Company tells employees to run miles each month if they want their bonuses - eviltoast
  • derf82@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    11 months ago

    First, disabled people exist.

    Second, the article makes it clear walking only counts for 30% credit.

    Third, if you are not doing it, starting can be very difficult.

    Fourth, the top bonus requires 62 miles per month.

    Last, why should there be a bonus based on something unrelated to your work?

    • LotrOrc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      If you’re not doing it getting a giant bonus would be a good motivator to go out

      One mile a day is really really easy to do. Jogging or walking. If you can’t do that then quite honestly you’re not in any sort of good shape.

      62 miles a month is slightly over a mile a day. If you’re not walking at least a mile a day you are doing your body a massive disservice

      Why not if this is both easy to do and a benefit for your own health?

      • derf82@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        If you’re not doing it getting a giant bonus would be a good motivator to go out

        A better motivator would be giving credit for improvements rather than requiring the same of all regardless of age, fitness level, and disability. The only thing this would motivate me to do is find another job.

        One mile a day is really really easy to do. Jogging or walking.

        Walking only counts for 0.3 of jogging, so it is 3.33 miles of walking

        My doctor has specifically advised against jogging due to the impact on my knees.

        62 miles a month is slightly over a mile a day.

        Math isn’t your strong suit, huh? That is over 2 miles a day, Or 6.67 miles if you walk.

        Why not if this is both easy to do and a benefit for your own health?

        You miss the point. It may be easy for you, but it is not easy for everyone.

      • dasgoat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        ‘Prevents you from moving’

        Buddy I can walk just fine but if you ask my hypermobile and asthmatic ass to run, I’m just not going to. I can’t. My legs and lungs are fucked up. Guess I don’t get the extra bonus, oh well. Sucks.

        If you’re heavy, running can be a real challenge. ‘Promoting fitness’ isn’t done through a braindead scheme like this. Not for people who need guidance and help to get into a body shape they can be happy and healthy in.

        You know who will get the extra bonus? Healthy people who are able to run, and who have no health conditions to begin with.

        You are really, really underestimating the range of disabilities people can have while they can still function at their jobs. And how this braindead scheme excludes people for things outside of their control.

        And also, ‘not be a slob’. Am I a slob because I can’t just run a mile? You take my legs that bend like a silly straw and my lungs that collapse in on themselves and feel like they’re filled with cat litter that is on fire, and see if you run a mile.

        Jfc calling us slobs. Go fuck yourself.

      • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago
        1. Lmao NO. Disabled people work. We have this whole law about it and everything in the United States where employers have to provide reasonable accommodations and allow you time off work without compromising your job status.

        I’m disabled. I work full time. I could not fulfill these exercise requirements, but I can hold down a job. That is not a rare category of human being.

        We should have universal healthcare, not this nonsense from a private employer.

      • derf82@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        If you have a condition that prevents you from moving/ elevated heart rate, chances are you not working and already on disability.

        Ah, no. Plenty of us work. Desk jobs exist. I sit at one now. I have been told by my doctor I should not jog or run due to the impact to my knees.

        I understand the article says this but how do you police it. Put your fitness tracker to “Outdoor run” and call it day. Unless there are stricter measurements around heart rate and minimum speeds I don’t fully buy this.

        So you don’t know how they police it, but 1 sentence later you see how easy it is to police.

        So start. If a company is going to incentivize you to not be a slob maybe just go do it. Life isn’t fair. Stop making excuses and be a better version of yourself.

        Ah, the old “life isn’t fair” copout. Why should we not do our best to be fair?

        Idk, maybe they want their employees to not die of heart failure at 40 and see them grow to be old and successful.

        Ah, yes, because there is no daylight between the binary options of heart failure at 40 and growing old.

          • derf82@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Clearly. I said likely, not “all”. Likely assumes situations in which that is not true which in this case is the exact thing you said. Thank you for reiterating.

            You still have it wrong. You can’t just show up and easily get disability benefits. And that statement still reinforces the lie that the disabled are lazy, when the disabled want to work. And that is only people that meet the definition of disabled. There are surely more people with physical limitations that don’t otherwise qualify as “disabled”.

            No where do they talk about this.

            They specifically say walking only gets 1:0.3 credit. How can you assume that is unpoliced when it is a specific policy? The logical assumption is that is IS policed since they took the time to give lesser credit to walking.

            Life isn’t fair. It’s not a cop out. Exceptions can and need to be made.

            And they have no exceptions. That is the point.

            So let’s just prevent all people in society from healthy activities because it discriminates. Let’s drag all of society down to the same playing field for fairness. Solid reasoning. You know what’s easier reasoning to reconcile. Exceptions to the rule.

            What a straw man. No one is preventing people from healthy activities.