NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #18/NN_1992_18.iso/spool/alt/support/1226

Text File | 1992-08-13 | 6.9 KB | 135 lines

Newsgroups: alt.support
Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbfsb!cbnewsf.cb.att.com!motto
From: [e-mail] (mary.rita.otto)
Subject: Re: life and work
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: alt.support
Summary: Why work?
Sender: Mary Otto
Organization: AT&T
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:12:44 GMT
Lines: 121

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bear Giles) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>>>If you become frustrated with it as a job, then it has ceased to be
>>>fun and it is time to move on.  For the now, enjoy it.

When I first read this, I was tempted to comment but didn't.  Then I read
Bear's insightful comments, and was encouraged by them to share my opinions
here, too.

I work as a Systems Engineer at Bell Labs.  The pay is good, the benefits
are good.  The working conditions are adequate.  My current boss is great --
very supportive, very smart, easy to deal with.  But there have been a lot
of layoffs and close friends have lost jobs.  Morale has suffered.  There
is a lot of insecurity about our jobs here.  It was very hard when we went
through the last layoff.  It was like a three-month-long "wake" for the
living -- a true grieving process.

The last time something like that happened, I quit AT&T.  I took a job
with another company.  I was like the person who wrote above, "it is
time to move on".  But I was wrong.

This time, I decided to stay through the bad times.  It created more
opportunities.  After the bad stuff was over, I was able to bring forward
new ideas.  There was an openness to change because with the staff
reductions and reorganizations, things simply couldn't be done the old
way anymore.  It was amazing, when, after 6 depressing months, a few
colleagues and I initiated a new project.  Suddenly, there was this
burst of creative energy, and it was exciting to work again.  It was
fun.  We re-invented ourselves.

I know that this can happen in situations where there is no external
changes, too.  I have been in assignments where we were going no where
and it was so boring I couldn't stand it.  And I decided to do something
about it -- like what Bear said about taking grad classes for fun.  I
decided to help out some friends on their project "on the side".  That
grew into a whole new area of expertise that not only helped out the
project I was on, but opened up new opportunities later.

I realize that everyone's situation is different.  I know there can
be some situations where the only rational thing to do is to leave.
But "moving on" shouldn't be considered to be the default case.  Sometimes
it is running away from a problem.  That's where I went wrong.  I thought
that by leaving the company and getting away from the layoffs that I
was solving my problem.  But really it was a lack of self-confidence
that was making the situation so awful for me -- I was so worried that I'd
be canned next I couldn't stand it.  It was a lack of good, working
boundaries that was making it unbearable -- I couldn't protect myself
from getting caught up in the feelings of others -- I was overly involved.
I wasn't effective in dealing with management, I wasn't effective in
dealing with uncertainty.  So I threw away an opportunity to grow as
a person by running away, but took my problems with me to the next job
where I did get canned.

>>
>>This raises an important question that I have struggled with.  Is work
>>supposed to be enjoyable or is it something you do because you need
>>money to eat, etc?  (Especially in troubled economic times.)  I think
>>if you have the luxury you should try to do something you enjoy,
>>because (unless you're part time) you're gonna be there at least 8
>>hours a day, but in difficult economic times you may not have that
>>luxury and you have to take what you can get.
>
>I'm not sure "difficult economic times" makes a difference.
>
>Who I am is _reflected_ in my job and my lifestyle, but my job and
>my lifestyle do not _define_ me.
>
Bear - this was really profound.

My outlook is that my engineering skills are the ones I have to offer to
the market that get me the greatest gains for the least effort.  It is
a trade off.  It would be great if I could make as good a living from
my artwork, but realistically, I would have to work much harder at it
than I'm willing to (it wouldn't be as much fun, either, if I had to
set income goals on it).  A lot of other things that I think would be
great to do are precluded by choices I've made to be a wife and mother
in the way I define that role for myself.  But they are my choices and
my definitions.  Like Bear said, we define ourselves.  And we have
the power to redefine ourselves.

>>I still have my job, especially since I know a lot of people who've
>>lost theirs and/or are having trouble finding jobs, but I've felt
>>unhappy with my job lately.
>>new job.  The market is very tight where I live, and for personal

This is the kind of comment that draws a defensive response from me.
We are not "lucky" to have jobs, we are "successful" in establishing
our skills and value in the job market.  It is not like they have a
"lottery" for the jobs -- they pick the person they think can do
the best job (including the dubious tasks of being a friend of the
boss and being more attractive to look at or working for a lower
salary at the same job).
>It is possible for the economy to deteriorate to the point where
>people must accept _any_ job, but I don't think we're anywhere near
>that point yet.  What I have seen is a lot of people who insist that
>"I do X in city Y," despite the fact that there are no more jobs
>fitting that tight of a description.
I grew up in the south side of Chicago.  People worked in the factories.
We, as their children, were expected to work in the factories.  The
factory jobs went away.  Some people still classify themselves as "out
of work steel workers".  It is so sad.  Other people went and took classes
at the community college and now have new careers.  Others live in
terrible poverty, working at the unskilled service jobs that are available.
Like Bear said, there are a lot of people who have fenced themselves in
and now complain about the result of those fences.
>
>(On the other hand, we have, ah, leaders like Dan Quayle who thought
>it was great that a (California) fast-food restaurant had a help-wanted
>sign in the window.  It somehow never occured to him that nobody can
>afford to live in California on a $8/hr job unless they're willing to
>share a small apartment with roommates (and maybe not even then)).
To say nothing of how they would get to that job -- given the abysmal
state of public transportation.  And many of those $8/hr jobs are only
part time, enabling the employers to avoid providing any benefits.
>
>
>Bear Giles

Mary Otto