This is Why We OE

By -
As this is being typed, this author just got off the phone with someone close. The person had just been laid off by Wells Fargo. Here is an article talking about the layoffs that affected this person. 

Definition
This author and the person in question are fans of "OE" - "Over-Employment." The person in question is (was?) over-employed at the time of the layoff. By definition, Over Employment is the practice of holding two or more full-time jobs simultaneously, often without disclosing this to employers. 

According to Google, OE is a trend fueled by factors like remote work flexibility and the desire for increased income. While some find it a way to boost their earnings, it raises ethical concerns and potential risks for both the employee and their employers.

Why OE? 
Over-employment is primarily a means to a better income. 
Over-employment is also insurance against crazy times and layoffs (like my friend). 


Ethics
To be fair, the only legitimate ethical questions about overemployment are:
- conflict of interest
- if someone is paying for you to be in a certain place at a certain time
- if you cannot perform the duties of both (or all 3, all 4, etc.) jobs. 
- if you lie to your employer and tell them you are not working elsewhere. 

If you visit places like Reddit, where there are forums and discussions about over employment, then you will quickly realize that the vast majority of people who are over employed
- Will not work for a second company ("J2") wherein a conflict of interest lies. 
- Will not work for a company that requires their presence at a specific place, during specific hours; unless they work J2 during the "off hours" of J1. 
- Will easily be able to perform necessary duties of both jobs. 
- Will not discuss outside employment with an employer (this is "Rule 1 of OE" - you  don't talk about OE). 

Detractors
Naturally, there are detractors. Many, according to one Redditor, are "conditioned to believe the antiquated mindset that a boss/employer "owns" you by paying you." This is an antiquated line of thinking. If a company wants that level of ownership, then they must guarantee your future monetarily, in this author's opinion. A different Redditor on the same post suggests, "Over employment is only unethical because the employer doesn’t want you to do it. They want to have complete control over you. Same reason they don’t like unions, and pay you as low as possible."

As has happened before, financial guru Dave Ramsey's company holds some conflicting opinions about OE. Dave and the crew are very quick to tell you to pick up a second job to pay off debt (which is a leading reason most who are OE do so). However, they will give a blanket "deliver pizza" statement. What if someone has skills that allow them to make more than $1000 per month delivering pizza? Well, they might well be "stealing from the company" according to Ramsey personality Ken Coleman. Coleman suggests you must be upfront with both companies about what you are doing. Most people, this author included, feel that is none of either company's business, provided the above caveats are met (don't lie, don't talk about OE, and do not engage in a conflict of interest). 

Counter Point
As often is the case, Joshua Fluke has a very level headed opinion of over-employment. 
Also, it is this author's opinion, and the opinion of millions of others, that most, if not all companies lie to you about the job, pay, or working conditions. Therefore, there is no duty to be "100% honest" with them. 

Summary
This author tends to believe that the people that don't want you to OE are those with an antiquated mindset, or those managers in jobs who either a) don't want you to make as much as them, or b) want to have control over you. 

Indeed, this author's friend who was laid off from Wells Fargo, reported to a manager who liked to lord authority over him. So this layoff was, in fact, a blessing. Now the friend will be seeking a new J2, and his old J2 has been promoted to J1. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Your comment will be displayed after approval.
Approval depends on what you say and how you say it.

Popular posts from this blog

This Will Trigger The Weak

By -
Image
Seen on Social Media: Your Wife Is Your First Daughter—Treat Her Like a Baby, Or She’ll Break Your Home Let’s scatter the woke table: Your wife is not your equal. She’s not your therapist. And she’s definitely not your homeboy. She’s your first daughter—emotionally, mentally, and psychologically. And the moment you start expecting her to “reason like a man” or “carry half the weight,” you’ve already lost. The modern man is confused. He's told to be vulnerable, yet punished when he shows weakness. Told to be “emotionally available,” yet abandoned when he starts crying like a choirboy. Let’s get this straight: Women were designed to be nurtured. Not negotiated with. Let’s break it down like a real father would. — 1. Every Woman Is a Grown Baby Looking for Emotional Security She’ll talk tough. She’ll claim she’s independent. But when the bills land or the pressure hits? She’s curled up in your arms, needing your shoulder—and your wallet. Why? Because biologically, her system runs on h...
Read more

Polar Opposites

By -
Image
My friend, Lefty, had a darn good post a couple of days ago. Let's go into why it was such a good post.  Meeting Your Polar Opposite Polar Opposites For starters, people who cannot see past the surface might notice that Lefty is a self-described introvert. This author is a self-described extrovert. That would be "polar opposite."  Climate Change Next up, Lefty made the post, which has many references to the farce that is the claim of manmade climate change. Not only that, but Lefty's post was on March 12. That date marked 32 years since the Blizzard of '93 hit most of Tennessee. In that blizzard, Chattanooga got 18 inches of snow in 12 hours - I know because I was living there at the time. Were such an event to happen today, the Leftists would be screaming bloody-murder about manmade climate change.  Chemtrails Last part that made Lefty's post so good was he took a swing at the folks on the right who believe in chemtrails. For clarity, my conspiracy-theorist ...
Read more

The Problem With Many Modern Women

By -
Image
Seen on X, from Richard Cooper - here, pasted text in case Blogger inexplicably deletes the image as they have done so many times in the past: "In the not so distant past, she was wifey material if she was: A virgin Tattoo free  Had good family  Feminine  Under 25  Religious  Had homemaking skills  Agreeable  Could cook & clean  Wanted his children  Most brides today are none of those things." Here we will give an example of what most modern women are like in italics below Cooper's list of marriageable qualities.  Marriageable qualities vs. Reality: A virgin Been with 100+ men (whatever number they tell you, multiply it by 9, at the least.)  Tattoo free  Many tattoos.  Had good family  Comes from single mother only home where the mother did not allow the father into the children's lives.  Feminine  Feminist Under 25  Over 30, with declining fertility.  Religious  "Spiritual" (meaning wil...
Read more