With Unemployment Sky-High, Employers Having Significant Trouble Finding Workers Who Are "Punctual"

See, in addition to the normal questions about business conditions, the NY Fed also asked some other questions about the state of business, including what areas companies were having trouble hiring in.

Not surprisingly, there's still a big shortage of high tech talent out there. Everybody knows that.

But then right after that, a huge number of employers are still saying that they have problems hiring workers who are proficient in "Punctuality/reliability." In fact, this measure is one where things have actually gotten worse since the last time they did this survey in March 2007.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/employers-still-having-trouble-finding-workers-who-are-punctual-2011-8

When someone has been out of the workforce for upwards 99 weeks, you find habits have changed.

I find punctuality is a chronic problem all the way around. Reliability too, but most of my experience professionally has been in high turnover low end jobs, that most people don't like doing much. :shrug:

I find punctuality a problem, assuredly on Mondays and Fridays. Thursday seems to be the amateur night out, and the weekend brings about rough stuff on Mondays. But, on the unemployment side of things, two years of really having no reason to get up and get ready is also a hard change to make it seems. Only speaking from my experience hiring folks. Should not be taken as reality in the marketplace.

I don't mean to dismiss the point you made about being out of practice from being out of work for long, but that corrects itself pretty quickly once someone has someplace to go.

well over a year. He refuses to take a job unless he makes what he was making before being laid off. So he sits in jogging pants all day on the internet (if you read this Doug; I was referring to someone else! LOL) and when he did get a job offer making relatively close money, he partied over the weekend in a bad way hoping something he read on the internet would make help him pass the drug test on that Monday. It failed. He hasn't had another decent offer in probably 6 months, but doesn't seem to care. Internet works. Money is rolling in, albeit less, and he can eat and drink to his heart's desire.

I have been out of work for about three weeks now, and it is really difficult not to fall into the "death spiral" as I not-so-affectionately call it. I have to make myself get up and shower, get out of my jammies, and actually do SOMETHING productive, even if it doesn't bring any money. LOL.... how is your friend making money on the internet?

making money on unemployment

I have never been able to claim unemployment, it isn't even part of my thinking. Sorry, I misunderstood. :)

Cab driving is a stress filled, dangerous occupation. Considering all the time waiting for fares, time spent in traffic, time waiting for the passengers to come out, time GETTING TO the pickups and back to a safe place for the drivers to post, the price of gas, etc, the fare should be at least $3.00 a mile. But in the city of Detroit, they are restricted to $1.60 a mile.

The cab leasing companies should be non-profit state-run enterprises, paying drivers $20 an hour regardless of whether there are any fares or not. Any income above that would go to replacing cars with electric vehicles, maintenance, and dispatch. And if the revenue is NOT high enough, maybe put a tax on airlines, hotels, bars, and restaurants since they benefit from having cab companies bring customers and take them home.

Maybe then people will have a chance to have a polite, safe cab driver who shows up on time.

How do you have 0 posts?

:tinfoilhat:

Pretty bizarre. Mist be some kind of glitch. I am going to ask the admin - I'm more of a reader than a poster, but I've made about 20 posts or so.

And not for the better either. Lot of my duties included working at heights. Never bothered me when I first started doing it. But I noticed after a lay off or two and then being called back to work my legs began shaking uncontrollably from fear whenever I was up in the air working on a overhead crane or something.

Yea, I would say this is normal too.

Don

It takes 22 times of doing something to create a pattern which could form a habit. Going back to my old college days, but that seems to stick out. That is just the mere brain function, but the physical part is another different part of the process.

... change their start time to be later, and it works for a little while, then they start arriving late again...

where i work now, a good place to work in a union job, one of my coworkers just can't get his ass here consistently on time. he doesn't work two jobs. we are treated well, our morale is good. from where i sit, there are no excuses for being late as often as he is. yeah, everyone is late occasionally, including me. but when it's consistently late 2, 3 days a week, what's the deal?

we are paid hourly, and while we don't punch a clock, we are expected to sign in and out ... he feels this is "degrading" and doesn't understand why he has to keep track of his hours! he's almost 22 years old.

in these times, with hundreds of people applying for one job opening, employers are looking for ANY little thing to disqualify applicants.

That may go a long way in explaining punctuality and reliability. When one can even piece together 2 jobs, he/she runs the risk of having "flex scheduling" run afoul of one of your goddam part-time jobs! As one worker at Target said (paraphrase): They use flex-scheduling as a weapon so you can't find another part-time job, and you have no personal life.

