Socialising at Work

Mountainsandh

Morgans wrote: »

certainly none of the posts seem to offering any sort of solution to the situation the OP is in.

FWIW, think about starting an activity that you are happy to organise,, and see if others are interested. Book club was mentioned here. Hope things do get easier.

He/she might confirm or deny, but I don't think the OP has a "situation" as such. It seemed to me they were just looking for validation, or confirmation that they are not alone in these feelings.

Why should someone who are doing their job and getting on with everyone, while being an introvert in their own time, make any change in the situation ?

I just checked, here are quotes from OP's post :

I'm curious about opinions on socialising in the workplace
...
Love the work ...I really respect the company and its goals
...
My colleagues are all really nice
...
is there anything wrong with my attitude?
...
I know management are pleased with my performance on a professional level

Why should OP have to " think about starting an activity" that he/she is "happy to organise" ?

We all have different personalities, and if we do our job well, we are happy, management seem happy, relations with colleagues are amicable and cooperative, then I really don't see why personality A should have to force it to suit personality B.



I think this whole socializing thing depends on the job too.

My job is very social, I have to deal with people all day, and the communications and relationships make up 50% at least of my qualifications for the job.

When I'm at home, I'm more of an introvert.

Think of it like the Eurovision episode of Father Ted where Jon Kenny looks unshaven and mumbles before the show, but when he steps on stage he's polished and he really delivers as a TV presenter.

I dislike social occasions with work colleagues, and I would resent being expected to attend, not because I don't get on with my colleagues or dislike them, simply because as part of my job, I do the social thing, but in my own time, I prefer the more introvert lifestyle.

I think OP was making that point. OP, I'm the same.

Do you know, I tend to be pathologically honest, too much for my own good sometimes.
So I couldn't help but mention to colleagues before, and management, that the socializing was just not my thing, no offense, but I just preferred to stay out of it.
I got 2 types of answers : "not to worry about it sure, you do what you're comfortable with" or "ah sure, I'm the same, I go to these things but I'd rather stay at home".

Ursus Horribilis

Yeah, the thread has gone way off topic. Admittedly on a tangent which I found fascinating but won't have been of interest to the OP.

It doesn't look like they're doing anything wrong as such. I don't even consider it to be a work problem. Potentially it could come against them if they wanted to move up in the organisation or there were opportunities to move sideways and do other things. Having good interpersonal relationships with colleagues can help as can the ability to bring people together. We don't know what the OP does in their job so it might never become an issue at all.

Wanderer2010

davo10 wrote: »

Would you get over yourself. You want a union to fight for your right not to have free nights out at your employers expense? For Gods sake most employers don't give a damn about their employees and would replace them at the drop of a hat. I try to improve the atmosphere and you see it as a form of bullying and forced merriment, Jesus wept.

You haven't once answered the question: Whats wrong with people who are fantastic timekeepers, good team players, and get all their work done to a high standard but who don't wish to socialize with their workmates? You have dodged this question over and over.
Plus the fact that you are the business owner puts a spin on everything you say. It would be interesting to get the views of the people who are forced to go to these events 4 times a year, of course they are going to tell you they like it. They have no union to complain to. You may just be hearing what you want to hear.

davo10

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

You haven't once answered the question: Whats wrong with people who are fantastic timekeepers, good team players, and get all their work done to a high standard but who don't wish to socialize with their workmates? You have dodged this question over and over. .

Nothing at all, there are hundreds of thousands like you, you are just not what I personally would look for in an employee. I don't want to pay for "a service", I want to pay a person. I want someone you will integrate into a close knit team and get along with everyone. I want to know that if you have a problem, you won't let it fester to the point where it effects others. I would like you to see your colleague as more than just another service provider, and I want you to stay a long time and enjoy your work.

