I was asked how to handle working with someone whose poor planning results in extra stress for you; besides he is difficult about ... everything! If you work with humans, you will run into difficult people. It doesn't matter where on the organizational chart you find yourself, there is no such thing as a "difficult-free" zone. It doesn't exist so why not accept reality and have strategies to deal with the inevitable. BTW, I have included at the end of this post how to use this situation to your advantage!

Main Principle:
If you want to fix the problem you will need cooperation from your coworker. The first rule is to make sure the other party does not become defensive. To do that, avoid saying "You"; use "I" statements instead. It is harder than you think. Try it.

​Imagine your coworker neglected to complete his part of the project and forced you to burn the midnight oil - again! You're upset and you plan on confronting him because you have had it. What will you say? Remember the word "you" is prohibited. This strategy will work with coworkers as well as other relationships.
 
Here is a suggested script. "I stayed up all night to complete the project. I was not planning on doing that. I was trying to come up with ways that completing the project can be a team activity and not solely my responsibility.  Can we come up with some solutions?"
 
It is unpleasant having such conversations; however, with practice you will become an expert, and once you are known for this skill you will be pursued by managers within your company as well as other companies.

Strategy:
Most people don't clearly know what the issue is. Also most do not know what they are looking for in this altercation. In other words, what does a good resolution look like? With that information, try understanding why the issues continue to occur.

​ Next, ask if you can discuss better communications between the two of you. There may be the possibility that your coworker is unaware of issues that are being created. Even if the issues are known, this approach allows your coworker a face saving mechanism to change behavior. 
 
Finally, try appealing to your coworker's empathy. Explaining where you are coming from can make a world of difference in some situations. In some cases, people that seem difficult may be defensive because they feel that you are being difficult. Working through a situation can help both you and the other person to understand each other.

​As promised, here is how you can turn this friction with a coworker to your advantage.
 
Two scenarios:
 
1. You go into your boss’s office and unload all the issues you are having with your coworker. The boss acknowledges the challenging situation. You say thanks and leave after leaving that turd in your boss’s lap. 
 
2. You go into your boss’s office and tell about all the issues you are having with your coworker. You continue by saying the magic phrase all bosses love to hear, "I am planning on addressing the situation. I just wanted to keep you in the loop. Also, I would love hearing any strategies that I should use."

​Talk about making lemonade out of lemons! This is a wonderful opportunity to showcase your strengths.
 
In closing, there are two ways to get rid of your enemy. First, grind them into dust (a long and painful process) or second, you could turn your enemy into a friend!

What are you thinking about, you look so serious? Actually, I find myself asking questions to no one. I am left to myself frequently with only my own thoughts for company. ​ I am never alone in my home, either a caregiver or Laura is in earshot; however, it not feasible for me to have someone with me all the time. Besides I would drive someone insane if I vomited all my thoughts on them. I am certain if I was medicine, I would come with this warning: take in small doses.
 
I have lots of spiritual questions that I like to ponder. These are not salvation issues, merely musings of my mind.

Here we go...
In John 3:16, which reads in the King James Version, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." 
 
Although I know this verse, it brings several questions to my mind, like what does "begotten" mean? I looked it up: the phrase "only begotten" is translated from the Greek word monogenes. This word is variously translated into English as "only”, "one and only”, and "only begotten”. 
 
So what does monogenes mean? According to the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament definition, it means “pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind."

Now I know Jesus is unique. Have you ever asked why? Why only one unique son? This is God, why not more than one? Does this verse imply God has more sons, but Jesus is the only unique one? Also does this mean that God the Father came first and then Jesus came into existence?
 
Where did God come from? How can you even wrap your mind around the concept of a Being that always was and is and never goes away?

​Did God look around heaven and think that it was missing something, like angels, and then he created legions of them? “Alright,” God said, “These angels need management.” God looked at Jesus, who said, “Not me!”

So God created the arch angels: enter Lucifer.  Didn't God know that He was creating an enemy? Where was God when Lucifer was convincing one third of the angels to follow him? I would think after 10 or 20 were turning against Him, God would have a "Come to Jesus" meeting with Lucifer. But God confronted Lucifer only after 1/3 defected, why wait?

​Was there an angel who is now in the witness protection program who turned State’s Evidence on Lucifer and the rest of the now "Enemies of the State" are on Death Row?

Why did God keep creating billions of solar systems?  Are there more people like us wondering what is going on?