The times of finding 2 part-time jobs are over, gone with the wind of predictable scheduling (I once had 3 p-t jobs in the 70s). But you can't do this when you get 30 hours spread over Monday, Tuesday, ....Thursday, 11 p.m., ...Sunday 7 a.m. ....Wednesday, 4 p.m. ......? .......Satur... ....uh..... ....stay by the phone.....

Where I worked, it was briught in to help with a chronic punctuality problem. Managers had to many disciplinary actions for late arrival in HR. Flex was supposed to fix this. It didn't. The people who were dependable and timely, usually picked up the load. Their peer pressure was supposed to make people come to work on time. When one of the truants was promoted - the promotion system was a joke too - all hell broke loose.

"Employers are full of it as usual. The only shortage is high tech people willing to work for 12 bucks an hour at a job that used to pay 25 plus bucks an hour. They sprout this nonsense about laziness and education when its not true to try and justify all their outsourcing and foreign worker visas so they can pay crap in wages. That is the true reality."

And now he's working for about half what he was making before.

nt

worked years back, but it more relates to the promises people are given of great pay for getting a 1 year or 6 month 20K microsoft degree, computer network degree - which isn't really a degree but a diploma of sorts. I heard it touted that the average MCSE made 55K-70K and all you need to do is invest 20K for your future. The problem was that most of these jobs in that realm were add-on certs to BS's in computer science, experience, etc. I had young folks begging for internships at minimum wage coming out of those "schools".

With so much work, especially hi tech work, being computer based now, even coming in to an office is sort of antiquated -- much less coming into an office at the stroke of 8:00 (yes, it's 8-5 here in non-union Texas). Factory days are pretty much over.

Management just doesn't like to let go of the feeling of control that comes with having all the troops assembled under their watchful eye. In this day and age, coming to the office at the appointed time is a symbolic act, an acknowledgement of the power of the employer over the employee.

Restaurant, retail, medical and other fields for example.

I could do my job anywhere in the world where I have a reliable internet connection for vpn, but still have to come into the office. We have the ability to work at home, and some of our teams do have a 1 or 2 day a week scheduled at home, but some bosses, as you said, are simply control freaks.

The expectations drift. Now "reliable" is someone who will reliably work 60 hours a week and be on call the rest of the time.

"Management just doesn't like to let go of the feeling of control that comes with having all the troops assembled under their watchful eye."


There are a lot of jobs that could be telecommunte jobs - even one or two days a week - but mgmt likes playing lord of the manor. I had a boss tell me once that the idea that an employee might do their laundry, in the background, while working at home, bothered her too much to let employees work from home. :eyes:

Just took a course on this (related to management issues). According to studies, some working at home increases productivity and job satisfaction but too much working at home and little unity or 'bonding' between employees actually lowers productivity and at some point will actually start costing more money. Like everything, it's a balance.

In this course we also studied the differences between generations. It's true the younger set (under 30) fully expect to have way more flexible hours, but count all of their time on the cell as work and therefore actually work MORE hours in total. They want more work/life balance and are far less likely to be loyal to an employer (why should they? companies are no longer loyal to their employees, now they are paying for it). Older generations are used to the 8-5, mon-fri office hours, however, now employees are expected to be at the beck and call of their employers after hours and so never *really* leave work, unlike older generations. So the younger generation tries to make up for it in passive/destructive manners such as showing up late or taking long breaks. Also, while companies with higher job satisfaction ratings perform far better on the stock market, many managers not only discount how important job satisfaction is to the bottom line, they also vastly over-estimate how satisfied their employees are. And, the less satisfied the employees are, the more they will be unreliable and create a high turn-over.

Really, sometimes I think all these manager MBA's must've failed their business psychology/organizational behavior courses. It's simple, really. Treat people well, pay them well, make them feel as they are a part of the company and its vision and you will have a fairly dedicated (and punctual) workforce.

I wouldn't tolerate it for long.

>>I wouldn't tolerate it for long.

I take it you identify with management, then?

Don't need to relate to management to have that attitude.

Since most systems calculate time on 1/4 hour, workers are really good at cheating it.































btw: Yes, I am management, is there a problem with that?

If I got there 10 minutes late, I stayed 10 minutes later on the other end. If I was 20 minutes late, I stayed 20 minutes late. My job was an office job and was not the kind of job where I absolutely had to be there right at 9 to do something or meet with someone.

We were always responsible for logging our hours anyway, so why does it matter if you're 5 minutes early or 6 minutes late? The same amount of work gets done in the same amount of time, so what's the problem?

