I wish more people saw the world this way.

Every time someone divides an attitudes by generations.

Every time someone divides driving capabilities by make of car.

Every time someone divides work ethic by race.

Every time someone divides action by class.

There are good people and bad people and everything in between and they are not tied to specific demographics.

You can witness a trend, but it does not define anything.

People are just people.

Its wild that people can think a whole ass batch of people (a generation) thinks being 10 min late to anything is not a bad thing. Like if you show up to meet someone and they are 10 min late, its not the end of the world but if it happens every time you are going to judge that person.

I don't think jobs should be tied to timecards (I hate time keeping systems, I had to fix some) but to job requirements.

Some examples: Office work normally does not matter until it does. I once worked in a banks head office and had to at or shortly before 7:30am tell all the ABMs to change to the next business day (this would cause them to go offline briefly) and pull the reports for that day. If I was 10 min late the reports would not be there on time for 8am where they are needed for another task a co worker is expected to do before the bank opens (at 8am in some places).

Any retail store that has some respect for their employees and customers needs people to not be late, showing up 10 min late might just mean rushing to open or relieve some co-worker but that also is likely increasing the risk of accidents. I don't think its fair that someone gets to work an extra 10 mins or wait to buy whatever for 10 mins just because some one thinks "eh, 10 mins is close enough"

Task based jobs on the other hand (say programming, maintenance, sales, repair centres, etc.) should not really matter as much. When you start is less important then if you meet a deadline when finished. I used to work a job that wanted me to "start" every day at 7:42 AM (we used time units of 1/10th an hour) but would get real pissy when I did not leave my house until 8:30 or so since the stuff I was working on was in places that did not open until 9 or 10 am. They told me I should go to an arbitrary location (a warehouse or McDonalds where the examples they gave) by 7:42am to log in "in order to show I was ready for work". That was stupid and irrational, so I did not do it. But I would also not show up 10 min late if I could help it for any appointment (work or otherwise) since I value my time and the peoples time I am interacting with.

I think the issue is they are not "keeping the class war active" but trying to make the class war into a generational one. I have worked with, for and had worked for me people who are often late and never did I see one age group of people show up more late then another. Hell I have had issues with staff showing up over an hour early and that was only people under 25 so far (not an issue with them doing it, just an issue with feeling I am taking advantage of them).

How does one work inside of an erectile dysfunction?

Think there's a balance.

I work at a company where they have a documented process for everything. The thing is once some thing is in a document, it's like some written in stone mandate that becomes unchangeable and inflexible. The stuff in the "oral tradition" remains flexible.

Every so often new blood comes along, sees how dysfunctional the documented processes are, and proposes to fix the processes. Now in principle, they are right, but those of us who have been through a few iterations dread the outcome. Invariably the changes they propose to replace stupid existing processes are instead just added to existing processes, because some folks recognize the improvement but no one wants the blame for a mistake caused by leaving the old process behind. So each time we end up with more redundant stupid work.

So while in principle, documented processes are right, sometimes the political reality is stupid.

I just started at a new company that really invests time in documenting their processes, but the are poorly made by people that don't understand the process itself and, in some cases, the process itself is poorly planned and has to be changed over and over again, to the point where the DTP looks nothing like what's actually done...

I was instructed to review the documentation you twin myself, but advised the process did not actually describe the process itself....

But it does allow you to go, "Ah here's where the process went wrong, step 6 in the SOP. Why don't you use it as a guide for the next one?" It then isn't me vs them, it's me helping them understand the documented process collaboratively.