
And better traffic.
 
Futbalfantic said:
Coming from a blue collar worker.

Great. Cut the hours and the pay.

yes fully jealous
Click to expand...
Why the pay cut? I'd be doing the same or more work and using less resources.
 
jeepinmatt said:
Why the pay cut? I'd be doing the same or more work and using less resources.
Click to expand...
Again... jealousy.

In my line of work (And quite a few others) they pay me for my time. Not my productivity.

Just another thought. This to me feels like the WFH thing. Other sectors of the economy are going to hurt from this.
 
Futbalfantic said:
Again... jealousy.

In my line of work (And quite a few others) they pay me for my time. Not my productivity.

Just another thought. This to me feels like the WFH thing. Other sectors of the economy are going to hurt from this.
Click to expand...
Don't worry, it won't happen. My company has their salaried employees on a time clock :rolleyes: Feels so juvenile.
 
Haven't read the article yet. But from a blue collar, factory, industry point of view and one modeled around zero climate control. Two shifts, weekends, round the clock plant with overtime used to balance demand is how I've saw a lot of production run.
Over time is applied profusely. We are behind, ramp up the hours response.
I don't have to crunch numbers to see the daily decline after 8 much less 6 hrs on any shift. Mundain(sp?) work coupled with physical exersion and hours equals a very unbalance performance late in the day. Add that to mistakes causing scrap and machine damage all that OT is killing the bottom line. Add the employee being disgruntled about the work balance or the other half setting the household spending to match the pay you have a constant bickering and unsettled mind. Lets all face it. Job satisfaction for the grease that keeps the wheels going(average joe) isn't from some rosey feeling of accomplishment or glamour from the daily.
However furnish a bit higher wage, less demanded OT by opening another shift or split shifts to rotate fresh folks in and you create a balance. Not one focused on run time equals numbers, but one based on attitude balances the atmosphere needed for premium productivity. Now match that with consistent firm production quotas not tied to bonus or middle management perks and you create a employee employer contract transparency. No veils of coorporate favorability or unappreciated labor. Get employed folk in out and productive. Leave little room for wandering, complaining, and excesses which draw out the negative. Reward for productivity instead of time committed.

My 2cents.
 
RatLabGuy said:
That is the whole point.
Many white collar jobs are done inefficiently bc people lose focus and fart around bc they hate their life/job balance.

"A happy worker is a hard worker" is the #1 rule of industrial psychology. Its amazing how often it is ignored.
Click to expand...
Virgin and some other companies implemented infinite PTO policies a number of years ago to try and help that. Basically, as long as you do your job, take as much PTO as you want. What they found, is that it also "saved" them money. When you give people a defined number of days/hours, they will try to use it all. But if you just tell them to take off when they want, they actually tend to take less time and only take PTO when they are going on vacation/sick.
 
WARRIORWELDING said:
Haven't read the article yet. But from a blue collar, factory, industry point of view and one modeled around zero climate control. Two shifts, weekends, round the clock plant with overtime used to balance demand is how I've saw a lot of production run.
Over time is applied profusely. We are behind, ramp up the hours response.
I don't have to crunch numbers to see the daily decline after 8 much less 6 hrs on any shift. Mundain(sp?) work coupled with physical exersion and hours equals a very unbalance performance late in the day. Add that to mistakes causing scrap and machine damage all that OT is killing the bottom line. Add the employee being disgruntled about the work balance or the other half setting the household spending to match the pay you have a constant bickering and unsettled mind. Lets all face it. Job satisfaction for the grease that keeps the wheels going(average joe) isn't from some rosey feeling of accomplishment or glamour from the daily.
However furnish a bit higher wage, less demanded OT by opening another shift or split shifts to rotate fresh folks in and you create a balance. Not one focused on run time equals numbers, but one based on attitude balances the atmosphere needed for premium productivity. Now match that with consistent firm production quotas not tied to bonus or middle management perks and you create a employee employer contract transparency. No veils of coorporate favorability or unappreciated labor. Get employed folk in out and productive. Leave little room for wandering, complaining, and excesses which draw out the negative. Reward for productivity instead of time committed.

