Workplace Ethics 101

Borrowin a question from The lobe and Mail:

You edit computer software code on a freelance basis at home. You are paid $600 per batch of code, on the assumption that this task usually takes six hours to handle. However, you are faster than most, and your work is accurate, and you can do it in four hours. You ask your manaer to ive you more code to edit, and explain why. He decides to pay you $400 for each batch. Is this fair?

Well, is this fair?

Comments

[trinity13]

Def not!!! Cutting it back to $400 is almost like a punishment...like you weren't doing your work in the most efficent way. Instead you should be rewarded for doing a job well, not the other way around!

[Tara]

In high school art class, I was way ahead of the rest. I used to be 2 or 3 projects ahead. So, one time the assignment was pointillism. I made a stunning painting of a still life, with all the light and shadows and details. All in teeny tiny dots of paint. The girl next to me, in the same amout of time, made a cartoon clown. Using 5 colors. I got 70%. She got 90%. I complained. The teacher told me it was because more was expected of me than of her. And YES, that's unfair. If we are punished for being our best, than why would we ever strive to improve??

[Sandy]

Not fair, no way, not at all...unless you've signed the contract stipulating you are paid by the hour and not by the project. I, for example, freelance as a consultant and charge hourly.

[sleepingmommy]

No it is not fair. You should be paid the standard rate and not punished because you are faster.

[tommy]

no

[Vics]

Trinity13 said it first and best, a pay cut is a punishment. But Sandy makes a good point too. Personally I think the guy was daft to ask for more when he could have done something of a more personal nature with that little block of free time.

But thats just me.

[sigmund, carl and alfred]

It is very fair.

The analyst made the proposal- he can reject the $400 per batch deal. No one is forcing him to take it.

The business is trying to save money. No one complains when the govt trys to save the taxpayers money. Why should investor or business money be any different?

If the idiot analyst had a half a brain, he'd have offered to do the job for $400 instead of $600- if he got more work, because that in effect, was the case.

If the analyst takes less time, he can get other business elsewhere. I suspect if he took $600 for 4 hours of work, and then mananged to get more work from another source, no one would say he was stealing time from that first employer.

If you have ever owned a business, these matters are not as black and white as they appear.

Business owners invest the money (sometines NOT their own), time and they take the risk. They ought to have a say in being responsible with money.

[Paula]

I agree with the docs.

[caspar]

Nope, not fair. The key thing is the "language". The rate is based on accomplishing the task and the assumption is merely speculative. If the business wants to change the terms for further assignments, that's cool. But....a deal is a deal.

[annie]

First of all, I would just say, "Could I have more work?", like "I would like to make more money." I sure as Hell would not brag how fast I was.
Secondly, I do *similar* work and I charge by the job, not by the hour.

[Keb]

I have to agree with the docs on this one.

[Goober]

If the bid is 6 hours,,,,,if I can do the code in 2 hrs, you are still gonna pay me for the 6 I bid..........The rest of the time is NUNYA..........

[mar]

I know about this. After I had my baby I reduced my daily office hours to 6, 75% salarywise. I managed to do just as much as I was doing when working full time just because I do best when under pressure...

[Barbara]

Absolutely not fair! Your more productive workers should be paid more per hour. He should make $125 per hour.

[Plain Jane]

As I've often heard... Fair [fare] is what you pay on the bus.

[Goldie]

No it is not fair, and pretty stupid of the manager. His best worker will go elsewhere and he'll have to find somebody else to do the work, good luck getting that new hire to agree to work for $400 per batch. I can only imagine my reaction if my boss offered me a 30% paycut for doing a good job... I'd be out of there so fast... hehe

That said, I would have been more subtle when asking for more work ("because I love working 16-hour days", "because I need the extra income", but not "because I can do it in 4 hours"). Either that, or I would continue to do the same amount of work at 4hrs per batch, and use the remaining time productively ;)

[kenju]

No, it isn't fait. That would be getting penalized for being faster at your job!

[ribbiticus]

no way. in fact i should be paid more since i was able to finish earlier and do it better than most.

[OldOldLady Of The Hills]

I do not have a clue because I don't have the first idea of what all of this is!!! Sorry.

[fatty]

no, its not your fault your more efficient.

[Plumkrazzee]

It doesn't seem fair. On the other hand, take the $600 per batch, and slow down. Watch Days Of Our Lives, bake cookies, take a nap. Why bust your ass when you don't have to?

[peri]

Well, it may not necessarily be unfair, since you now have the opportunity to make 800 in 8 hours versus 1200 in 12 hours.
But to be truly fair, there should a reward for being more efficient.

[JCanuck]

If you are being paid $600 for the batch,then regardless of whether it took you 2, 4 or 10 hours, you should be paid the agreed amount.

Would this manager have paid you $800 if it took 8 hours to do? I doubt it.