Put simply, I want someone who is not you. That is not any slight on your ability to do your job, I'm sure you think you are very good at it. But for a job to be enjoyable rather than just be a means to an end, there should be an added, personal dimension and what better way to work than doing a job with people who will help you and cut you some slack when you are acting out a bit.

neonsofa

davo10 wrote: »

Nothing at all, there are hundreds of thousands like you, you are just not what I personally would look for in an employee. I don't want to pay for "a service", I want to pay a person. I want someone you will integrate into a close knit team and get along with everyone. I want to know that if you have a problem, you won't let it fester to the point where it effects others. I would like you to see your colleague as more than just another service provider, and I want you to stay a long time and enjoy your work.

Put simply, I want someone who is not you. That is not any slight on your ability to do your job, I'm sure you think you are very good at it. But for a job to be enjoyable rather than just be a means to an end, there should be an added, personal dimension and what better way to work than doing a job with people who will help you and cut you some slack when you are acting out a bit.

People can be a close knit team without socialising outside of work. And they can get along with everyone. And not let things fester. And everything else you mention.
I have great relationships with my colleagues- one of which I would consider my closest friend out of all my social circles. But I work nearly 40 hours a week with her. I see her more than I see my own family. I don't need to socialise outside of work with her.
We all get on great- at work. No need for more time together.

Wanderer2010

davo10 wrote: »

Nothing at all, there are hundreds of thousands like you, you are just not what I personally would look for in an employee. I don't want to pay for "a service", I want to pay a person. I want someone you will integrate into a close knit team and get along with everyone. I want to know that if you have a problem, you won't let it fester to the point where it effects others. I would like you to see your colleague as more than just another service provider, and I want you to stay a long time and enjoy your work.
.

Listen to yourself, you are basically looking for carbon copies of yourself for your organization, what person could possibly live up to your impossibly high standards. When you interview people, what questions do you ask so as to spot these less than perfect people from joining your group?
There are millions of people out there who are excellent at their jobs but they don't wish to mingle with their workmates after work but are no LESS workers for that fact- they can still work within a team, have a bit of banter, help each other and go home happy at the end of the day.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

slovakchick

davo10 wrote: »

I absolutely agree with you, that is why I have said in all my posts that this works for my business and my business alone. It probably wouldn't work in other jobs, but my posts are only based on my experience. Including part time staff there are 12 people. They all get along very well most of the time but there is an age divide, roughly half being in their twenties and the other half forties/fifties. But we all have to work closely together and are interdependent.

I understand that social events can seem a bind to those that can't be bothered getting to know their colleagues or believe that doing a good job is all that is required. But the fact is that there are thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands who can just do what is required, but a bad employee in such a close knit unit can break everyone's heart.

Again, I make no apologies for my approach and if organising social events and expecting people to attend for the good of the group offends, then so be it. The only evidence I need to show me it is worthwhile is the fact that the employees work better together, none have left, all appreciate the effort and expense and there is a marked reduction in tension/conflict. Now if that isn't good enough, nothing will be.

Is doing a good job not what is required to be a good employee?

slovakchick

Patww79 wrote: »

I fail to see how someone who does the exact same job and gets on with people in work in the exact same way can be less desirable because they don't want to go to forced company events? To be honest this guy just sounds like he likes to do the big fella and demands everyone be there to ooh and aah at how great a boss he is. Good for the ego but I'd see someone like that as an absolute nightmare to work for.

Think hes trolling?

davo10

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Listen to yourself, you are basically looking for carbon copies of yourself for your organization, what person could possibly live up to your impossibly high standards. When you interview people, what questions do you ask so as to spot these less than perfect people from joining your group?
There are millions of people out there who are excellent at their jobs but they don't wish to mingle with their workmates after work but are no LESS workers for that fact- they can still work within a team, have a bit of banter, help each other and go home happy at the end of the day.

Why does this bother you so much? I've made it clear in numerous posts that this approach works well for me and obviously wouldn't for others. It works, the staff stay, we have a great working environment, we all get on, there is very little tension, why would you not accept that some employers do not want you working for them the same way you don't want to work for some employers?

