It's just more of the 'if you have time to lean you have time to clean' mentality. more on this later, I have to get to class.

Edit!

So, I don't know when the concept of 'work' changed (Or maybe it never changed, I just don't know) from 'I will give you X currency to do Y/give me Y' to 'I will give you X currency to give an enthusiastic 110% of your effort in the process of doing Y.'

I'm very transactional in my nature. Inputs, outputs, and that's all that should matter, at least in professional contexts. In my own context, say I'm working with two new agents, Alfred and Bernard. Alfred is a joy to be around, a really nice person, and always puts great effort into his work, you can tell he is modestly challenged by it and produces say, $4000 in sales in a given week. Bernard is slightly less likeable and breezes through his work with absolutely 0 apparent difficulty and in half the time as Alfred, but produces identical results, $4000 in sales.

Should these employees be compensated differently? OF FUCKING COURSE NOT. And because of the commission structure in my company, they wouldn't be, but I understand that this is somewhat unusual. In a professional environment I don't understand why anyone would give half a damn how much effort someone puts into their work, as long as their results are satisfactory? Should we give that person who has no difficulty more work? Pay them less? Because they don't 'struggle' like some of the other members of the company?

I have another thought, half-formed about some strange forced notion of 'everyone's equal, especially when they are most certainly not equal' that is raring to get out, but I can't find a good way to express it right now. That and I have a dinner-date in a few minutes so I'm not exactly giving my enthusiastic 110% into my hubski-ing.