<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Job vs. Job</title>
	<atom:link href="http://robbmiller.wordpress.com/2006/06/08/job-vs-job/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://robbmiller.wordpress.com/2006/06/08/job-vs-job/</link>
	<description>The Ubiquitous Tangents of Robb's Conjecture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:56:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JL!</title>
		<link>http://robbmiller.wordpress.com/2006/06/08/job-vs-job/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>JL!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jun 2006 05:31:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://robbmiller.wordpress.com/2006/06/08/job-vs-job/#comment-7</guid>
		<description>Since working for Apple I&#039;ve felt strongly about this: rules dictating what workers can or can&#039;t do are completely ridiculous, especially when the worker&#039;s actions wouldn&#039;t be disturbing someone else. Am I going to keep someone else from getting work done by looking at a web page? Heck no!

Here&#039;s the deal at Apple: get your work done, and make it good, or you&#039;re fired. That&#039;s all. And that&#039;s all the motivation I need. If I want to browse the web, that&#039;s fine. If I want to chat with my wife while I&#039;m at work, that&#039;s fine. If I don&#039;t get my work done, they&#039;ll have someone else in there who is just as capable as I am in two weeks, and that&#039;s all there is to it. Why is this hard for employers to figure out? Dressing nicely and acting like you&#039;re a good employee doesn&#039;t make you a good employee. Being results-focused makes you a good employee.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since working for Apple I&#8217;ve felt strongly about this: rules dictating what workers can or can&#8217;t do are completely ridiculous, especially when the worker&#8217;s actions wouldn&#8217;t be disturbing someone else. Am I going to keep someone else from getting work done by looking at a web page? Heck no!</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the deal at Apple: get your work done, and make it good, or you&#8217;re fired. That&#8217;s all. And that&#8217;s all the motivation I need. If I want to browse the web, that&#8217;s fine. If I want to chat with my wife while I&#8217;m at work, that&#8217;s fine. If I don&#8217;t get my work done, they&#8217;ll have someone else in there who is just as capable as I am in two weeks, and that&#8217;s all there is to it. Why is this hard for employers to figure out? Dressing nicely and acting like you&#8217;re a good employee doesn&#8217;t make you a good employee. Being results-focused makes you a good employee.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
