What's Da Buzz?

It seems to be a universal thing no matter what country you are in or what company you are working for but office politics is one of the ugly sides of having a job. (Hence why I feel self-employment or running a business is better.)

For those who have not been graced of experiencing office politics in a Western company, I’ll explain it briefly. Office politics is not based on who is performing better or frustration with dealing with someone not pulling their share of the workload. Instead office politics is when you are judged based on whether or not you associate with the “in crowd.” Basically, those who often are not good at doing a job go back to forming the groups like they did in elementary and high school instead of being mature and working to get the job done.

Individuals in the “in crowd” may take exception to your not participating in their group or honoring their group and try and find flaws in your work to get you fired. These childish antics of those who are insecure are unfortunately common. The nastiness is getting worse as morality in the USA declines.

So if you are a Filipina here in the USA or other Westernized company, how do you get past the office politics without sacrificing your own identity (harming your home life in the process because of changing for the worse)?

The answer lies in the core of what a Filipino is. We are respectful, very hard working, polite and kind as a general culture. That is how you beat the office politics in-crowd. You stay kind and polite at all times always giving the proper respect to those who are in authority while asking for clarification on work issues. Do not engage in gossip or anything the in-crowd focuses on. Do your job better than anyone else in the company without giving the desire to “climb the corporate ladder.” By performing better than the rest because of our hard work ethic while remaining humble, you remove the threat to their job unless they are paranoid about you taking their job because you are outperforming them.

Work hard, do your best to remain error-free, accept constructive criticism as it relates to the job while letting them know you respect a person’s knowledge, experience, and title but you are equals when it comes to being a human being. Or as the phrase goes “Kill’em with kindness.”

Live well,

Anah

Generating money online can sometimes be a tricky business. Not only do you need to learn how to manipulate HTML code, SEO terms, widgets, blogging rules and many other things but it is possible that the lack of action could be costing you earning potential.

What the heck am I talking about this time? If you are a casual blogger or the standard Internet user who just happens to be reading this entry into this blog, never mind. But if you are serious about making money online, that will require you to take some measures to ensure you are getting all of the traffic you can get to your website.

The first step is to take this domain name analysis. The next step is to analyze just how much money you want to make on the Internet and how serious you are. Business is not free. Running a blog or doing just about anything else to generate a profit margin for you are a form of a business and that carries with it expenses.

So if you are dead serious like we are on generating a significant profit margin from your work on the Internet, then get ready to start funneling some funds into the expense side of your website(s). In this manner, you can lock out the competition from trying to piggyback on your good web name and get all of the traffic you are supposed to be receiving headed your way.

Think it over, take the analysis, then check your goals and your budget. I know I have some work to do.

But for now, I’ll enjoy my 3 days weekend with the family!

Live well,

Anah

If you have been paying any attention to the news from the USA, Wisconsin is getting mentioned regarding the protests by unions and what Governor Walker is attempting to do. If you are one of my international readers, this is a momentous time in Wisconsin. We are finally something more than cheeseheads, that place north of Chicago, or the place with lots of snow and deer.

Enough with the humor part of this. I am employed in both the public and the private sector, so I am quite familiar with both. In my college job, I had a choice of either joining the union (WEAC or the Wis.branch of the NEA) or not. However, it really wasn’t a choice. The union was going to be taking union dues from my paycheck whether I was in the union or not. It didn’t matter whether or not I supported them or wanted to join. They were going to take my money. I had no say in the matter.

So what is the real issue of what is going on now? You will hear a lot of stuff that is merely political garbage trying to make the other side look bad. No, the Governor is not a tyrant or dictator. What he is doing is no surprise as he said he would when he campaigned. He won the election and is doing what he was elected to do. On the other side, the unions are willing to agree to the financial terms but do not want to give up their collective bargaining rights.

As for almost all of the other claims, they are bogus and inflammatory political garbage. The doctors writing sick notes is true but they will be likely facing medical fraud charges and may lose their licenses to practice. Most of the crowd of protestors are not state employees but a portion are teachers and many more are paid to be there or bussed in. Also, the changes are for all state employees whether they be a legislator, union, or non-union.

So what is the big issue with collective bargaining rights? Why is that issue creating such heat in Wisconsin during a weekend of a blizzard? (I’m snowed in today.)

To answer that, one must understand that public unions and private unions are two very different things. In the private sector, the union that represents the employees negotiates with management. Management of a business is limited in its resources based on market trends, competition, profit margin, and responsibility to shareholders. If they give up too much to the workforce, they will no longer be able to compete and will go out of business. (GM should have but was bailed out by the government.)

The public unions represent the employees but you have to look at who they are negotiating with. There is no true management. They are all employees. There is no profit margin, no competition, no market trends, and no shareholders to be responsible too. At most, they deal with politicians but those who fund their paychecks are the taxpayers. If the politicians do not act in good faith on behalf of the taxpayer, then no one is representing the taxpayer. There is no balance.

Further, it is well known that the union dues forcibly removed from my paycheck are given to the politicians who are in favor of the unions. They use that money to get re-elected (and keep getting paid by the taxpayers) and in turn vote in favor of the unions. The taxpayer is left out of the equation but is given the bill. The employees like myself are also out of the equation as we have no say.

By removing the collective bargaining rights on the benefits and a large part of the wage controls, it puts a feature back into play. The taxpayers can have a say at the bargaining table. Also, it permits the municipalities to set the beginning costs of employment as opposed to the unions specifying the minimum at the taxpayers’ expense. Further, it gives the municipalities greater power to react quickly to decreased revenues. I can say from experience that the unions will not elect to reduce their benefits.

They will also drag out any process for years which only hurts the municipalities when there are budget crunches. In the end, the taxpayer gets hit twice.

What it boils down to is this. If the collective bargaining powers remain with the unions, the concessions are temporary and the core problem remains. The budget problems will return and the union-politician corruption will remain. If the collective bargaining powers are largely removed, the unions will have to collect their own dues if the employees want to pay them.

It is all about control. The unions want to retain control and forced collection of dues. The opposite side wants to return it to the taxpayer and the employee. Many employees would opt out of the union if they had a choice. That would seriously hurt the union’s power, finances, and ultimately control over the politicians.

So should the public employee have a choice on whether or not to join a union? Who should have control over the public servants? Should the public servants be in control of themselves or should the taxpayer control them? Do the servants control the master or do the servants serve the master (taxpayer)? Do the people tell the government what to do or does the government tell the people what to do?

Live well,

Anah