I can hire service providers like yourself, but I'd prefer not to. You can be easily replaced if you just provide a service but replacing someone who fits in well with other employees is much harder.

I don't look for copies of myself, nor copies of other staff, ideally I'd like to employ diverse personalities who bring different perspectives and attributes to the place. If your personality is such that you see yourself only as a provider of a service, nothing more, and makes no effort to connect with colleagues except on a basic, mechanical level, then this is not the place for you. You would be bored and you would bore others before eventually leaving.

neonsofa

davo10 wrote: »

Why does this bother you so much? I've made it clear in numerous posts that this approach works well for me and obviously wouldn't for others. It works, the staff stay, we have a great working environment, we all get on, there is very little tension, why would you not accept that some employers do not want you working for them the same way you don't want to work for some employers?

I can hire service providers like yourself, but I'd prefer not to. You can be easily replaced if you just provide a service but replacing someone who fits in well with other employees is much harder.

I don't look for copies of myself, nor copies of other staff, ideally I'd like to employ diverse personalities who bring different perspectives and attributes to the place. If your personality is such that you see yourself only as a provider of a service, nothing more, and makes no effort to connect with colleagues except on a basic, mechanical level, then this is not the place for you. You would be bored and you would bore others before eventually leaving.

But remove the forced nights out and all that can still remain. People can connect with each other without someone meddling and orchestrating their nights out.

the_syco

davo10 wrote: »

You can't force people to get along, you can however provide a time outside the work environment which allows them time to interact on a more personal level.

Agreed. I'm not a people person, but able to get along with most. Have gotten about 3 jobs in my life through people I know via work. All said jobs last lasted at least a year, one lasting 8 years.

davo10 wrote: »

For Gods sake most employers don't give a damn about their employees and would replace them at the drop of a hat. I try to improve the atmosphere and you see it as a form of bullying and forced merriment, Jesus wept.

Have worked in said places, and the atmosphere can be soul destroying. Have also worked in companies where the boss would ensure that a high percentage of people would go to the events, and we worked as a team a lot better. But as you say, there's a difference between can't and won't. The can'ts usually have kids, etc. The won'ts are usually the miserable ****'s who don't last that long in the job. And this would be in pubs/cinema/tech support.

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

There are millions of people out there who are excellent at their jobs but they don't wish to mingle with their workmates after work but are no LESS workers for that fact- they can still work within a team, have a bit of banter, help each other and go home happy at the end of the day.

And there are millions who don't work well in a team. Have come across some of them.

Wanderer2010

davo10 wrote: »

Why does this bother you so much? I've made it clear in numerous posts that this approach works well for me and obviously wouldn't for others. It works, the staff stay, we have a great working environment, we all get on, there is very little tension, why would you not accept that some employers do not want you working for them the same way you don't want to work for some employers?

I can hire service providers like yourself, but I'd prefer not to. You can be easily replaced if you just provide a service but replacing someone who fits in well with other employees is much harder.

I don't look for copies of myself, nor copies of other staff, ideally I'd like to employ diverse personalities who bring different perspectives and attributes to the place. If your personality is such that you see yourself only as a provider of a service, nothing more, and makes no effort to connect with colleagues except on a basic, mechanical level, then this is not the place for you. You would be bored and you would bore others before eventually leaving.

Its your snide references that kind of bother me, Telling me that I "might" think I do an excellent job as if I'm somehow beneath you. Who do you think you are addressing me like that? I'm an excellent worker and I also happened to not want to mingle with workmates outside of work, and your dismissive tone in relation to this sticks out a mile. Every business in the world wants a service from their workers- time and labour in exchange for money, that's the world we live in.
You, on the other hand, want copies of people who can only work in your precious company if they drink and mingle out of work on their own time 4 times a year. You could do with going to charm school Davo10, or if you went there you should get your money back.

davo10

Patww79 wrote: »

I fail to see how someone who does the exact same job and gets on with people in work in the exact same way can be less desirable because they don't want to go to forced company events? To be honest this guy just sounds like he likes to do the big fella and demands everyone be there to ooh and aah at how great a boss he is. Good for the ego but I'd see someone like that as an absolute nightmare to work for.

