Employee pay
- Thread starter cory
- Start date
- Replies 80
- Views 5K
FireFighterZero
Captain Zero!
Do you want me to say that I dont fully trust a known labor organizing maniac with my and my families livelihood......until I verify it with my....say...accountant?
You drive a hard bargain lsxkllr..............maybe even a collective bargain......
You drive a hard bargain lsxkllr..............maybe even a collective bargain......
FireFighterZero
Captain Zero!
Ha! Dont be so modest! 
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #55
You have a point, although I think this phrase Reagan coined is understood in it's intent.
Last edited:
ummm, I disagree with your statement.
perhaps you are different, but I would like to present a common situation which MAY present a valid real world example of the ‘trust but verify’ sentiment:
I am at the gas station, a guy comes up with a gas can and asks for gas money.
I TRUST he is guy truly stuck without gas.
I VERIFY his story by noticing that his gas can is clean and empty, and his female companion is also using another gas can presenting the same story to others.
then by VERIFYING, (and due investigational diligence) , I see that the two of them possess a shopping cart, but WHOH, no vehicle!
ergo, your statement is without veracity.
Not sure I follow. The first statement's incorrect. It's just some guy with a gas can. I don't trust him. If it was my well known friend with a gas can saying he's out of gas, I trust him.
Using your words, you explicitly don't trust him. You're suspicious, and gathering further evidence to ascertain the truth. You meet his equally shady girlfriend and determine he's full of shit. You didn't trust him from the first minute.
en.wiktionary.org
Using your words, you explicitly don't trust him. You're suspicious, and gathering further evidence to ascertain the truth. You meet his equally shady girlfriend and determine he's full of shit. You didn't trust him from the first minute.
trust - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #58
Was thinking on this further; the term 'blind trust' seems to lean toward verifying the sensibility of 'trust but verify'- I think Frans is saying trust is trust is trust, you either have trust or you don't. But blind trust suggests that you can have too much trust when trusting a person or thing unreservedly. Fully and 'blindly' trusting someone or something can lead to problems if one later finds out that the trust one thought was solid actually would have benefitted from verifying that trust because the trusted person or thing ultimately proved to be........untrustworthy.
Clear as mud?
Clear as mud?
Getting further into the weeds...
Been thinking about this, and on exactly what trust means. Dave mentioned trusting gear, but verifying it. I think there's a line somewhere between autonomous beings and inanimate objects. You can trust the properties of steel, nylon, and aluminum, but they need to be verified because rust, wear, and breaks happen and the object won't say a thing.
I hold humans to a higher standard of trust, and it becomes more binary. Trust in a human relies on the belief they'll act appropriately, and are competent. Going back to the gear, Dave could be trusted to evaluate well worn gear for safety. Me, not so much. The gear just exists in a trustless state until monitored.
Been thinking about this, and on exactly what trust means. Dave mentioned trusting gear, but verifying it. I think there's a line somewhere between autonomous beings and inanimate objects. You can trust the properties of steel, nylon, and aluminum, but they need to be verified because rust, wear, and breaks happen and the object won't say a thing.
I hold humans to a higher standard of trust, and it becomes more binary. Trust in a human relies on the belief they'll act appropriately, and are competent. Going back to the gear, Dave could be trusted to evaluate well worn gear for safety. Me, not so much. The gear just exists in a trustless state until monitored.
A good point on how inanimate objects and autonomous beings differ, but situational similarities do also exist. You run into this in tree work quite often, where a situation demands trusting a crew member with doing a task, that if done wrong, could do you some serious harm. Without that trust, I would simply find another way. However, even so, and having a history of successfully performing similar tasks, I will 'always' run through a mental check list of what I might do if this one time things go badly. That does not diminish my trust for that individual, it is just looking at the entirety of what is going on.
I am firm believer, that in this world of ours, the many colors in between black and white are eminently worth considering.
I am firm believer, that in this world of ours, the many colors in between black and white are eminently worth considering.
SeanKroll
Treehouser
Seems like the concern would be to stretch the job by employees, not finish up in 8.
SeanKroll
Treehouser
Only if you can fit it in. It's not telescopic, so you need a lot of room to maneuver it. A 60' is challenging at times.
Needs a lot of flat room or lots of cribbing.
Howard70
Treehouser
Hey Folks:
Been away for awhile and came back reading this thread. Great discussion about "Trust but verify". I wonder if the problem is the order of the words? I'd like to verify things before I trust them, not after. The example of the couple with cans at the gas station is an example. When first approached, why would I trust a stranger? After seeing his companion and the shopping cart I'd realize they weren't trustworthy and thus wouldn't trust them.
Same with climbing gear - we probably verify it before we climb and we aren't really trusting it (by climbing) until we verify it's condition?
Howard
Been away for awhile and came back reading this thread. Great discussion about "Trust but verify". I wonder if the problem is the order of the words? I'd like to verify things before I trust them, not after. The example of the couple with cans at the gas station is an example. When first approached, why would I trust a stranger? After seeing his companion and the shopping cart I'd realize they weren't trustworthy and thus wouldn't trust them.
Same with climbing gear - we probably verify it before we climb and we aren't really trusting it (by climbing) until we verify it's condition?
Howard
I could go with verify then trust. If in the case of the Russians, they appeared to be honest actors after some period of time, you could then trust them at their word. Hypothetically speaking anyway. Specifically with the Russians, it would take *a lot* to get my trust.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #71
Maybe this is the key
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #72
And this
Nutball
TreeHouser
One could always go back to the hard way of doing things for a week, so they realize how well they are treated: no chipper ms 170, 193t, & 391, one pickup truck with a trailer, one scrench, one file, no surplus of consumables, all must be bought in the morning, and rent a stump grinder...
Cory, just start finding a new guy if he's not panning out. It's not personal, it's simply work. You've been super cool (amazingly so imo with the phones and car e.t.c) talk to him, but after all that and he's not even gonna stay to work it might be time to move on. People do get burned out, start feeling trapped e.t.c, it's not personal. Maybe he just needs a week off or something, you never know. Or he needs to go. I would pull him aside and have a talk, and everything will be answered.