Oddly enough, I've found that as exacting as engineers usually are, they are often the most lenient. Only the oldest managers have this "on the hour, on the dot" mindset.

Some cannot.

If a nurse is 10 minutes late every day, what does that do for the person on the shift ahead of the late person or do the patients just do without a nurse for the 10 minutes?

I had a job where my relief was often late. Since I couldn't just leave and abandon patients, had to wait and keep doing what needed to be done in the meantime, not knowing if my replacement was "just" late or if was not going to show. At the end of the shift you are tired and simply want to leave and rest, most of your energy is gone. It isn't fair to the person you are replacing.

And it isn't fair to you manager or anyone else who relies on your work.

I don't understand these people who think that 10 minutes of "The Companies" time is your time.

deleted

There are many, many reasons where I work that someone would be paid and not actually be there.

"btw: Yes, I am management, is there a problem with that? "

Yes, there is. YOU DON'T WORK. You manage workers, but you yourself?

Natch. You're lucky your employees are willing to sell you their time.

I certainly wouldn't.

from there on out i would be written up, three and i was fired.

never late again.

you are right

--then what?

the busses schedule and how do we resolve

and being ready and able to work. Yes I know it is difficult.

--and sell licenses to hunt them for sport.

sure, we think people should be on time for work most of the time, so of course we think we should be able to shoot them if they aren't.

:rofl:

--or pay them enough that they can afford their own. All the snotty overprivileged types on this board seem to think that having one part time job that isn't enough to live on is no excuse whatsoever for attempting to take on another one.

Many of the people in my office treat the posted working hours as a suggestion. And they are completely ignorant of the prez and vp swooping through the office periodically to check who's on the internet doing non-work-related stuff. Many of these same people make a mass exodus at 4:59. Don't think that goes unnoticed, either.

One of my informal duties here is the office ombudsman/morale officer. I liaise between the staff and the prez/vp and try to maintain a pleasant working environment. A small amount of downtime during the workday is to be expected. And I've told people this. Unfortunately, the only people who come to me with questions about their job performance, are the people who "get it." Sometimes I think the others don't even read a newspaper or watch the news or know that there's an unemployment problem. I have spoken to two of the worst offenders more than once, in a friendly manner, as in, "they notice when you're on the internet. Maybe you should dial it back a bit. Try to limit your socializing to lunchtime." Like talking to a wall.

As I explained to my staff, DON'T give them a reason to write you up. Show up on time. If it takes you until 5:15 to complete your project, suck it up. That way, if you're held up in traffic one day, or if you have to leave early, you're covered. My staff is a model of attendance, and they largely escape the Eagle Eyes of of Heartless and Lord Pissypants.

Maybe that's not the best working model, but it works for us.

without expecting overtime" and "being available off hours" for "punctuality/reliability." Just a thought.

not coding. AS such, many of those jobs

- pay very close to minimum wage

- require a car since they are not near any public transport.

Now, what kind of car does someone making say, $40,000 to $20,000 annually drive?

Most likely, some sort of used car that they are desperately hoping passes next month's state inspection.

If the employee has kids, what kind of day car can they afford? Even if the caretaker is personally responsible, most likely her ( and it is most likely her) transportation is just as unreliable as the employee's. And I guarantee you, if the employee's kid is sick, no day care operation will cover for your employee. If the kid's barfing, your employee has to stay home.

So, if you want your employees to be out at your manufacturing campus in the middle of nowhere right on time every day, pay them enough so they can afford a decent car, damn it! And get together with other local employers to provide decent, affordable 24 hour day care options! And don't think that a notification 10 minutes before quitting time Friday gives your employees enough time to round up a babysitter to cover those added extra shifts Saturday and Sunday!

If some service folks have a job to do, corporate says they'll be there on such and such a day. Sometimes it will be divided into morning or afternoon. "What time will they be here" I ask. "We cannot give you a time".

When the power was turned off for a smartmeter upgrade, the "appointment" was on such and such a day. It was canceled three times, and we were only advised after the fact by a new appointment scheduling received by mail days later. Similar thing happened with a water meter upgrade.

Is "poor punctuality of workers" just a reflection of corporate methods that have been used for many years? Or is "poor punctuality of workers" a deliberate projection, a mislead by corporate to publicly assign blame to the wrong party?

The appointment windows are because they want to fully book their employees but the tasks the employees do on any given appointment might be done quickly or take a long time.

I went to a doctor, 20 minute appointment, and told him the problem. Two minutes later he had confirmed it and submitted my prescription. Should he wait for the next patient due in 18 minutes, or head to the next patient because he knows the guy's waiting? The latter.

