Got my new EWI case today... a little bummed out...

[MainEventSound]

I'm a journeyman member in IATSE Local 30 and I treat every gig the same whether or not it's a union gig or a gig for my company. I work hard, I don't stop until the work is done. I can't say this for all of my union brothers, but I have a good work ethic. FYI, it's just the few lazy ass workers who give us a bad name.

[Rezrover]

Isn't that how it works? Your lazy workers cancel out your better workers so it's an average work force all around?

[IsildursBane]

Speaking of which (all of the packing material)... we recently had a damage in shipping claim (with UPS)... the packaging was UPS certified, so getting reimbursed for the damage in shipping claim was fairly straight-forward, but during the communication with UPS involved with processing the claim, UPS suggested we use "Instapak" type foam-in-place material rather than the styrofoam packing peanuts we use to cushion the contents within the package. This "Instapak" stuff is a chemical activated foam in a plastic bag, that when heated and activated, expands... well... around the contents of the package. I've never used this stuff before, but I crunched the numbers, and for some of our parcels, it looks like it might be somewhere in the ballpark of what the peanuts are costing us, and might work considerably better... and be less messy for our customers to deal with on the other end. Does anyone here have any experience using this "Instapak" stuff... and if so, where and how to use it to get good results? And what's involved with getting set-up, and what's the good/cost effective product to use?

 

 

 

Hmm... I was never aware of this stuff before, but now that you mention it, I've received a bunch of packages packed with it. I never gave any thought to how the foam got formed around the piece. They're right that it's more effective and MUCH cleaner than using peanuts.

 

-Dan.

[Craig Vecchione]

 

Don't get me wrong; I'm quite sure it was a {censored}ty gig to never be able to plan ME time, but I have also NEVER understood why somebody would take an on-call position in the first place...and then get tweaked when they were... called while 'on' . :poke:

 

 

If you were told that you'd see maybe an hour a week, TOPS, and then were subjected to 2 and a half extra DAYS, you'd understand.

[kmart]

If you were told that you'd see maybe an hour a week, TOPS, and then were subjected to 2 and a half extra DAYS, you'd understand.

 

 

I'd understand that I'd not be long enough in that job for it to be such a pain in the ass to me personally is what I'd understand.

 

Been there, done that:

I took my first management position job for a significant pay increase (at the time) and was overseeing the M-F day shift at a place that also ran a PM and Saturday shift.

My job was to handle all day shift and transition/turn-over to the PM/Saturday supervisor (like a team leader; not at my level). When we would be extremely busy/above bandwidth capability, it was understood that I would assist by working extra hours on occasion to get through those peak times.

 

Shortly after I started, the PM/Saturday sup quit. I was working 8:30 to 5:30, and would regularly stay until 6:00 just to make sure the jr. folks on the night shift understood what they needed to focus on.

Then my bosses asked me to come in on a Saturday during a busy patch.

I agreed, because it was once.

 

A few weeks later, what I'm hearing from one of the bosses is that I need to be coming in on ALL Saturdays.

That was not part of the job description.

That was not part of any negotiation.

That was not what I signed up for a month and a half earlier.

 

I told her in no uncertain terms that I was still willing to come in occasionally, not regularly, AT MOST one Saturday per month, but not every month, etc., but in no way would I be coming in every Saturday, and that she'd better step up efforts to get night-time sup to handle that. End of discussion

 

Of course, a few weeks pass and then they did hire a night-time guy. And never told HIM that he needed to work Saturdays either. He left after two weeks.

 

Pressure came back to me to cover for him (nights and Saturdays).

I left.

Total time on the job: 3 months

[Craig Vecchione]

To undesrstand, you also need to understand the job market. It took too long to find and get this job, and I've continued looking since. If there were options, I'd take them.

 

The point remains that issues like this would often be handled in the collective bargaining a union can provide. It's not as if a $30B and very profitable corporation would be crippled by hiring the staff needed to actually do the work efficiently. It would likely lead to more, not less, profit.

[W. M. Hellinger]

Just ask anyone with a job today...have their responsibilities increased lately as coworkers are laid off? Has their pay increased commensurately? How about benefits....does anyone not in a union still have fully paid benefits? A pension? How about being intimidated into working holidays and weekends "to cover" for non-existent employees for shifts that the Co won't hire for?

