Is it demeaning work?

Following an unpleasant circumstance, where a telephone operator makes a phone call to a potential client to promote their product, and is met with insults and slights, this question arises: is it a demeaning work? At a first glance, it is not possible to say that carrying out certain tasks over others is more worthy or privileged. If we start from the basis that all jobs are equal, is incomprehensible not meeting this flagrant disregard. In this life, the hardest part is finding the best way to relate.

The contempt for the person making the call is constant, which creates the impression that this work is not based on any merit. It is as if the agent is carried out lacked career or your experience will not grant jurisdiction to deserve an honorable deal. Neglect is undervaluing the efforts of others, considering him less distinguished than oneself. But can one assume that their tasks are more worthy than others? Is that a way of equity or common sense?

Links to other articles

- Sex businesses
- Who knows plan
- Human capital
- Decalogue to innovate
- Finding a way
- The ability to manage success

Insults irrelevantly are also constant. Run over verbally signal is misunderstanding the meaning of that function, which is due to a contractual obligation of the telemarketer, and has nothing to do with a deliberate, but random choice; anyone purposely chooses someone and makes him the object of his impertinence. However, the overabundance of phone marketing may have contributed to this hostile environment, because it comes so often untimely, without obeying the scope of interest of the recipient. But why turn is a need for custom tort is incomprehensible. If it is a worker who is insulting, why do you think your work is better than the telemarketer’s? There should not be categorically that absurd line, far beyond a simple strategic performance, depending on the contractual tasks.

On the other hand, it is natural that the receiver deems responsible for his setbacks, either the company or the industry from which the calls, the person on the other line. It is true that in making that contact, one becomes the window through which customers look for businesses, but the agents don’t acquire any responsibility or decision-making power. They are simple employees who are making a run around.

Naturally, there are very aggressive telemarketing campaigns that do not respect the schedule, or the condition of the recipient, much less demand, because they are based in insisting ad nauseous. However, those responsible for the indiscriminate commercial attack are the developers, who seem to have lost sensitivity to the personal circumstances of their prospects. In these cases, anything goes as long to sell. Nevertheless, this fact does not place responsibility for the bad strategies on the telemarketer’s back, who simply does the job in exchange for an almost always modest salary or commission. It is undeniable that the person becomes the only link between the business firm and the prospective client, who prevents many times make an objective consideration of the overall picture.

The question is: Are we installed in the constant need to disqualify another, to belittle the accomplishments of others, to discuss such truths? Is this the trend that will dominate the coming times? For some reason, we are always on the defensive; we jump at the slightest intrusion. 

It is better to think we are not all as hostile or we can resort to unwarranted verbal violence. In the exercise of common sense, you should never look down on anyone nor not understand that commercial work is a personalized choice, because doing so is to lose sight of the fundamentals of human beings: respect.

image:@morguefile

 

 If you enjoyed this article, share it. Thank you.    

Tweetear