My 2cents.
Click to expand...
I dont disagree with your thoughts, but hiring new people adds significant cost to the mix. You can typically pay the current employee for alot of OT, vs hiring more. Also, in many environments, they have found that 10 and 12hr shifts add in alot more productivity, vs 6-8. Basically the workers tend to ramp up and down at the ends, and reducing the days and lengthening the shifts eliminates more of that downtime. But our plants arent ones that have alot of repetitive detailed work. Depending on the cell and job within the plant, they work different schedules. Certain cells work 4-10s, some work 5-8s, some 12hr; basically managing backlog within the production cycle to keep the overall process most efficient. They offer alot of OT, but rarely is it mandatory, and there are always people willing to get more $$ by working more hours.
 
WARRIORWELDING said:
I don't have to crunch numbers to see the daily decline after 8 much less 6 hrs on any shift. Mundain(sp?) work coupled with physical exersion and hours equals a very unbalance performance late in the day. Add that to mistakes causing scrap and machine damage all that OT is killing the bottom line. Add the employee being disgruntled about the work balance or the other half setting the household spending to match the pay you have a constant bickering and unsettled mind.
Click to expand...
Lots of truth here.
WARRIORWELDING said:
Reward for productivity instead of time committed.
Click to expand...
With reward comes risk, and most people are averse to that.
 
paradisePWoffrd said:
Virgin and some other companies implemented infinite PTO policies a number of years ago to try and help that. Basically, as long as you do your job, take as much PTO as you want. What they found, is that it also "saved" them money. When you give people a defined number of days/hours, they will try to use it all. But if you just tell them to take off when they want, they actually tend to take less time and only take PTO when they are going on vacation/sick.
Click to expand...
yep.
Several years ago my BIL started working for Epic Games. He was so proud of the "infinite PTO" policy. Each year I have watched him take less and less time off just for fun stuff, now he works all teh time except doc apts for his kids etc..
 
RatLabGuy said:
yep.
Several years ago my BIL started working for Epic Games. He was so proud of the "infinite PTO" policy. Each year I have watched him take less and less time off just for fun stuff, now he works all teh time except doc apts for his kids etc..
Click to expand...
At my company, directors and above don't have a set pto bucket, but the reality is they can't take enough off to use what they would have anyway.

I have my time I'm taking for the year planned out and still have 8 days unplanned. Reality is I probably won't use it. I have things I have to do every day anyway so even vacation days I have to work a little.
 
I couldn't imagine cutting all our people back down to 30 some of hours a week and populate a whole new shift. Finding enough people to fill the shifts we run now is nearly impossible. Actually, it has been impossible for the last year. We haven't had a full crew in at least that long.
 
Ive come to realize my job ends up being a whole lot of hurry up then waiting for shit to go wrong. that said there a weeks i work tons and weeks i end up watching videos. my bosses know and dont care as long as it all gets done correctly on time and budget. we have set times we need to be "available" while i may still be on the phone with subs at 9pm some nights getting stuff worked out. we have set hours and set vacations but all of that ive realized is kinda a guide line. and as long as i let someone know im gonna be a few hours late in the morning or im leaving early one day ive never had an issue.



look at the PTO policies for some of the forest ranger/ wildlife people. they bank that stuff and retire 5 years early in some cases.
 
awheelterd said:
I couldn't imagine cutting all our people back down to 30 some of hours a week and populate a whole new shift. Finding enough people to fill the shifts we run now is nearly impossible. Actually, it has been impossible for the last year. We haven't had a full crew in at least that long.
Click to expand...
and this is the biggest issue with the reduced week idea (for factory / production work where you still have to get XX done by Y date and need Z man hours to do it). Cutting 1 group back and adding another not only assumes you can magically find the people the fill teh jobs, but that the people want only 30 hours of work, ANd that the math works out to structure it that way. 2 shifts at 30 is still 60 man hours.
I'm quite sure @UTfball68 has an opinion on this
 
awheelterd said:
I couldn't imagine cutting all our people back down to 30 some of hours a week and populate a whole new shift. Finding enough people to fill the shifts we run now is nearly impossible. Actually, it has been impossible for the last year. We haven't had a full crew in at least that long.
Click to expand...

