am i being a defeatist or pro-active?

helpimcrap

helpimcrap

helpimcrap

Soldato
Joined
13 Jan 2004
Posts
12,785
Location
Leicestershire
Been told i'm being defeatist but think i'm being pro-active.

Basically everyone in our team has to re-apply for their jobs (name of role has changed so original job doesn't exist - great work-around sacking people :rolleyes:).

Since i found out i've cancelled Sky and trying to limit my outgoings whilst at same time continuing towards geting a lodger in. Bathroom i was going to do this summer and i've bought tiles and the flooring and was going to buy the bathroom suite this week but that has had to go on hold for time being.

You can say 'be better than the other guys' etc but as i've seen in the past with similar issues in the company its not always the ones who can do the job the best get to keep them so i figure i've got 6 months grace then we'll see how the cards fall.

Just think i'm trying to be a little pro-active as it's going to happen and i want to be in the best position regardless of how it ends up. :)
 
You're reacting to an imminent situation presented to you so I'd say you're being a realist or adopting reactionary behaviour.

I also don't think you know what pro active means.
 
[FnG]magnolia;20984810 said:
You're reacting to an imminent situation presented to you so I'd say you're being a realist or adopting reactionary behaviour.

I also don't think you know what pro active means.
Click to expand...

eh?

This is exactly the way i meant it...

Google lol
"proactive behavior (or proactivity) by individuals refers to anticipatory, change-oriented and self-initiated behavior in the work place. Proactive behavior involves acting in advance of a future situation, rather than just reacting. It means taking control and making things happen rather than just adjusting to a situation or waiting for something to happen"
 
You aren't really influencing the situation itself by being active about it though, so you aren't being proactive. I don't think it's the right word here.

I know what you mean though, and you certainly aren't being defeatist about anything. Sensible and careful perhaps.
 
helpimcrap said:
Basically everyone in our team has to re-apply for their jobs (name of role has changed so original job doesn't exist - great work-around sacking people :rolleyes:).
Click to expand...

If the new job entails at least something like 66% of your previous role you may be able to question the legality of having to re-apply (this is the case in the public sector, not sure about the private).
 
No. If you were being pro active you'd make sure you were doing a really good job at work. Whilst searching for another one in case you get the boot.
 
Current employment laws make it very difficult for a place to get rid of crap employees unless they throw down some gross misconduct. Restructures are the only way to get rid of poorly performing people these days.

As for the thread title, if you had made all those provisions before you were aware of any impending job loss, you would be pro-active, as you are doing them after being made aware of the possible job loss, you are being reactive to that.
 
Meh, you're doing the right thing theoretically.

You're making your out goings less so you can save the money SHOULD you not get your new job / old job.

Either way, look for new jobs and think about applying for the 'current' one as well.
 
Making your outgoings less isn't a bad idea at the moment anyway.

My aim has always been to have 6 months-years salaray tucked away in an untouched savings account in case of reduncancy anyway - I realise this isn't practical for everyone but you could aim for as many months as circumstances allows.
 
Reapply for a position on the next 'rung' of the ladder rather than reapplying for you old job.

A mate of mine works for a company where they pull this trick all the time. I think he's been through the process three times and each time he's got the promotion!
 
Indulges in phrase definition semantics

Berates OP for indulging in phrase definition semantics

qKW4D.gif
 
Disco Boy said:
No. If you were being pro active you'd make sure you were doing a really good job at work. Whilst searching for another one in case you get the boot.
Click to expand...

I'm good at my job and i have a superb rapport with suppliers. Unfortunately that doesn't mean you get a job - in the past it seems to have been 'if your face fits'.
 
krooton said:
Current employment laws make it very difficult for a place to get rid of crap employees unless they throw down some gross misconduct. Restructures are the only way to get rid of poorly performing people these days.

As for the thread title, if you had made all those provisions before you were aware of any impending job loss, you would be pro-active, as you are doing them after being made aware of the possible job loss, you are being reactive to that.
Click to expand...

after what happened elsewhere i decided it would ultimately come down to affect me so i decided to apply elsewhere in the company for roles to be told 'you'e applying for the wrong reasons so i won't support your applcation' i.e. explaining that this has happened now and it will happen to my role in the future and others on my level so i wanted to apply for a role to get the experience an interview gives you. thought i was being just a little proactive then last year.... doubt i would havegotten the role but wanted the 'experience' it would have given so it would put me in a better position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom