Is it acceptable to address someone as "slacker" in the workplace?

Ath_Wat

Superfuse said:

sevenhills said:

Superfuse said:

I think you've probably hit the nail on the head. It's an insulting term. If productivity is an issue, there are better ways to address it.

But is it true? If the boss is just trying to hurry people along, it's not a swear word.

I was addressed as slacker whenever seeing my boss outside of the office. I don't think I'm a slacker. Happy to test this! 🤣. Code of conduct; don't swear. It's a interesting approach.

You should change the poll then, to "Is it appropriate for a manager to call a report "slacker" every time they see them outside the office and offer no explanation for why they are doing it", which is a very different question from the one you have posed.

Superfuse

Ath_Wat said:

Superfuse said:

sevenhills said:

Superfuse said:

I think you've probably hit the nail on the head. It's an insulting term. If productivity is an issue, there are better ways to address it.

But is it true? If the boss is just trying to hurry people along, it's not a swear word.

I was addressed as slacker whenever seeing my boss outside of the office. I don't think I'm a slacker. Happy to test this! 🤣. Code of conduct; don't swear. It's a interesting approach.

You should change the poll then, to "Is it appropriate for a manager to call a report "slacker" every time they see them outside the office and offer no explanation for why they are doing it", which is a very different question from the one you have posed.

Thank you for commenting. I intentionally kept it vague. I wanted to see if people thought the word was fundamentally inappropriate without me influencing their decision.

If you would like clarification on the context, I would suggest that you're in the 'depends on the situation' camp.

Ath_Wat

Superfuse said:

Ath_Wat said:

Superfuse said:

sevenhills said:

Superfuse said:

I think you've probably hit the nail on the head. It's an insulting term. If productivity is an issue, there are better ways to address it.

But is it true? If the boss is just trying to hurry people along, it's not a swear word.

I was addressed as slacker whenever seeing my boss outside of the office. I don't think I'm a slacker. Happy to test this! 🤣. Code of conduct; don't swear. It's a interesting approach.

You should change the poll then, to "Is it appropriate for a manager to call a report "slacker" every time they see them outside the office and offer no explanation for why they are doing it", which is a very different question from the one you have posed.

Thank you for commenting. I intentionally kept it vague. I wanted to see if people thought the word was fundamentally inappropriate without me influencing their decision.

If you would like clarification on the context, I would suggest that you're in the 'depends on the situation' camp.

It's absolutely not "fundamentally inappropriate", obviously.  It's not like the n-word.  It's easy to come up with appropriate uses where it is being used humorously or ironically, even between people who are not friends, as long as the irony is obvious, such as

"Are you still here at 8pm?  What are you, some kind of slacker?  Go home!"

I don't believe there would be any argument on this point.

Similarly, it is obviously wrong in all cases for a manager to use it seriously to a report.

The argument is only about where one person's humour crosses a line for another, and that is all about context.

Superfuse

Ath_Wat said:

Superfuse said:

Ath_Wat said:

Superfuse said:

sevenhills said:

Superfuse said:

I think you've probably hit the nail on the head. It's an insulting term. If productivity is an issue, there are better ways to address it.

But is it true? If the boss is just trying to hurry people along, it's not a swear word.

I was addressed as slacker whenever seeing my boss outside of the office. I don't think I'm a slacker. Happy to test this! 🤣. Code of conduct; don't swear. It's a interesting approach.

You should change the poll then, to "Is it appropriate for a manager to call a report "slacker" every time they see them outside the office and offer no explanation for why they are doing it", which is a very different question from the one you have posed.

Thank you for commenting. I intentionally kept it vague. I wanted to see if people thought the word was fundamentally inappropriate without me influencing their decision.

If you would like clarification on the context, I would suggest that you're in the 'depends on the situation' camp.

It's absolutely not "fundamentally inappropriate", obviously.  It's not like the n-word.  It's easy to come up with appropriate uses where it is being used humorously or ironically, even between people who are not friends, as long as the irony is obvious, such as

"Are you still here at 8pm?  What are you, some kind of slacker?  Go home!"

I don't believe there would be any argument on this point.

Similarly, it is obviously wrong in all cases for a manager to use it seriously to a report.

The argument is only about where one person's humour crosses a line for another, and that is all about context.

If you think it's ok in some circumstances, I would suggest that you select 'depends on the situation'. 👍

Not sure you can see the figures. No currently have it with 57%.

Ath_Wat

Superfuse said:

Ath_Wat said:

Superfuse said:

Ath_Wat said:

Superfuse said:

sevenhills said:

Superfuse said:

I think you've probably hit the nail on the head. It's an insulting term. If productivity is an issue, there are better ways to address it.

But is it true? If the boss is just trying to hurry people along, it's not a swear word.

I was addressed as slacker whenever seeing my boss outside of the office. I don't think I'm a slacker. Happy to test this! 🤣. Code of conduct; don't swear. It's a interesting approach.

You should change the poll then, to "Is it appropriate for a manager to call a report "slacker" every time they see them outside the office and offer no explanation for why they are doing it", which is a very different question from the one you have posed.

Thank you for commenting. I intentionally kept it vague. I wanted to see if people thought the word was fundamentally inappropriate without me influencing their decision.

If you would like clarification on the context, I would suggest that you're in the 'depends on the situation' camp.

It's absolutely not "fundamentally inappropriate", obviously.  It's not like the n-word.  It's easy to come up with appropriate uses where it is being used humorously or ironically, even between people who are not friends, as long as the irony is obvious, such as

"Are you still here at 8pm?  What are you, some kind of slacker?  Go home!"

I don't believe there would be any argument on this point.

Similarly, it is obviously wrong in all cases for a manager to use it seriously to a report.

The argument is only about where one person's humour crosses a line for another, and that is all about context.

If you think it's ok in some circumstances, I would suggest that you select 'depends on the situation'. 👍

Not sure you can see the figures. No currently have it with 57%.

My point is that there is no debate that it depends on the situation.  Anyone answering otherwise simply hasn't considered cases such as the above.

Are you honestly telling me you think the case I have outlined above is inappropriate?

What do you hope to gain by getting results from a badly worded poll without actually debating context?

Ath_Wat

And incidentally my answer to your actual question - "is it acceptable to address someone as slacker in the workplace" could be "yes" - because it is, sometimes.  "Yes" and "Depends on the situation" are overlapping answers in response to such a vague question. People saying "yes" are not necessarily saying "Yes, always".

Ath_Wat

If I can explain further, a word is only unacceptable if it is implicitly offensive to certain people. There is not community of avowed slackers who might be offended by overhearing it being addressed in a humorous fashion to somebody.  Therefore the word is acceptable, and context is everything.  Anyone saying it is never acceptable has in their own mind applied certain conditions to the question, it being so vague, and answered it based on those conditions.  I don't know if this was your intention in making it so vague.

Superfuse

Ath_Wat said:

If I can explain further, a word is only unacceptable if it is implicitly offensive to certain people. There is not community of avowed slackers who might be offended by overhearing it being addressed in a humorous fashion to somebody.  Therefore the word is acceptable, and context is everything.  Anyone saying it is never acceptable has in their own mind applied certain conditions to the question, it being so vague, and answered it based on those conditions.  I don't know if this was your intention in making it so vague.

Thank you for your comments. It's interesting to hear other people's POV.

The 'No' option has had more votes than the other options combined. So the wording is possibly not that critical.

Dakta

No

I voted no but I made the decision based on my own circumstances which is a professional setting where you don't say such things to people. You also are expected to be mindful that the context sent is not always context received and you factor both in before opening the mouth.

I have worked on building sites and other areas where insults were traded as humour, and you do let it roll off your back but there's normally rarely much risk of it being taken in the wrong context.

I lie actually, I don't know if he used the word slacker or something similar but once had a manager in my professional setting who did publicly call people such things particularly in team meetings, it had a profound effect, eroded team morale - literally cut team contribution in wider meetings to zero and eventually someone upstairs cottoned on and one day someone sat in a meeting on unrelated grounds and a couple of days later he disappeared. 

jj_43

No

no, you should describe the unacceptable work or behaviour thats the issue.