Think bottlenecks and FTE’s (full time equivalency). It doesn’t work for every environment, but where it does work, it opens up capacity. Say I have one piece of equipment that produces 100,000 widgets/day. And that funnels to an operation that can only do 50,000 widgets/day. And that funnels to an operation that can only do 30,000 widgets/day. If I add 20hrs worth of capacity (from 40 to 60), I just improved my throughput. That’s not a difficult concept to bridge to, work more, get more. Even better if I can get multiple functions/operations out of one employee, and they can supervise more than one piece of equipment…and this could theoretically quadruple coverage. However, if I just let the one employee work the 60hrs, now I’m paying one employee OT pay to get there, so it actually costs me more to make the same widget, and then my margin (also read bonus) drops. There are also tons of studies out there regarding burnout, somewhere around 15-20% OT hours is where most employees start burning out, meaning their focus starts depleting and mistakes start happening and costing the company money. The other thing to think about are benefit implications, you reduce people’s hours far enough, you don’t have to offer them benefits…meaning, if you can’t increase sales, decrease expense. All that said, every scenario is different, but it can/does work. I personally use split shifts all the time in certain departments to start earlier and end later to keep a line running that would otherwise be shut down. I just never drop anyone below 36 (and still pay them 40minimum).
 
Totally get you. Our folks typically get 45- 47hrs a week. Not crazy OT and 5hrs is the only "required" OT. More is available if they want it, but not required.
UTfball68 said:
Think bottlenecks and FTE’s (full time equivalency). It doesn’t work for every environment, but where it does work, it opens up capacity. Say I have one piece of equipment that produces 100,000 widgets/day. And that funnels to an operation that can only do 50,000 widgets/day. And that funnels to an operation that can only do 30,000 widgets/day. If I add 20hrs worth of capacity (from 40 to 60), I just improved my throughput. That’s not a difficult concept to bridge to, work more, get more. Even better if I can get multiple functions/operations out of one employee, and they can supervise more than one piece of equipment…and this could theoretically quadruple coverage. However, if I just let the one employee work the 60hrs, now I’m paying one employee OT pay to get there, so it actually costs me more to make the same widget, and then my margin (also read bonus) drops. There are also tons of studies out there regarding burnout, somewhere around 15-20% OT hours is where most employees start burning out, meaning their focus starts depleting and mistakes start happening and costing the company money. The other thing to think about are benefit implications, you reduce people’s hours far enough, you don’t have to offer them benefits…meaning, if you can’t increase sales, decrease expense. All that said, every scenario is different, but it can/does work. I personally use split shifts all the time in certain departments to start earlier and end later to keep a line running that would otherwise be shut down. I just never drop anyone below 36 (and still pay them 40minimum).
Click to expand...
 
UTfball68 said:
Think bottlenecks and FTE’s (full time equivalency). It doesn’t work for every environment, but where it does work, it opens up capacity. Say I have one piece of equipment that produces 100,000 widgets/day. And that funnels to an operation that can only do 50,000 widgets/day. And that funnels to an operation that can only do 30,000 widgets/day. If I add 20hrs worth of capacity (from 40 to 60), I just improved my throughput. That’s not a difficult concept to bridge to, work more, get more. Even better if I can get multiple functions/operations out of one employee, and they can supervise more than one piece of equipment…and this could theoretically quadruple coverage. However, if I just let the one employee work the 60hrs, now I’m paying one employee OT pay to get there, so it actually costs me more to make the same widget, and then my margin (also read bonus) drops. There are also tons of studies out there regarding burnout, somewhere around 15-20% OT hours is where most employees start burning out, meaning their focus starts depleting and mistakes start happening and costing the company money. The other thing to think about are benefit implications, you reduce people’s hours far enough, you don’t have to offer them benefits…meaning, if you can’t increase sales, decrease expense. All that said, every scenario is different, but it can/does work. I personally use split shifts all the time in certain departments to start earlier and end later to keep a line running that would otherwise be shut down. I just never drop anyone below 36 (and still pay them 40minimum).
Click to expand...
You sound like a book I've read and studied some.
 
