Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
And this is just the "pro consumer" argument. Nevermind the simple care for workers so they can live stress free lives, have time to let their family feel their love, and generally just be human.
Crunch deteriorates mental health. I've lost a coworker to suicide. Lost coworkers to other health issues brought on or exacerbated by industry working conditions. I won't say "crunch kills" because that's probably not the common case, but it shaves years off a life for sure.
As for the argument that reward takes sacrifice -- no employee benefits from crunch. There is no reward. Executives who order the crunch will. Good sales numbers? You, CEO, deserve a 3 million dollar bonus. Your employees? $100 amazon gift card "launch bonus".
In most cases, crunching employees are not paid for their extra time. So no reward for their efforts that way either. If crunch is imposed, that means managers messed up scheduling, or executives over promised deliverables. It's their fault and the trench workers pay for it.
No matter how you look at it, crunch is bad. Bad for employees. Bad for consumers. Bad for the industry. Anybody who tells you otherwise either directly benefits from it or is too ignorant of the industry to know better.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