I'll take that one on the chin, you have your opinion based on your experience, I have mine. I don't need nor want to be seen as the big fella, but I do hope that I am a good boss who looks after his employees. Even during the recession no one was let go, no one had their wages cut, it would be too hard to replace a good employee.

It's not that you would be less desirable than the thousands like you. Ask yourself, if you left your job would your employer miss you and for how long? How easy would you be to replace? My guess is you would be extremely easy to replace because there is nothing different about you, you just do a good job that someone else can probably do just as well.

Good employees are worth the effort to retain, I don't have to do it, I can probably get someone as good to do the job of each employee. But I have invested time and effort in trying to make their jobs enjoyable and to improve communication. If that is anathema to you, it is probably because your boss probably has never shown any interest in you beyond the cursory "do your job".

I ask myself, would more staff have left over the last few years if they didn't make the effort to occasionally interact outside the work environment and the answer is I don't know. But none have left since we started and it's not as if they all stand around in awkward silence with a drink in their hand, they talk, laugh, ask about their interests, take the Mick out of each other. What's wrong with that?

slovakchick

the_syco wrote: »

Agreed. I'm not a people person, but able to get along with most. Have gotten about 3 jobs in my life through people I know via work. All said jobs last lasted at least a year, one lasting 8 years.


Have worked in said places, and the atmosphere can be soul destroying. Have also worked in companies where the boss would ensure that a high percentage of people would go to the events, and we worked as a team a lot better. But as you say, there's a difference between can't and won't. The can'ts usually have kids, etc. The won'ts are usually the miserable ****'s who don't last that long in the job. And this would be in pubs/cinema/tech support.


And there are millions who don't work well in a team. Have come across some of them.

The miserable ****s with social anxiety as discussed previously?

davo10

slovakchick wrote: »

The miserable ****s with social anxiety as discussed previously?

Social anxiety would fall into the "cant's".

Wanderer78

the_syco wrote: »

The won'ts are usually the miserable ****'s who don't last that long in the job. And this would be in pubs/cinema/tech support.

And there are millions who don't work well in a team. Have come across some of them.

i guess i could be considered a wont, and id like to think ive a better approach to life and socialising to many ive worked with. spending time socialising in pubs etc is a complete waste of time and money in my world, i truly do have better things to do. the scenario that has been presented here is pure hell in my world and i know others that would agree, then add the insult of making it compulsory???

we really need to stop with this team player crapology, this really is corporate nonsense ology. ive heard all the corporate propaganda ****ology, some businesses really need to get over this stuff, its insulting and disrespectful to many.

davo10 wrote: »

Social anxiety would fall into the "cant's".

so how do you deal with such a person?

slovakchick

Wanderer78 wrote: »

i guess i could be considered a wont, and id like to think ive a better approach to life and socialising to many ive worked with. spending time socialising in pubs etc is a complete waste of time and money in my world, i truly do have better things to do. the scenario that has been presented here is pure hell in my world and i know others that would agree, then add the insult of making it compulsory???

we really need to stop with this team player crapology, this really is corporate nonsense ology. ive heard all the corporate propaganda ****ology, some businesses really need to get over this stuff, its insulting and disrespectful to many.



so how do you deal with such a person?

There are none in his group, go figure

Wanderer2010

Wanderer78 wrote: »

i guess i could be considered a wont, and id like to think ive a better approach to life and socialising to many ive worked with. spending time socialising in pubs etc is a complete waste of time and money in my world, i truly do have better things to do. the scenario that has been presented here is pure hell in my world and i know others that would agree, then add the insult of making it compulsory???

we really need to stop with this team player crapology, this really is corporate nonsense ology. ive heard all the corporate propaganda ****ology, some businesses really need to get over this stuff, its insulting and disrespectful to many.



so how do you deal with such a person?

