Re: Rude Ca****er at McDonald's Today

Scott in SoCal  <scottenaztlan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:

> Expecting a droid with almost zero training and not much
> more income to be chipper 100% of the time is most definitely
> unreasonable. 

Except that McDonald's employees don't have "almost no training."
Especially when they're ****ft supervisors.  How do I know that?
Half a dozen or more of my friends worked there when I was in
high school and college, and we talked about it quite a bit.
These people aren't simply taken off the street, dressed in
a polyester uniform, and turned loose at front counter.

The employee's income is irrelevant.  You're taking it as a
given that this ****ft supervisor was underpaid.  Well, relative
to what?

Fast-food workers are paid commensurately with the skills and 
responsibilities demanded by their jobs.  No matter how little
skill a job demands, the expectation of their employers and the
public at large is that an employee will do his job properly.

And in a service-related job, that includes being pleasant to
the people who make the whole enterprise possible in the first
place.  Being pleasant doesn't require a Ph friggin' D.


> That may be what they are being paid for, but they're simply
> not going to be motivated to deliver it every working hour.
> That's reality.

**** motivation.  Do it anyway. Quit whining and suck it up. 

It's a job, with duties and expectations for the discharge 
thereof.  Grasping this and coming to terms with it is known
as "being an adult."  And if this broad is a ****ft supervisor,
she's ostensibly an adult.


: Look, Scott; we both know that you're going to argue just
: to argue, for the sheer ornery s****t of it

> So now we understand why you jumped into this thread from
> outta nowhere. :)

Excuse me?  It was crossposted to a newsgroup that I read.


> You have still failed to establish the McDonald's cor****ate
> policy that requires a ****ft Supervisor to behave in the way
> "Just Visiting" demands.

Oh, come the **** on!

This is a great example of what I mean when I say you argue
just to argue. You don't discuss topics in good faith; with
you it's all just a contest to see who can come up with the
glibbest argument, and truth and common sense be damned.

Obviously I, as a member of the public, don't have access to
McDonald's internal policies, job descriptions, and lists of
employee duties and expectations.  Then again, I don't need 
to.  Clearly, a company as PR-conscious as McDonald's cares
very much about its employees presenting a pleasant environ-
ment to its customers.  Why?  Because if they didn't, they
wouldn't _have_ many customers.


> On the contrary: the fact that this woman was PROMOTED to
> ****ft Supervisor is a pretty strong indication that 
> management is quite satisfied with her job performance.

It's entirely possible that her attitude didn't take a 
nosedive until after she was promoted.  Or that whoever
promoted her is as clueless as she is.  Neither is hardly
a reflection of cor****ate policy.



Geoff

--
"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women
 easier access to the mainstream." -- Rush Limbaugh