Another year goes by and so there another office Christmas party takes place. We had ours last Friday and it was a fun night. A good dinner, plenty of beers, a decent band belting out the best songs of 20 years ago and a good group of people. In my 9 years of my working life, I have always had a great time on these things, even though there are plenty of potential snags that can bring the best of careers to a sketching halt. Just a quick google search on the web can generate a hundred tales of woe.
So to educate the masses, which is what I do, I have come up with my definitive list of how to enjoy yourself at the party without killing your career.
Here are the seven rules of Christmas Party edicate
1. Do attend: I cannot believe the number of people who don’t like going to the Christmas Party. In my team of 4, I was the only one who rocked up. Pretty poor effort in my opinion. Some people seem to think their non-attendance at the Christmas Party is like a protest vote. They think "I don’t like the company so I am not going to go to the Christmas Party" will show the company their displeasure. Not quite the case people. Managers don’t care; they are still getting boozy. Go, have fun and drink some beer on the boss.
2. Drink: Nothing like someone rocking up to the Christmas Party and staying cold sober the entire time. No one likes a party pooper. You don’t have to get drunk (though it helps), but get into the spirit and you will have a lot more fun. Besides, it’s free!
3. If you are going to pash someone, do it discretely: Kissing the hot HR chick on the dance floor might gain you plenty of kudos from your workmates, but when the photo gets back to the wife and/or husband, its not going to do anyone any favours. Keep it away from the public eye. And remember the fateful words, "What happens at the Chrissy party, stays at the Chrissy party"
4. Hugs are fine: Its amazing what a bit of alcohol can do to the friendship levels. That anal accountant who gives you a glare in the lift yesterday now suddenly announces that he is your new best friend. If he wants to give you a hug, what’s the harm? Might make it a little easier to get that next cab charge when you need it. Just watch out for the grope!
5. Dance: After the inevitable speeches, dodgy gifts and the Managing Director has thanked you for another year of soul destroying labour, the cover band or DJ will start up the 80’s hits. Time to boogie. This is where the best fun of the Christmas party occurs. If you have rhythm, by tripping the light fantastic on the dance floor, your value in the company will rise. The lads will say, bloody hell, this guys a bit of a player; I might invite him to the next pub effort. The chicks will say, hey, he can dance, he might be good in bed, and he’s worth inviting to the next company drinks.
If you can’t dance, still get up there and have some fun. Everyone can do the 80’s shuffle and knows the actions to "YMCA" You will still be 100% better off than the staid folk who sit at the tables by themselves.
6. Don’t tell the boss what you think…about work: At some stage at the Christmas Party, you will have to talk to the boss while under the influence. If you do, talk about anything but work. Say his cricket team sucks; his football team is ordinary or even that his dress sense leads a lot to be desired. Still on safe grounds. But if you question his management, there are real problems. To say St George Rugby League Club is ordinary may hurt your boss, but is a perfectly valid thing to say at a Christmas Party and easily forgotten But to say you think his management sucks is something he is bound to remember in the cold hard light of sobriety.
7. Go home.. Unless you are single: Now this is the big one. The band is a memory; the ugly lights have been switched on. Someone is talking about a pub up the road, or worse, a nightclub a block away. Unless you are single, go directly home. Do not pass go, do not collect $200. Refuse all tempting offers home from women bearing lifts. You are not in the right spirit to make correct decisions at this stage so go home to your girl/guy who is there with comforting words and sleepy cuddles. You’ll thank me in the morning.
So there it is. The 7 rules of Christmas party fun that will ensure you are invited to the next one and won’t be greeted by shamed looks/sacking on Monday morning and/or a letter from the divorce lawyer.
Monday, December 4, 2006
Friday, December 1, 2006
Work Choices…about 5 years too early
I was reading with interest about the protest march in Sydney recently regarding the Work Choices legislation. Even Morris Iemma, the Premier of NSW participated (strictly for political reasons I think). He knows he is on a winner with this one. There is no doubt that there are a lot of people in Australia who feel threatened by these change to industrial relations. Unions are particularly worried about the changes as the legislation severely limits their power to call strikes etc. That was why Morris was there (Labour party man that he is).
But as for me, I’m not quite sure of the fuss really. Work Choices strips workers of some of their entitlements its true. Things like penalty rates and overtime can all be removed from Workplace agreements and Individual contracts. Employers in businesses of 100 employees or less can sack people purely for "operational reasons" and are immune from the unfair dismissal laws (apart from discrimination in regards to age, sex, sexual orientation etc). All potentially look bad for the worker on paper.
As an IT worker for the last 9 or so years, I have been governed by a Workplace Agreement for most of that time for my conditions. I have always had to negotiate pay rises and conditions with my employer, and have had no problems doing so. I have also had to deal with the potential bogeyman of sub continent out sourcing of my work. Some will say I have been lucky so far in still having a job. But I have never needed a union, nor felt the lack of one. I believe my skills and experience speak for themselves.
