Lazy worker, or hard working tyrant

@winterose (39922)
Canada
February 24, 2007 10:41pm CST
I remember years ago, when I had my first job. There was a woman supervisor who did her job well but she fought with everyone around her and made everyone's life miserable. She was eventually fired for that. If you were a boss who would you rather keep as an employee; someone whom everyone likes but is either too lazy to do the job right or just produces enough to stay employed by the company, or a dynamite person who works hard does twice as much as anyone else but fights with everyone and makes their lives miserable? which out of these two would you choose to have working for you and why?
3 people like this
5 responses
@ElicBxn (60762)
• United States
25 Feb 07
Well, he/she'd have to produce enough to stay employed, but if you can't have a group that works together, then you don't have a group producing at its full capacity. Someone like the person you are talking about can personally produce a lot of work, but if they are so nasty then nobody will want to work under/for/with them & the entire team production will go down.
3 people like this
25 Feb 07
I wouldn't pay someone to do something if they didn't do it in the right attitude. I'd rather cut my losses and keep those hard workers. Also i would aim at keeping everyone friendly to some level as useless scrobbles isn't really needed. Kudos ~Joey
2 people like this
@callarse1 (4793)
• United States
25 Feb 07
I would take the worker who does just enough work. I don't like lazy people because they annoy me. They expect to get paid and want other people to do their work. I don't like someone who does lots of work and complains and fights, either. I would take the one that just does enough work over the other two. Have a nice day and a big plus for your discussion. Pablo
2 people like this
• Canada
26 Feb 07
I would keep the dynamite person, but would assign them a job sale as a commissioned sales person where being nice to people is the only way to make money and hopefully train this person to be nicer. That way they win by earning more, and you win by have an effective staff member. :)
1 person likes this
@winterose (39922)
• Canada
26 Feb 07
good answer, I like the way you think, providing there is sales in the particular job, and providing there is no contract situation that forbids the employer to change a person's job around.
1 person likes this
• Canada
26 Feb 07
Good point... if I couldn't contractually change their jobs, I would certainly encourage them to change voluntarily... which might not be too hard since they should earn more if they are a real go-getter in a decent sales position.. ;) If there isn't a sale position, or something where they can feel like they are making a real difference, then they'd be looking for work elsewhere as they'd probably be a liability working with out staff as you describe them.
@coolcatzz (1589)
• Canada
25 Feb 07
Well I would definitely have to keep the one that produces. I mean that is why the company is in business to make money and stay afloat. Personality is big but not the deciding factor.