Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[penguinofhonor]

I can't find the numbers right now, but I'm pretty sure the CDC says millions of people catch diseases every year because of people working in the food industry while sick.

[Frumple]

Sick leave isn't particularly mandatory from on high, no, so far as I can recall. There might be some amount mandated on the federal level, but if it is, it's so small as to be functionally nonexistent. Just like our vacation days :V

Most places of employee allow for some sick days, though. Pretty much never enough, but some.

[Vattic]

I can't find the numbers right now, but I'm pretty sure the CDC says millions of people catch diseases every year because of people working in the food industry while sick.

From what I understand presenteeism (didn't know there was a word for it) also damages productivity. Which makes sense as people aren't going to perform well when sick and colleagues may catch it. The only times my workplace has been strict that employees not come in sick were those when norovirus were around.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

US productivity per capita is also extremely low for nations of otherwise similar conditions, suggesting that the key to becoming a resurgent economic superpower might be lots of vacation time. What irony.

[Loud Whispers]

US productivity per capita is also extremely low for nations of otherwise similar conditions, suggesting that the key to becoming a resurgent economic superpower might be lots of vacation time. What irony.

Work burnout can be adequately measured in suicide rates

[ArKFallen]

Work burnout can be adequately measured in suicide rates

Seems too tenuous a link with all those other things that bandy around as factors. IE poverty, stress, feeling of no direction.

[Loud Whispers]

Work burnout can be adequately measured in suicide rates

Seems too tenuous a link with all those other things that bandy around as factors. IE poverty, stress, feeling of no direction.

Also linked to work burnout, but which is chicken and which is egg?

[Frumple]

Work burnout can't really be adequately measured in suicide rates -- there's a potential correlation, but work burnout results in quite a few other things (including, but not limited to, job shifts, un and under employment, homelessness, various sorts of non-fatal physical issues, simple decreased productivity... there's just sort of a sundry list) and not to equal degrees, while suicide has significantly more contributing factors, some of which are both contributing factors to and results of work burnout. It's a bad measure that won't even remotely manage to adequately track instances of work burnout.

You'd want some kind of conglomerate measure if you're aiming for adequacy -- several things tracked and weighted appropriately, probably on a graduating scale instead of yes/no. Suicide could be on the list, but you're not dealing with a chicken and egg scenario, you're dealing with a dozen different chickens and eggs with no clear connect as to which direction the incubation is occurring. Trying to simplify things is just going to create a (badly) distorted picture of what's happening.

[lorb]

Asking people is the best way to measure work-burnout.
Call 300 people and ask them; do a little math/stats; done.

[Frumple]

... no, that's probably one of the worst ways to measure work burnout. A lot of people don't realize that's actually what's going on, more would not admit it, and still more would not admit it over the phone. So on and so forth.

Surveys/interviews can definitely be part of the means of assessment, but as things go it's often a pretty terrible way to track stuff like this, especially if you're just asking them if they feel burnt out. Humans are often quite bad at self-identifying problems and worse at reporting or acknowledging them to other people. Would be even more so in fields where work burnout is likely, since the people in them are under significant pressure and generally have a great deal of incentive (not the least of which is continuing to function at-least-minimally while burnt out, which can be the difference between, y'know, being able to eat or not) to not admit the issue exists to anyone, even -- especially, often enough -- themselves.

E: And the fun thing is, just as under reporting is a significant problem, so is over reporting by people primed by the question to respond in ways that give false positives. So your calling and asking is very much likely to throw out all sorts of bad data. You really want to rely primarily on statistics and behavior tracking for something like this, not direct interviewing. The latter can get really bloody unreliable on certain subjects.

[Truean]

http://news.yahoo.com/pope-prepares-historic-address-congress-071839676--politics.html#

All that "religious" political stuff is just gonna come to an interesting point in a little bit.... Anti gun ("arms trade"), Anti poverty? Climate change? Abolishing the death penalty? Other classically liberal slants...?

The catholic church opposes gay marriage and lots of right wing political people use that as a reason to oppose it? No surprise there. Let's see if they start opposing the "the arms trade" (guns), death penalty, poverty, income inequality,and Co2 along with total equality with open immigration. Somehow I think not. Trail mix religious excuses: take what you want a leave what you don't? I'm not sure it works that way. Then again, it's only the Pope....

Let's see how this plays out.

[Arx]

The right wing political people have been diverging from the Catholic church (and reality) for a long time. A couple of months back, when the Vatican came out as supporting the theory of anthropogenic climate change, half the GOP made statements to the effect that the pope should stick to religion and not try to get involved with science.

[Graknorke]

half the GOP made statements to the effect that the pope should stick to religion and not try to get involved with science.

I find it funny, given that politicians are also hardly ever scientists. The pope is just as qualified to talk about it as they are. Excluding bias because of his position perhaps, but I don't know anything about a Christian doctrine regarding climate change.

[Frumple]

The right wing political people have been diverging from the Catholic church (and reality) for a long time.

Pretty much. Even a lot of the US catholics don't agree the Pope has any authority, nevermind the protestant majority, many of which outright think the guy's the antichrist and/or devil.

Nice-ish to see the guy continuing to talk about as well as you could expect out of 'em, though, I guess. Fellow's views are about as catholic as soiling yourself in a confessional _{(bonus point get: crude old people joke)} but at least he gives lip service to some of the better parts of it instead of primarily the backassward bits. It's something.

[RedKing]

half the GOP made statements to the effect that the pope should stick to religion and not try to get involved with science.

I find it funny, given that politicians are also hardly ever scientists. The pope is just as qualified to talk about it as they are. Excluding bias because of his position perhaps, but I don't know anything about a Christian doctrine regarding climate change.

Actually, Francis has a chemical technician diploma, which qualifies him MORE than most politicians to talk about it. He's not a scientist, per se, but at least he understands the basics. Which is more than can be said for about 95% of Congress.