07/09/24 - It seems like a lot of HR thinks that limiting workers’ bathroom times can increase work efficiency.
“The three coolest things about Singapore:
Their ACs are so strong! As soon as you get indoors, it’s like walking into a freezer. When I’m on the subway, it’s almost worse to sit down than to keep standing, because the seats have been thoroughly chilled by AC. The moment I sit down, my whole butt freezes!!
Most people I saw had tattoos, all meaningful patterns. I saw so many interesting and unexpected tattoos here…Like there was a really hot blond-haired, blue-eyed foreigner who had a porcelain bowl filled with rice tattooed on his leg XD A whole bowl of rice! Also kept catching glimpses of something blue on someone’s ankle, and I thought of the “Fly, Butterfly” TV show, where the female lead had a blue butterfly tattoo on her ankle. I got closer, and saw this friend had a picture of Doraemon laying down.
There’s almost no security checkpoints here. You don’t have to go through security to get into universal studios or subway stations. It’s really smooth coming and going, and it makes me feel even more welcome!”
Comments say, “I’ve asked clients why they keep the AC so low, and he was like, “What’s the point of having AC on if it doesn’t make everything cold?” They feel comfy like that.”
“When I went to Hong Kong, it was the same way. It was so freezing cold I had to buy an emergency cardigan.”
“I really don’t know what to say about China’s subway security. When you have big luggage, it’s one thing to haul it up and down the conveyor belt in an airport or train station, but doing it again for the subway is just so [crying emoji]”
“When it comes to mixing oil trucks, there seems to be two main factions on the internet. One side thinks that China’s food safety is completely done, there’s no saving it. And the other side is still doubtful about the Beijing News report and think there’s some kind of conspiracy behind this.
I think neither attitude is helpful. They’re both too extreme. We’ll address the latter one first. There’s no conspiracy behind why reporters covered this case. Nobody told them to. They didn’t do it for any ulterior motive. This is just their job, to cover stories like this. Maybe they feel proud of the reports they put out, but more importantly, they’re just filling their quota.
As for the former people, I don’t understand their mentality at all. I think it’s unnecessary to exaggerate the negative impact of this case. This just means there’s a significant loophole in our food safety standards, and nobody took this loophole seriously before.
From a professional point of view, this loophole got overlooked because the problem happened in a transitory period, and our food safety inspections are separated by stages. Inspections happen at the agricultural stage, the market stage (including FDA), food production, and sales. But this time, the problem happened during the transportation stage, which is under the jurisdiction of the transportation department, which doesn’t cover food safety at all. So nobody saw beyond the jurisdictions of the various departments to discover and resolve this loophole.
Before the official investigation result comes out, we still can’t tell just how bad this loophole is. We can only say that the potential damage is catastrophic. But fundamentally, this isn’t irrecoverable. This is just a simple problem. This can’t prove that Chinese food safety is beyond saving. You can’t say this is just like the toxic baby formula days.
The most important part of food safety is the control of raw materials, mostly in the agricultural planting stage, under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture. And in food processing, which takes place in factories and is under the jurisdiction of the FDA, which is called the Market Supervision Bureau now. There’s safety standards in sales too, but that’s less important.
In the days of toxic baby formula, there were serious problems both in the agricultural and processing stage. You can say that the whole food industry was very rudimentary, and there were a ton of companies acting in bad faith, making dirty money.
China spend over a decade to crawl out of that stage, and it shows in that there are less and less severe food safety problems. We have barely heard of any cases lately. There are small problems. But the focus of China’s food safety has slowly transitioned from industry-wide problems to fighting knockoffs, like food fraud.
The restaurant industry has been getting better too, but we can’t credit all of that to supervisory agencies. Restaurants improving can mostly be credited to societal development in general. Though, of course, restaurant hygiene is a problem worldwide. It can never be completely fixed.
If there’s a problem, we need to figure out the source of the problem, reflect on ourselves, deal with the person responsible, and think of a policy that can prevent it in the future—including amending laws and setting standards.
We can express worry, anger, dissatisfaction, even chew people out. You can’t demand normal people be all that rational and understand the big picture, after all. But if I can say something blunt, if you have the energy to get mad on the internet, you probably eat pretty well normally. You’re not the demographic that would be harmed by food safety problems anyways.
If you have opinions, try to stay on topic and pressure government agencies to deal with the problem. Don’t make a bigger deal out of this than it is, don’t get too heated, or you’ll look childish.”
Comments say, “I’m just worried this’ll all go away just like it did ten years ago. I want an actual long-term solution.”
“Sinograin just sold their oil, they didn’t provide any shipping services. It was the buyer who hired a transportation company, and the oil was delivered to “Hebei Logistics Company, Metallic Materials Division.””
“Most of the first group of people were just misled, and thought there was solid proof that Chinese national companies like Sinograin were mixing oil barrels. Some of the media running misleading reports include state news media, so only maybe half of the people actually know what’s up.”