 

 

I'd like to hope I'm an exception to what you

[Craig Vecchione]

I'd like to hope I'm an exception to what you

[W. M. Hellinger]

This definitely makes you an exception. Mostly large corporations are what conform to my description. It's easy for them to be that way...the people who make the real decisions....the ones that affect people...are removed by position, and often location, from those they affect. It's management from 30,000 feet. It was said that WWII bomber pilots had similar situations....killing tens of thousands within minutes, but seeing none of their victims. Unless they were unfortunate enough to be shot down and survive...

 

 

And they were just following orders from 8,000 miles away. Poor bastards... all of them, be it at 30,000 ft. or on the ground. But that's what happens when management mismanages and things get out of hand... we resort to violance.

[BillESC]

Mark,

I like your style, I've run my business in the same fashion. Not easy by any means but quite rewarding to ones conscience.

[W. M. Hellinger]

Not easy by any means

 

Fortunately for me, I sense that my employees realize this, and fortunately they cut me some slack realizing we're all only human... because we are... both they and I. We all put our pants on pretty much the same... one leg at a time.

[BillESC]

My point was it's not easy to run a company in a compassionate and caring manner when the alternative usually provides a better profit margin.

[W. M. Hellinger]

My point was it's not easy to run a company in a compassionate and caring manner when the alternative usually provides a better profit margin.

 

There's no doubt in my mind that some or much of my management style would make an MBA roll their eyes.

[Craig Vecchione]

 

There's no doubt in my mind that some or much of my management style would make an MBA roll their eyes.

 

 

 

No doubt. But it makes customers happy, and I'm betting it also lets you sleep much better at night.

[Ryan.]

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! Brand spankin' new box just came in and its pristine! Looks like I'll be at the studio tonight plopping my MixWiz and 231s into it!

[Dogoth]

My point was it's not easy to run a company in a compassionate and caring manner when the alternative usually provides a better profit margin.

 

 

The issue as I see it is not necessarily a better profit margin but being able to stay in business at all. In some industries To stay competative you MUST grind on your employees (I'm not saying it's right, it's just what I see). It is my belief that this is due to the availability of cheap overseas labor. I'm not necessarily advocating protectionism as much as making sure that the playing field is truly level. If we have labor laws (minimum wage, 40hr work weeks, safety regs etc...) they are because we have a high regard for human life and dignity (human rights). We should evaluate our trading partners with an eye toward the same standards and if they don't at least try to come close, there should be more tarriffs & duties for imports from that country. This is how we should spread the American Dream around the world. Make them conform to our standards rather than lower ourselves to theirs.

 

Who makes the rules of the game anyway? Oh I forgot it's not government, it's Big International Business. I guess I lose this round :>(

 

Sorry about the rant.

[W. M. Hellinger]

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! Brand spankin' new box just came in and its pristine! Looks like I'll be at the studio tonight plopping my MixWiz and 231s into it!

[Dookietwo]

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! Brand spankin' new box just came in and its pristine! Looks like I'll be at the studio tonight plopping my MixWiz and 231s into it!

 

 

Don't forget pictures!

[Coaster]

wow, 3 days? that is impressive. i have noticed i have been getting parts express deliveries in 3 days from ohio to nd, maybe the shippers are upping the game?

[W. M. Hellinger]

The issue as I see it is not necessarily a better profit margin but being able to stay in business at all. In some industries To stay competative you MUST grind on your employees (I'm not saying it's right, it's just what I see). It is my belief that this is due to the availability of cheap overseas labor. I'm not necessarily advocating protectionism as much as making sure that the playing field is truly level. If we have labor laws (minimum wage, 40hr work weeks, safety regs etc...) they are because we have a high regard for human life and dignity (human rights). We should evaluate our trading partners with an eye toward the same standards and if they don't at least try to come close, there should be more tarriffs & duties for imports from that country. This is how we should spread the American Dream around the world. Make them conform to our standards rather than lower ourselves to theirs. Who makes the rules of the game anyway? Oh I forgot it's not government, it's Big International Business. I guess I lose this round :>( Sorry about the rant.

