Is more better?

Generally, more is better. However, that isn't the case at work. In the first quarter, we were ahead of budget and I was slacking given my very apparent demeanor with regards to the impending raise and bonus worries. Lo and behold, my worries came true, I got shafted. For a moment, I did wonder if I was an integral part of the team or not. Maybe I should just look for a new job.

Then the fan started to breakdown and the workflow picked up. We lost the 3-person team in our Queens office, fired an incompetent but picked up another one and people started paying off their loans. Now, the budget is about $150 million behind. Whoa!

To the relief of the GM, I narrowed that gap by 1/3 and probably can make up 1/2 to 3/4 of the rest by the end of the year. Yet, the dude still persists is pushing me to make up the end amount. As an incentive, homey offered a scrumptious dinner challenge which I met but he hasn't come through yet. As additional incentive, homey give me another pittance of a raise which was appreciated but more noted.

The words "good job" used to mean something. Now, it's "what else do you have?" Dammit, I'm going to be the branch sole BACON-DUDE for 2005 and I worry that I will again be disappointed come next year. The crappy highs-and-lows that I put myself through is based on the premise that I do indeed like the job but the pay sucks.

Thank you, Mr. Murphy. More would be better is if it was matched with the performance. I think I need a nice slice of spiced carrot cake.