​Does God control everything? If so, to what level of detail does He control it? The crease in my pants happened when I sat down.  Does God control that?  Be careful with the answer because you will be defining the limits of your God.  Cool, eh? 
 
This is the kind of entertainment that I create for myself.

​My friend, Al, visited from Arizona this past weekend.  He mentioned that he enjoyed reading my recent blogs, although he doesn’t necessarily agree with them.  He said it was nice to know that I think about more than how to get through another day with ALS and we agreed to disagree on some topics.

I am intrigued by all the discussions about the minimum wage increase.  It is a topic relevant in today’s economy; unfortunately I am seeing more cussing than discussing.  There is a lot of passion behind people’s arguments but often not a lot of knowledge.  In my situation, I have time to research and to think, a novelty in our society.

I am impressed with the number of people getting involved in the conversation. Let me give some advice if you are going to talk about this topic: In order to be taken seriously, manage your emotions. BTW:  Excellent debaters win by making the adversary get emotional!

That will be our secret - Shhh.  And, most importantly, it is ok to agree to disagree.

 I understand that people are frustrated because they cannot make ends meet on a minimum-wage job.  I get that.  In my mind, no one should be trying to live on “minimum-wage”.

People are suggesting that the minimum wage should be a “living wage” implying that if a person works 40 hours per week at a minimum wage job, it should be sufficient to sustain them.  Perhaps if our nation wants to be competitive in a global economy, we need to revise our thinking regarding the role of minimum wage.   That is a whole other conversation so we won’t go there but you may want to contemplate that idea.

Let’s begin by looking at the pros of raising the minimum wage as presented in articles on the CNN and Newsweek websites.
 
According to articles published, there will be a larger potential talent pool because as wages increase, jobs tend to become more attractive to seekers. In theory, a higher minimum wage may attract better qualified, more experienced workers. This implies that a business’s staff could be more skilled and more reliable, resulting in improved performance which will positively impact the bottom line.

Moreover, the increased talent level of the staff could also mean that fewer workers are required. My response to this is that day one, this may be true, a higher wage may attract more skilled and willing workers but unfortunately, as workers become accustomed to earning $15 per hour for menial work, that figure will not be enough to attract better workers. 

I can also tell you from experience that higher pay does not alter a person’s work ethic.  Either a person is determined to work hard and give a job 100%, or he is not.  Increasing his pay by a few dollars an hour is not going to change how hard he works.  It may excite him for a few weeks but once he becomes accustomed to that higher pay check, he will fall back into his old disgruntled behavior.  I acknowledge that if basic human needs are not met and then a wage increase enables basic human needs (food and shelter, not the latest iPhone and gel manicures) to be met, there may be a level of stress relief that may infiltrate the work environment.

Another benefit stated in the articles is lower employee turnover. Higher wages can improve employee morale, and a happy employee is less likely to look for other employment opportunities than an unhappy one. According to research by the Department of Labor, higher wages dramatically reduce employee turnover. A business may pay a slightly higher hourly wage but in theory will reduce turnover and thereby reduce recruitment and training costs. 

I agree with this statement at higher level pay positions.  For example, if a business is known for paying top dollar to engineers, like Google, that company is going to attract quality applicants and retain a higher percentage of its engineers because they cannot go elsewhere and receive the same compensation.  On the other hand, if an employee is in a minimum-wage job that he does not enjoy, $15 per hour is not going to make him stay when he can go to any other business in town and receive the same pay.

Another argument is that there will be increased productivity and customer satisfaction. The Federal Minimum Wage is currently $7.25/hour.  In Washington, where we live, the minimum wage is $9.47/hour.  Do you honestly believe that employees are more productive because they are getting more than $2/hour above the federal minimum wage?  I don’t think that comparison even crosses their minds!

Some argue that a higher minimum wage will lead to economic stimulus.  Minimum wage workers will have more money to spend with a higher minimum wage and that money will likely be spent. This in turn could lead to increased sales.  Ok, I will give you that point; if people make more money, they will inevitably spend it.

If we choose to continue to view a minimum wage job as a “career” then we should examine the effects of raising the minimum wage to $15 nationally.

1.  Initially, there will be increased competition for minimum wage jobs.  A higher minimum wage will likely intensify competition with overqualified applicants rivaling teenagers and younger, inexperienced applicants. While small businesses can certainly benefit from this shift, younger workers may miss out on the opportunity to acquire lifelong skills in an entry level job because older, more experienced workers will be more willing to take these minimum-wage positions.

