Tegger wrote:
> Don C <dc.nc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in news:0d979ed6-5307-4ff4-8da3-
> a610d2bca86a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>>I'm an apprentice tech at a Chevy dealer****p. They have had me take a
>>bunch of on-line cl***** that I do after hours. It was implied that I
>>would get paid for this time. I have completed all of the on-line
>>training and now they want to send me to Phoenix for 2 days for my
>>final hands on-diesel training. They have told me that I wont get
>>paid for this time.
>>
>>Is it up to each dealer****p to decide whether or not they pay for on-
>>line and hands-on training, or is there a standard GM policy on this?
>>
>
>
>
> Hmm. Bad sign here. You're looking at this as having to work for no pay.
> You're not a real professional, then.
>
> Let's investigate further: Assuming you're 25 and will work until 65,
> working only 8 hour days the whole time, 50 paid weeks a year, you will
> work 80,000 hours in your life.
>
> You are being asked to give up 16 of those hours for no pay, or 0.02% of
> your lifetime total. How much more are those "bunch of on-line cl*****"
> eating up?
>
> Me, I'd be seeing this as a golden op****tunity to make myself more
saleable
> for more money to prospective employers, even to your current employer.
GM
> is throwing at you information that may be nearly impossible to come by
> once you're on the outside looking in.
>
> Information is priceless. It, plus work ethic, is what makes a worker
worth
> more than his fellows. Those 16 "free" hours will pay for themselves
many
> times over, provided you have the right attitude.
>
I agree, but as an apprentice he may need those 16 hours to pay the
rent. It'd be one thing if it were a weekend but I would assume that
these are weekdays that he won't be getting paid for working at the
dealer****p.
Maybe I'm out of touch, but that is a sign to me that this dealer****p is
unconvinced that the OP is worth the investment. Whether that means
that the OP has given the dealer****p reason to doubt him or if that
means that the dealer****p is cheap and sees techs as replaceable I have
no idea, but I don't think that this is a sign of a good
employee/employer relation****p.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
|