Another time my Internet went out. The guy came out, had to check the computer, the modem, the cable line and all the wiring in the house; he found that it was set up strangely and rewired it. Then he checked the connection to the outside line, cable integrity to the local junction box, then to a subdivision junction box. Turns out another technician had meant to disconnect a neighbor of mine and instead disconnected me. I had a 30 minute appointment, the guy was here for an hour. Should he have left after 30 minutes?

You can't plan these things, and trying to take them into account ahead of time yields a lot of inefficiency. If the goal is to help as many people as possible, as cheaply as possible, it works. Convenience drops a bit lower on the list.

This is different from not being punctual in getting to work. Then it's not customer service and unpredictability in providing the service, it's taking time to feed the cat, have coffee, hit the snooze button a third time, dawdle in the shower. It's playing off customer service, service to your employer, and service to self, and weighting service to self above your commitment to the others. I see the same people rushing out, late, every morning, roaring down the road doing 40 when there are elementary school kids trying to cross the street in our cul de sac to get to the neighborhood bus stop. They could get up 5 minutes earlier. I guess this just never occurs to them.

If you're driving a beater car or relying on public transportation because you or a partner has been out of work for a while or just underemployed, I could see punctuality being a problem.

Unreliable cars, public transportation, depending on someone else for your ride, absurd commutes to affordable housing...

That's gonna hurt "punctuality."

How many jobs pay enough to buy reliable transportation or homes close to work these days?

Parents who rely on OTHER people to watch their kids...sometimes the babysitter runs late.

Parents who have to drop kids off at daycare, sometimes there are unexpected "conferences" come up at dropoff.

Parents who drop kids off at school sometimes get stuck in traffic.

Workers who have to stop and get gas before work sometimes get detained because the store understaffs and the wait time is longer.

There are MANY excusable reasons for being late to work, however, employers want more and more and more these days.

I can totally see some parent who drops their kid off at school before they rush to work. They cannot afford before school care for their kid, but the school doesn't open up until a particular time. There's a small window where these parents can drop their kids off at an open and supervised school and make it to work on time. Any variable - traffic, weather, vehicle - can totally mess things up on a regular basis. The employee cannot leave earlier, because then their kid would be waiting outside the school unsupervised. And they may not be able to stay later, especially if they are a single parent.

Of course the solution would be to pay people actual living wages so they could afford childcare AND a home, food and transportation, but I won't be holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

"NY Fed finds overpaid wastes of oxygen can't find enough decent hard-working
underpaid folks to kowtow sufficiently to their every whim"

headline corrected.

Because punctuality and reliability have been collapsed into one attribute, the data user has no way of knowing how much of the rating reflects punctuality and how much reflects reliability. Why does that matter?

Punctuality is a pretty clear cut marker. Either workers arrive on time or they don't.

Reliability, unless it was well defined in the questionnaire, can cover all sorts of employer perceptions from slacking off sometimes, taking days off for sickness or quitting the moment a better paying job is offered.

there are a lot of workers that have two jobs. Some jobs are supposed to end at a set time, but don't always because the next shift is late, so then the person that was supposed to leave for the second job leaves late and is late for their next job...

That way they would be desperate and starving.

I'd be willing to bet you that those proles would get their sorry, useless asses out of the sack at 0330 if they haven't eaten for a day or two in order to get to work on time, even if they had to walk to get there.


Actually, the employers could solve these problems by having all of their employees herded into company-owned dormitories at night, that way they can't go home and get drunk, smoke dope, or do whatever it is that the lower classes do to brighten their dull, monotone existence.

They'll never be late for work, won't call off sick on Monday or Friday, and will be at the beck and call of their betters at a moment's notice on the shop floor.

The employer would only charge them a nominla sum of say, forty dollars a night to sleep in the company dormitories...sorry, no outside food is allowed in, the vending machines will provide all the proper nutrients for the slav...workers.

expect the same treatment in return? :shrug:

work you like the dog you are. We will cut your benefits, cut your pension, and make sure you have to rely on food stamps and dollar stores. We will bully you, fire you if a cheaper worker comes along, and deny your premotion because your bosses lazy mistress needs the job to pay for her nails.

Why aren't you more reliable?

:thumbsdown:

Couldn't have said it better myself.

The people who were not punctual before the crash still are. The people who were punctual before the crash still are, such as myself. I get up every day as if I had a job because I gave myself other jobs to do. In fact, I'm more disciplined now because it's self imposed and not from an "employer."

in a really sad sort of way. *sigh* So true.