And unfortunately the nature of Unions has changed dramatically. Since the basic rights of the worker have been enshrined in law, they have been more committed to political activism than protecting the worker. Where is the Union fight for maternity Leave and Paternity Leave? Where is the work/life balance fight? Most of these initiatives have come from business themselves rather than any protracted Union fight. You are more likely to see the ACTU at an environmental rally than a fight for women’s pay equality.
An argument for unions is that in jobs where huge amounts of skills are not required, union power is the only power available. A person manning a checkout in a department store has a lot less clout at the negotiating table than an I.T professional. And it is a valid argument. Still, no one wants to be a checkout person all his or her life. This is a time where skills are the most important part of employment. If you don’t have them, you have go and get them.
But from an economic viewpoint, I think the reason for the legislation is due to employee shortages and the aging of the workforce. Businesses know that soon they will have to compete heavily for the best and most skilled workers (especially if they want younger workers). This will mean that the power will be with employee rather than the employer. What John Howard (the Prime Minister) and his business cronies want is to level the playing field a little, maybe a little earlier than they had to. If employers can sack workers for operational reasons and reduce pay and overtime, they believe that this will keep employees in check and keep a lid on workers demands for pay rises, even as their potential value to business increases.
Howard is a master opportunist. I believe he thought that these changes had to go in at some stage in the near future, and decided that it would be easier to do so while the Federal Coalition had control over both houses of parliament. It is a fairly good idea. When you are strong, do the unpopular things.
And it is not just employers who benefit. While employee wages will go up under Work Choices (due to the increased value of the employee), they will not go up exorbitantly (as they might have under the existing awards). Wages under control = inflation under control. If inflation is under control, so are interest rates (as the Reserve Bank wants low inflation above all else). Also, if labour costs are under control, the prices of goods and services will also be fairly static. Which is good for the consumer. Ie You and me.
The government governs for all, including business. Just because a policy is pro-industry, does not mean it is bad for the worker. A good economy with high employment, low prices for goods, benefits us all.
But as for me, I’m not quite sure of the fuss really. Work Choices strips workers of some of their entitlements its true. Things like penalty rates and overtime can all be removed from Workplace agreements and Individual contracts. Employers in businesses of 100 employees or less can sack people purely for "operational reasons" and are immune from the unfair dismissal laws (apart from discrimination in regards to age, sex, sexual orientation etc). All potentially look bad for the worker on paper.
As an IT worker for the last 9 or so years, I have been governed by a Workplace Agreement for most of that time for my conditions. I have always had to negotiate pay rises and conditions with my employer, and have had no problems doing so. I have also had to deal with the potential bogeyman of sub continent out sourcing of my work. Some will say I have been lucky so far in still having a job. But I have never needed a union, nor felt the lack of one. I believe my skills and experience speak for themselves.
And unfortunately the nature of Unions has changed dramatically. Since the basic rights of the worker have been enshrined in law, they have been more committed to political activism than protecting the worker. Where is the Union fight for maternity Leave and Paternity Leave? Where is the work/life balance fight? Most of these initiatives have come from business themselves rather than any protracted Union fight. You are more likely to see the ACTU at an environmental rally than a fight for women’s pay equality.
An argument for unions is that in jobs where huge amounts of skills are not required, union power is the only power available. A person manning a checkout in a department store has a lot less clout at the negotiating table than an I.T professional. And it is a valid argument. Still, no one wants to be a checkout person all his or her life. This is a time where skills are the most important part of employment. If you don’t have them, you have go and get them.
But from an economic viewpoint, I think the reason for the legislation is due to employee shortages and the aging of the workforce. Businesses know that soon they will have to compete heavily for the best and most skilled workers (especially if they want younger workers). This will mean that the power will be with employee rather than the employer. What John Howard (the Prime Minister) and his business cronies want is to level the playing field a little, maybe a little earlier than they had to. If employers can sack workers for operational reasons and reduce pay and overtime, they believe that this will keep employees in check and keep a lid on workers demands for pay rises, even as their potential value to business increases.
Howard is a master opportunist. I believe he thought that these changes had to go in at some stage in the near future, and decided that it would be easier to do so while the Federal Coalition had control over both houses of parliament. It is a fairly good idea. When you are strong, do the unpopular things.
And it is not just employers who benefit. While employee wages will go up under Work Choices (due to the increased value of the employee), they will not go up exorbitantly (as they might have under the existing awards). Wages under control = inflation under control. If inflation is under control, so are interest rates (as the Reserve Bank wants low inflation above all else). Also, if labour costs are under control, the prices of goods and services will also be fairly static. Which is good for the consumer. Ie You and me.
The government governs for all, including business. Just because a policy is pro-industry, does not mean it is bad for the worker. A good economy with high employment, low prices for goods, benefits us all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)