One thing is crystal clear from this thread. I don't think the majority of people would want to touch Davo10s workplace with a barge pole. In each and every response he has shown arrogance and a contempt for people. Hes a legend in his own mind and when he said he doesn't have a union, that pretty much explains everything. Id love to see it from the other point of view, his staff and what they REALLY think of his forced socialising and wanting to invest in a "person, not a service", its like a religious cult he is recruiting for. Absolutely bizarre person.

slovakchick

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

One thing is crystal clear from this thread. I don't think the majority of people would want to touch Davo10s workplace with a barge pole. In each and every response he has shown arrogance and a contempt for people. Hes a legend in his own mind and when he said he doesn't have a union, that pretty much explains everything. Id love to see it from the other point of view, his staff and what they REALLY think of his forced socialising and wanting to invest in a "person, not a service", its like a religious cult he is recruiting for. Absolutely bizarre person.

Its too much i really think he is trolling personally sorry.

Wanderer2010

slovakchick wrote: »

Its too much i really think he is trolling personally sorry.

I agree: way too much wackiness for this drivel to be true.

Morgans

Mountainsandh wrote: »

He/she might confirm or deny, but I don't think the OP has a "situation" as such. It seemed to me they were just looking for validation, or confirmation that they are not alone in these feelings.

Why should someone who are doing their job and getting on with everyone, while being an introvert in their own time, make any change in the situation ?

I just checked, here are quotes from OP's post :



Why should OP have to " think about starting an activity" that he/she is "happy to organise" ?

We all have different personalities, and if we do our job well, we are happy, management seem happy, relations with colleagues are amicable and cooperative, then I really don't see why personality A should have to force it to suit personality B.



I think this whole socializing thing depends on the job too.

My job is very social, I have to deal with people all day, and the communications and relationships make up 50% at least of my qualifications for the job.

When I'm at home, I'm more of an introvert.

Think of it like the Eurovision episode of Father Ted where Jon Kenny looks unshaven and mumbles before the show, but when he steps on stage he's polished and he really delivers as a TV presenter.

I dislike social occasions with work colleagues, and I would resent being expected to attend, not because I don't get on with my colleagues or dislike them, simply because as part of my job, I do the social thing, but in my own time, I prefer the more introvert lifestyle.

I think OP was making that point. OP, I'm the same.

Do you know, I tend to be pathologically honest, too much for my own good sometimes.
So I couldn't help but mention to colleagues before, and management, that the socializing was just not my thing, no offense, but I just preferred to stay out of it.
I got 2 types of answers : "not to worry about it sure, you do what you're comfortable with" or "ah sure, I'm the same, I go to these things but I'd rather stay at home".

I've reread the OP again and you are right. Absolutely no need to do anything like that. I think I got it confused with others posting in the thread. Apologies.

OP should do nothing of the sort, concentrate on getting the work done well, keep a good friendly attitude and engage in the on-work 'banter' on their own terms.

More generally, I still dont see why people are getting so exorcised about the idea of after work socialising. I think the benefits of a happy team who like each other are obvious. Ideally the fun wouldnt be mandated but sometimes a nudge is needed. Ideally, if people got on well at their first couple of work organised occasions, their need would reduce.

davo10

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

One thing is crystal clear from this thread. I don't think the majority of people would want to touch Davo10s workplace with a barge pole. In each and every response he has shown arrogance and a contempt for people. Hes a legend in his own mind and when he said he doesn't have a union, that pretty much explains everything. Id love to see it from the other point of view, his staff and what they REALLY think of his forced socialising and wanting to invest in a "person, not a service", its like a religious cult he is recruiting for. Absolutely bizarre person.