I was the most punctual, reliable employee you'd ever meet.

The faster you go, the more you cheapen your own labor -- !!

We need every to SLO DOWN --

We've had a 35% increase in productivity over the last decades and NO

comparable rise in wages -- in fact, stagnant wages.

If you want young kids on the cheap who are just happy to get a paycheck so they can party and buy toys instead of hiring folks who need to work to support a family, don't be surprised if they don't give a shit.

My company insists on hiring the lowest common denominator possible because the kids who call out sick all the time and show up late are still easier to handle than the guy who will show up every day on time, but fight like hell when he's getting screwed on his pay or benefits.

when they are wrong, either in practice or policy, because they have achieve a level of proficiency that allows them to know how to do the job right.

}(

fuck 'em.

all.

When I would show up at five minute past eight, I should have asked the supervisor, "If I am five minutes late, is the Sun going to explode, and wipe out all life on earth?"

That's the attitude they had. The earth was coming to an end.

I was once fired from a job for being late three times in two weeks. My boss showed me my timecards...I was 40 seconds late one day, 45 seconds late the next, and 90 seconds late a week later.

That was when I decided that punctuality wasn't going to be a hangup for me if I ever opened my own company. I eventually did, and that became standard policy. If you're going to be more than 10 minutes late, give us a call and let us know so we can plan accordingly. If you're going to be less than 10 minutes late, we really don't give a damn.

Amazingly, I don't think anyone ever abused it. Most people were there within a minute or two of their scheduled shift.

I don't know if it's a new problem or not, but it is a problem.

often I am just not in mood to prepare, but I can at least show up. It usually works.. even better than 90% of the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU3Hs36FIrw

;)

adequate programs in place to measure employee productivity, so when they want to fire someone they don't like they use "punctuality/reliability" as the excuse.

It's a "catch-all".

It's a telling trend, especially considering that jobs are currently an employers' market. The fact that there are "significant" numbers in the trend suggests that maybe, just maybe, it's the employers who are getting it wrong.

Employment is a two-way relationship, and it's one that spans years, not individual hours.

Employees aren't serfs, and "punctuality" is a largely irrelevant leftover of the factory system. Yes, if you have an appointment, be on time. But that's not the same thing -- this is a day in, day out relationship that's shaped by the tasks at hand.

Employees "sell" completed tasks, not ticks of the clock. If they're treated like grownups, they'll perform like grownups. But that's not what most managers are interested in -- it's the homage that comes first.

not everyone. many people will, yes.

we got rid of one that, although being treated like a grownup just as the rest of us, still had to lie about hours worked, skip out early when it came time for the shit work, was NEVER available to help out coworkers, and generally did the least amount possible when actually here.

most people are fine, but there are just enough buddy fuckers around to spoil it for the rest of us. that's why we turned her in--so we wouldn't lose a good thing.

i'm (not) sorry, but my life is more important than whatever is waiting for me at my job when i get there. if they expect me to be flexible and stick around late when needed, or come in on a saturday, then they damn well better understand when whatever i'm doing on my times runs over a little here and there.

then you should be on time to make sure the person you are replacing can leave at the end of their shift. Unless you feel you are more important than them. Of course things happen, but being late, not caring whether or not you put out someone who is supposed to be going off shift? That is wrong.

The faster you go, the more you cheapen your own labor!!

We are all labor -- every person on this continent has to go on strike together!!

is a well known 'passive/destructive' method for dealing with poor job satisfaction. Any one with management courses knows this. If your employees are continuously late, and you can't seem to get anyone to come in on time, you need to seriously look at what deficits your company has in how they are treating said employees. If employees don't feel they are treated fairly, they will make up for it in certain ways, like facebook'ing during office hours, talking too much at the water cooler, making the rounds to co-workers' offices and, yes, coming in late and leaving early. This is a well known phenomenon in management. So, these employers KNOW why they are having problems. They just don't want to admit they are shitting all over their workers and that is what is causing it, so they blame the workers and whine about it, and refuse to fix the problem.

no, couldn't possibly be that.

gullible :rofl:

Most of whom are classic narcissists (dollars to donuts those people are the most toxic people in your workplace as well) or sociopaths. If there is proper screening, you can screen those type of people out. I'm talking in general - which is what the OP was talking about - noticing large amounts of unreliable people. IN GENERAL.

But whatever, thanks for the same insult my ex used to throw at me whenever I was thoughtful about anything. He was a narcissist. I'm guessing he wasn't the only one I've run into.