2. There may be an increase in unemployment among the unskilled.  The minimum wage imposes a wage floor that prices unskilled labor out of the market. Daniel Mitchell of the Cato Institute suggests that "businesses are not charities and that they only create jobs when they think a worker will generate revenue. Higher minimum wages are especially destructive for people with poor work skills and limited work experience. "   With a higher wage, there is a higher expectation of performance.  Unfortunately, simply paying someone a higher wage does not improve their work ethic or skill. 

3. Employee morale will be negatively impacted.  When Wal-Mart increased the minimum wage for a half-million employees to $15/hr, it had an "unintended consequence".  It should not be thought of as unexpected, in fact, it is exactly what The Bloomberg Report said would happen. The more experienced employees who did not get a raise were unhappy that their newer, more inexperienced coworkers were being paid as much as or almost as much as they were. They put in the time and effort to get to their level of compensation and felt it was unfair to start coworkers off at the same pay.  By the same token, within an organization today, there may be employees who are college graduates or long-term employees who are paid $20 per hour.  Those employees may be content with their pay until a new hire with no education or experience is brought in at $15/hour.  Will companies have to bump everyone’s pay accordingly to maintain a differential between senior/skilled employees and minimum-wage employees?  Where does it end?

4. There will be an increase in automation technology.  The thought of the implementation of a $15 minimum-wage made cost-justifying automation easier for a McDonald’s owner in Phoenix, Arizona.  “protests getting worse every day The store’s new manager, Peter Gibbons, told CNN that he has worked with the robots at a product development facility in San Francisco for the last six months and speaks highly of the machines. “These things are great! They get their work done in a fast and orderly manner, plus they don’t ask for cigarette breaks.”

37-year-old Paul Horner, a spokesman for McDonald’s told reporters that because of the demand for a $15/hr minimum wage, the company has been playing with the idea of a restaurant run entirely by robots for years and believes their “Microdots” are the answer.

If you are upset by the thought of McDonald’s eliminating minimum-wage jobs and replacing them with robots, you can watch this video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAuQ5yzV9Lo

My mother-in-law raised an interesting point recently.  She is retired and lives in Florida.  She was eating at a Wendy’s and saw a sign on the wall that perplexed her so she told my wife about it.  She said that Wendy’s was hiring and the sign said, “Apply on your smart phone.” 

She was wondering why people who can afford a smart phone would be looking for work at Wendy’s.  Mind you, my mother-in-law is financially secure, probably because she has been careful with money her whole life and she still uses a flip phone (as does my wife).  This brings up a question of what the necessities are that the “living wage” needs to cover. 

 5.  The cost of goods will inevitably increase.  My wife began a small baking business about three years ago.  The business is very labor-intensive and pays minimum wage to its employees.  The business operates on a small profit margin appropriate for its industry.  My wife ran the numbers and said if the minimum wage increases to $15/hr, her cake bombs which currently retail for $3.25 each would have to increase in price 18% or $3.84 each.  That is assuming that none of her suppliers need to increase their costs as a result of the minimum wage increase. 

​ Hopefully, you can see how detrimental this increase will be to small, labor-intensive businesses.  Of course, if we had a technical business such as an engineering consulting company, the impact on our business of an increased minimum wage would be negligible.  Hmm… perhaps we need to be heading in a more technologically advanced direction…

The key to understanding the complexity of increasing the minimum wage is based on one simple concept, the same concept that made our country great. Capitalism is based on the premise that an economy’s purpose is to generate profit through unrestrained competition. 

Basically, businesses are in business to make money.  When they cannot do that given the wage constraints, businesses will do one of three things: close, automate or move to a country with more favorable wages.

Capitalism vs Socialism
I take a risk and start a business.  I put myself into debt to get things going. I could make a lot of money or I could lose everything.  It is up to me and perhaps it should stay that way, including what I determine is reasonable to pay my employees.

On the other hand, I start a business in a socialistic society.  it makes money and the government wants to control the distribution of the earnings.    Is this where we are headed?
​​
Although it is entertaining to hear comments on this subject, I believe that only business owners have valid input. It would be like me offering my opinions on the best way to give birth! Just because I've seen it done certainly doesn't give me the same amount of knowledge as my wife who has experienced it firsthand!