 

Good rant... I'm turning all of this thread over and over in my mind... adding on to the 30+ years that I've been turning all of this over.

 

About 20 years ago... my business was between a rock and a hard spot for a week or so... and I found myself grinding on my employees (who were my wife Liz and myself). I came to the conclusion then that if you've gotta grind on your employees to stay competitive, then you're either in the wrong business or you have the wrong employees... or a combination of the two. I then came the realization our situation was a combination of the two... so we stopped doing what we were doing as and where we were doing it, and went to doing something else someplace else... and that worked much better... so we kept doing that... and made a lot of money and enjoyed a very grateful customer base.

[W. M. Hellinger]

wow, 3 days? that is impressive. i have noticed i have been getting parts express deliveries in 3 days from ohio to nd, maybe the shippers are upping the game?

 

We didn't do anything different than what we usually do based on the circumstances. Maybe the carriers are upping the game? It does seem on a daily basis that our parcel and freight carriers are happy to oblidge when they show up here.

[Ryan.]

SO STOKED. Everything fits in nicely. The box looks great. And best of all... I can now protect my mixwiz from the constant flow of weed and cig smoke floating through the rehearsal studio warehouse.

Thanks Audiopile... now about that Reel Snake...

[BillESC]

The issue as I see it is not necessarily a better profit margin but being able to stay in business at all. In some industries To stay competative you MUST grind on your employees (I'm not saying it's right, it's just what I see).

 

 

Setting aside the political bend, 'grinding' employees is counter productive. An unhappy worker will not do a happy job. Plain and simple.

[Dogoth]

Setting aside the political bend, 'grinding' employees is counter productive. An unhappy worker will not do a happy job. Plain and simple.

 

 

I couldn't agree with you more. What I see is that most of the corporate world doesn't care about a happy job. Barely adequate is enough (the key word being adequate). It seems that the bar has been lowered (shopped at Wal-Mart recently?).

 

I had a boss once who said. Most employees WANT to do a good job and it's managment's job to remove the roadblocks keeping that from happening - NOT to put them in the way).

[W. M. Hellinger]

Setting aside the political bend, 'grinding' employees is counter productive. An unhappy worker will not do a happy job. Plain and simple.

 

I completely missed the "political bend" part to grinding employees (it went right over my head).

 

Anyhoo... Bill: I suspect you're old enough that when you first entered the work world... it was probably as changed from how things are now for you as it seems to be from my perspective.

 

My first "time clock" job was at a factory. As I recall, the factory ran 3 shifts. As I recall, I worked the 5am - 1pm shift. I believe my payscale was $1.87/hr., which was somewhat above minimum wage for the time. I clearly remember I was well advised to show-up for work a good 1/2 hour or more early, because: The shift change involved approx. 150 employees punching out, and approx. 200 employees punching in (one time clock). At 4:59am the graveyard shift would start punching out. When the line of graveyard shift employees had punched out, the morning shift employees could start punching in. If an employee of the morning shift didn't punch in by 5:01am, they were docked an hour's pay, and were credited with a black mark on their employment record if punched in 5 minutes late. Three black marks and you were fired (plenty more where you came from). I was in the packing department. A mis-pack traced to your station credited 1 - 3 black marks depending on the severity of the mis-pack. Getting hurt on the job (if you couldn't conceal it) credited 1 - 3 black marks depending on the severity of the injury.

 

Oh yea, and "smoke breaks": You couldn't smoke at your work station, but every hour the whistle blew for "smoke break". If you smoked, you could go outside for 3 minutes, sit down, and light one up. If you didn't smoke, you were expected to keep working.

 

And... all work stations were "standing position" (no sitting down on the job)... because management believed that a standing employee is a more productive employee.

 

During one of my first jobs in agriculture, during which time I drove combine, I asked my employer if the sunshade for the combine could be re-installed on my combine. That combine had been equipped with a sunshade, but for some reason it had been removed and stored in a barn. I offered to install it on my own time. His reply to my request was (and he was serious): "I'm paying you to work, and if you aren't absolutely miserable while you're working, then you're not working." And that was that for that.