Question: “Tollbooth attendants barely make any money, but why does no one ever quit?”
Answer: “I had a classmate who works as a tollboth attendant now, and she just came over to my house. I asked her how much money she made a month, and she said her base pay was only a little over 2K.
I was like, “But you work all day—sometimes doing overtime at night. If you’re only making 2K a month, I bet you have awful turnover rates, right?”
And she was like, “I’ve been working here for 3 years and I haven’t seen anyone quit.”
I was like, “Why does no one quit if the pay is that low?”
And she gave me a couple of reasons why I wouldn’t want to quit either.
Lots of holidays, lots of free time. It might look really hard to be stuck in a tiny tollbooth all day while working, but they only work 8 hours a day, and they only have to work every other day. And there’s never any overtime. They clock off on time every day.
2. The base pay is low, but there’s lots of benefits. They get all kinds of subsidies and insurance and 401K movements. Add it all up, and they get over 4K a month, plus a substantial yearly bonus.
3. The job is really simple. You just gotta maintain a smile. Before, you still had to check the money for counterfeits, but everyone pays with Alipay or WeChat pay now.
4. It’s a prestigious job. Most people still see being a tollbooth attendant as a dignified and comfy job. They’re not exposed to the elements, they don’t have to bow and scrape to anyone.
If you could find a job this good, would you ever quit? And work relations are super simple too. You don’t have any drama like people stuck working on the same factory floor.”
Comments say, “So they don’t get paid 2K a month at all. If they really got paid 2K a month, they’d have quit a long time ago. The key is still that a lot of their pay comes in the form of benefits.”
“I just want to ask, when it comes to long holidays like Chinese New Year or Independence Week, do they still have to work every other day?”
“Who says nobody ever quits? Do you have any idea how high turnover rates are for tollbooth attendants?”
“Do they not consider female figures when designing pants?
The cut on the girl’s pants is so weird. Her pant legs are so wide, and there’s a weird bump in it. I feel like this design looks a lot better on the guy. It fits better and makes him look smart. But it’s obviously not even trying to fit the girl.”
Comments say, “They didn’t consider the female figure when designing the shirt either.”
“I never liked wearing pants growing up. I like loose-fitting skirts. My parents thought I was vain, but it was just because I couldn’t find any pants that fit. If the waistband fits, then it’s too tight around my butt and thighs. If it fits my butt and thighs, the waistband is always way too loose.”
“I’m a lot more upset about how women’s pockets are so much shallower than men’s. What, do women not have to put their phones away?”
#Why don’t workplaces allow workers bathroom freedom? “For the longest time, how difficult it is to go to the bathroom while working and how short of a bathroom break you get has been an important indication of how much traditional factories exploiting workers. In the manufacturing industry, workers on the production line are only allowed very brief breaks from work to go to the bathroom. Or else they need to wait until their lunch break or until they get off of work.
But as bathrooms in cities has become cleaner in the last few years, even white collar workers are having a harder time going to the bathroom. It’s not just the biggest tech companies that limit worker’s bathroom time, becoming infamous for putting motion censors in their bathroom, there are even restaurants or cafes that strictly limit how often their workers to go the bathroom. All kinds of management strategies have cropped up, like “limiting workers’ bathroom rights” or “strictly controlling bathroom time” or “no wifi in the bathrooms.”
It seems like a lot of HR thinks that limiting workers’ bathroom times can increase work efficiency. Some even post on the internet, “How do I stop workers from pooping on my dime?” And on the other side, people who fight for employee rights outright see bathroom breaks as a fundamental human right. “Controlling people’s bathroom habits is a naked violation of their dignity.””
Comments say, “It’s not that they can’t stand workers having bathroom freedom. They just think of their workers are robots that never need any refuelling or recharging.”
“It’s one thing to pay me so little, it’s another thing to want to control me so much.”
“This truly shows the superiority of our system.”
“It’s fine to go to the bathroom normally, but I think the problem is that some people go in and never come back out.”
#Beijing University Professor is against raising the point at which people need to pay income tax. “Beijing University’s Economics Professor Yao Yang spoke at the 2024 Netease Economist Annual Summer Meeting, “Do you know what ratio of our population even pays income tax? The answer is no more than 20%! Almost nobody pays income tax anyways. If you raise the amount at which we start charging taxes, then even less people will pay. Should we only demand taxes from people making 8K a month? 10K a month? That’s the naivety of someone wondering why we don’t just eat cake.””
Comments say, “A lot of people don’t pay income tax because they’re putting 24% of their income into their superannuation and 28% of their income into their housing superannuation, and that part is tax deductible. I’m sure this professor saved a lot on his taxes with the same method.”
“So raise people’s income?? Why do you keep trying to get money out of people who don’t have any?”
“Doesn’t this prove that 80% of people don’t even make enough money to pay income tax to begin with?”