UTfball68 said:
Think bottlenecks and FTE’s (full time equivalency). It doesn’t work for every environment, but where it does work, it opens up capacity. Say I have one piece of equipment that produces 100,000 widgets/day. And that funnels to an operation that can only do 50,000 widgets/day. And that funnels to an operation that can only do 30,000 widgets/day. If I add 20hrs worth of capacity (from 40 to 60), I just improved my throughput. That’s not a difficult concept to bridge to, work more, get more. Even better if I can get multiple functions/operations out of one employee, and they can supervise more than one piece of equipment…and this could theoretically quadruple coverage. However, if I just let the one employee work the 60hrs, now I’m paying one employee OT pay to get there, so it actually costs me more to make the same widget, and then my margin (also read bonus) drops. There are also tons of studies out there regarding burnout, somewhere around 15-20% OT hours is where most employees start burning out, meaning their focus starts depleting and mistakes start happening and costing the company money. The other thing to think about are benefit implications, you reduce people’s hours far enough, you don’t have to offer them benefits…meaning, if you can’t increase sales, decrease expense. All that said, every scenario is different, but it can/does work. I personally use split shifts all the time in certain departments to start earlier and end later to keep a line running that would otherwise be shut down. I just never drop anyone below 36 (and still pay them 40minimum).
Click to expand...
So at what point is it more profitable to have an employee work OT vs hiring someone else on.
 
Futbalfantic said:
So at what point is it more profitable to have an employee work OT vs hiring someone else on.
Click to expand...
Once they are regularly exceeding 40-50% overtime in my opinion. Maybe less depending on margins and simplicity of the job and especially if the new employee adds capacity for which there is a demand.
 
Trend? Credit contracting?



Wells Fargo to close all personal lines of credit - CNBC

"Thu, July 8, 2021, 11:10 AM EDT·1 min read

July 8 (Reuters) - Wells Fargo & Co is shutting down all existing personal lines of credit and is not offering the consumer lending product anymore, CNBC reported on Thursday, citing letters from the bank.

The product, which usually gave users $3,000 to $100,000 in revolving credit lines, was pitched as a way to consolidate higher-interest credit-card debt, pay for home renovations or avoid overdraft fees on linked checking accounts, the report Wells Fargo tells customers it’s shuttering all personal lines of credit said.

Customers have been given a 60-day notice that their accounts will be shuttered, according to the report.

Wells Fargo did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

The move comes more than a year after the bank suspended home equity loans, given the economic uncertainty fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The fallout from the pandemic also prompted the bank to stop providing loans to a majority of its independent auto dealer customers last year."
 
Futbalfantic said:
So at what point is it more profitable to have an employee work OT vs hiring someone else on.
Click to expand...
jeepinmatt said:
Once they are regularly exceeding 40-50% overtime in my opinion. Maybe less depending on margins and simplicity of the job and especially if the new employee adds capacity for which there is a demand.
Click to expand...

All things considered, it’s generally around that 30-35% mark. At that point the employee’s throughput rate generally drop, their mistakes start increasing, and you’re paying a premium for that sub-optimal work. At that point it becomes more beneficial to invest in more/new talent.
 
ponykilr said:
Trend? Credit contracting?



Wells Fargo to close all personal lines of credit - CNBC

"Thu, July 8, 2021, 11:10 AM EDT·1 min read

July 8 (Reuters) - Wells Fargo & Co is shutting down all existing personal lines of credit and is not offering the consumer lending product anymore, CNBC reported on Thursday, citing letters from the bank.

The product, which usually gave users $3,000 to $100,000 in revolving credit lines, was pitched as a way to consolidate higher-interest credit-card debt, pay for home renovations or avoid overdraft fees on linked checking accounts, the report Wells Fargo tells customers it’s shuttering all personal lines of credit said.

Customers have been given a 60-day notice that their accounts will be shuttered, according to the report.

Wells Fargo did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

The move comes more than a year after the bank suspended home equity loans, given the economic uncertainty fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The fallout from the pandemic also prompted the bank to stop providing loans to a majority of its independent auto dealer customers last year."
Click to expand...
Trend. They (we) realized how quickly it can turn to shit. One more thing that will be a lasting negative shutdown impact that 'no one thought about'.
 
Back
Top