I know 12 valued people who would. They are the ones who want to work for me and I want to retain. They are still there all these years later so that is all the proof I need. I do have contempt for you, simply because you have contempt for the approach I take. If arrogance is striving for a good atmosphere at work, then I am guilty as charged. I am not arrogant enough to suggest that it would work for every place of work, but I will not apologise for making an effort. It's not that I don't have a union, the employees have never said they wanted one, presumably because they've never needed one. If that's bizarre, then I can live with being bizarre.

slovakchick

davo10 wrote: »

I know 12 valued people who would. They are the ones who want to work for me and I want to retain. They are still there all these years later so that is all the proof I need. I do have contempt for you, simply because you have contempt for the approach I take. If arrogance is striving for a good atmosphere at work, then I am guilty as charged. I am not arrogant enough to suggest that it would work for every place of work, but I will not apologise for making an effort. It's not that I don't have a union, the employees have never said they wanted one, presumably because they've never needed one. If that's bizarre, then I can live with being bizarre.

You obviously took today off from managing your company to own this thread today, must be a downtime at the start of the summer in your line?

Wanderer2010

davo10 wrote: »

I know 12 valued people who would. They are the ones who want to work for me and I want to retain. They are still there all these years later so that is all the proof I need. I do have contempt for you, simply because you have contempt for the approach I take. If arrogance is striving for a good atmosphere at work, then I am guilty as charged. I am not arrogant enough to suggest that it would work for every place of work, but I will not apologise for making an effort. It's not that I don't have a union, the employees have never said they wanted one, presumably because they've never needed one. If that's bizarre, then I can live with being bizarre.

That's not how unions work. You don't just ask for one. Theres a Mandate, a Trade Union agreement and it lays down terms and conditions for how workers are meant to be treated, including procedures for complaints etc. How many workers have made complaints to you or about you? What would be your reaction if they did? You are making out your business to be a one-mad band at the top. How can you make any objective claims when that's the case? Id love to hear from your staff as to how they really feel about being forced to socialize 4 times a year outside of company hours.

davo10

slovakchick wrote: »

You obviously took today off from managing your company to own this thread today, must be a downtime at the start of the summer in your line?

The joys of having good employees. But if you look closely, you'll see that my posts are early in the morning, lunchtime and evening. If by "owning" you mean replying, then ya, I've engaged in this thread quite a bit.

davo10

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

That's not how unions work. You don't just ask for one. Theres a Mandate, a Trade Union agreement and it lays down terms and conditions for how workers are meant to be treated, including procedures for complaints etc. How many workers have made complaints to you or about you? What would be your reaction if they did? You are making out your business to be a one-mad band at the top. How can you make any objective claims when that's the case? Id love to hear from your staff as to how they really feel about being forced to socialize 4 times a year outside of company hours.

Funny that, no complaints, they can have a union if they want to, the only complaints I had were a couple of years ago when two employees fell out and one very valuable one left. That is what spurred me into trying to improve the atmosphere by trying to improve communications between coworkers, they weren't doing it by themselves.

slovakchick

davo10 wrote: »

The joys of having good employees. But if you look closely, you'll see that my posts are early in the morning, lunchtime and evening. If by "owning" you mean replying, then ya, I've engaged in this thread quite a bit.

One of your last hypotheical questions :
"Hypothetically speaking, can a resignation be given in verbal form only and once accepted in writing by the employer, can the person then change their mind and withdraw the resignation? This is not a real situation so I am not seeking definitive legal advice"
Something fishy about u lol

davo10

slovakchick wrote: »

One of your last hypotheical questions :
"Hypothetically speaking, can a resignation be given in verbal form only and once accepted in writing by the employer, can the person then change their mind and withdraw the resignation? This is not a real situation so I am not seeking definitive legal advice"
Something fishy about u lol

Yip, that would be the incident I refer to above. They could not work together so one left.

Wanderer2010

davo10 wrote: »

Yip, that would be the incident I refer to above. They could not work together so one left.

Why didn't you try and force them together for drinks, that might have worked? Doesn't sound like you did much to help them for a guy so particular about how perfect your employees are and how great you are to invest in them. I thought you could spot these people a mile off?