Delta seeking volunteers to help out in loyalty lounges amid staffing shortage

[garbon]

OK if you don't object to other people's stuff whizzing about in the air then I'm perfectly fine with that.

I don't take issue with you have a preference, but I was communicating that I wouldn't want anybody's things whizzing about. Sounds dangerous and not worth the benefit from my perspective.

Dangerous? If you think there are reasons not to have them that go beyond your personal preference then those I think are very relevant to other people.

Yes, who will be making sure they don't run into things and people?

I've no idea what you are saying with your second sentence. Of course preferences about what should be allowed in public spaces impact other people.

[The Brain]

Your personal preferences should matter to other people because?

Using public space for private endeavors, be it commercial or non-commercial, needs a certain degree of societal consent as the freedom of those using public space might infringe on the freedom of those prefering non-usage.

The law handles that.

The law is the way it is partly because of how garbon feels about other people having their packages delivered by drones.  That's how it should be when externalities are involved.

"I don't like it" is a horrible way to make law.

[The Brain]

OK if you don't object to other people's stuff whizzing about in the air then I'm perfectly fine with that.

I don't take issue with you have a preference, but I was communicating that I wouldn't want anybody's things whizzing about. Sounds dangerous and not worth the benefit from my perspective.

Dangerous? If you think there are reasons not to have them that go beyond your personal preference then those I think are very relevant to other people.

Yes, who will be making sure they don't run into things and people?

I've no idea what you are saying with your second sentence. Of course preferences about what should be allowed in public spaces impact other people.

An example: I think the trend among some car and bike enthusiasts to have the "rusty af" look is horrible, looks like ass, and I don't like it. However, I don't see a reason for this preference of mine to be considered relevant when society makes decisions about which cars and bikes that should be allowed on public roads. If I had thought that there was a safety problem with it though, then that would have been relevant. There's a big difference.

[DGuller]

"I don't like it" is a horrible way to make law.

The public space belongs to all of us, and you're within your right to do as you wish with your space for whatever reasons you wish.  Since there is more than one owner of the public space, however, passing laws is how we exercise control over the public space that we all co-own.

[garbon]

An example: I think the trend among some car and bike enthusiasts to have the "rusty af" look is horrible, looks like ass, and I don't like it. However, I don't see a reason for this preference of mine to be considered relevant when society makes decisions about which cars and bikes that should be allowed on public roads. If I had thought that there was a safety problem with it though, then that would have been relevant. There's a big difference.

I highlighted my concern was danger vs benefits.

[The Brain]

An example: I think the trend among some car and bike enthusiasts to have the "rusty af" look is horrible, looks like ass, and I don't like it. However, I don't see a reason for this preference of mine to be considered relevant when society makes decisions about which cars and bikes that should be allowed on public roads. If I had thought that there was a safety problem with it though, then that would have been relevant. There's a big difference.

I highlighted my concern was danger vs benefits.

And as I said I think those kinds of concerns are very relevant to other people. Unlike personal preference, which is fine as conversation but shouldn't be a base for decision-making regarding the use of public space.

[The Brain]

"I don't like it" is a horrible way to make law.

The public space belongs to all of us, and you're within your right to do as you wish with your space for whatever reasons you wish.  Since there is more than one owner of the public space, however, passing laws is how we exercise control over the public space that we all co-own.

Exactly.

[alfred russel]

I think there's distinction for regular overtime for salaried employees and this Delta thing, however. It's one thing to say "the project you're on requires more effort to complete on time than anticipated, please work extra within your actual job description" and quite another to say "yeah, I know you're an accountant but we'd like  you to wipe some tables and restock the napkin dispensers at our business class lounge."

I've had to do a lot of outside work related stuff: participated in a bunch of "volunteer" activities for charities the company sponsored, I "volunteered" for years to be a microphone handler at annual shareholder meetings, and I somehow got my arm twisted into being on a company heritage committee. I bet everyone has similar stuff.

I think the real reaction here is that you have high value employees doing menial work. It isn't that they are being asked to do extra work outside of their job responsibilities. It wouldn't be a story if Delta was asking for "volunteers" for some nonsense local business roundtable they were participating in.

[DGuller]

I'm sure they're rather ask the menial workers, but fucking unions ruin everything.

[The Brain]

If my employer asked for me to do unpaid work (in this sense, ie not in any way connected to my normal job for which I get a salary) I would assume that the company was close to going under (which I suppose Delta may well be) and I would likely do some volunteer work but I would also start looking for a different employer (but if the crisis blows over I may still stay).

[OttoVonBismarck]

Delta is an air major they never really go under, they just change names or merge in with others

I don't think they're in imminent danger either way.

I think this is more akin to what D4H mentioned, the corporate guys see it as sort of a nudge to the white collar staff to take a work day to work in the hospitality lounge instead. Most salaried white collar work isn't strictly tied to clocking in a 8:30 and clocking out at 5:00 or whatever, so likely they would just be expected to "make up for" any work they would have normally done during that day's time. For a lot of white collar workers you probably only do 2-3 hours of real work per day anyway.

[Zoupa]

Seems reasonable to me.  Not every person in the world thinks of their relationship with their employer in adversarial terms.

It's not reasonable, it feels quite disconnected from reality. Assuming folks do have enough time in their life to volunteer for something, who would choose an airport lounge over another activity that benefits the community as a whole?

In totally unrelated news:

[DGuller]

I find "wage theft" to be a bad term.  Theft is typically concealed.  When you take stuff because the victim would be wise to not protect it, it's called a robbery.

[OttoVonBismarck]

If these were exempt salaried people being asked to volunteer I do not believe it would be considered wage theft anyway, considering as per the terms of their employment they likely could have been subject to being ordered to do this.

I have a friend who is an exempt, salaried chemical engineer with a major chemical company. While it's not happened in about 15 years, they actually train all the engineers to also work production plant jobs (many of those jobs are not technically very involved); the reason being the engineering staff is not unionized and is all salaried and exempt from overtime. So if there is ever a strike, they can be pressed into filling production roles. This has actually happened at his factory in the past (before he worked here.) No wage theft is involved since he is an exempt (from overtime) employee.

[alfred russel]

If my employer asked for me to do unpaid work (in this sense, ie not in any way connected to my normal job for which I get a salary) I would assume that the company was close to going under (which I suppose Delta may well be) and I would likely do some volunteer work but I would also start looking for a different employer (but if the crisis blows over I may still stay).

But aren't you an engineer at a nuclear power plant? For better or worse, a lot of consumer facing companies have the culture "your job is to either sell the product or support the people who sell the product". Which I understand from one perspective, but from another means Home Depot is hiring high powered attorneys from Ivy League schools (I think it is a fortune 100 company) and then having them put on a smock and help people find what they need in the lumbar aisle.