Yes

4 of 13

by Jake Betz

• 

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

If the co-worker was valuable to the company, taking a pay cut to save his or her job would be a virtuous and mutually beneficial course of action.

The Golden Rule, though seldom mentioned nowadays, succinctly guides us on how we should act as moral human beings: "Do Unto Others as You Have Others Do Unto You." If I was about to lose my job, not due to any job performance issues but simply for my employer's financial benefit, I would be extremely grateful if my colleagues sacrificed so I could keep receiving a paycheck. Accepting a pay cut to help another shows great strength of character and a generous spirit.

When such situation arises, it's important to put ourselves in our co-worker's shoes. He or she probably has a family to support, a household to maintain and a mortgage and credit card bills to pay. Losing one's job during a time of severe recession is a traumatic experience. In addition to the loss of salary, the employee might wind up without health care. Paying for health care coverage when you are not employed poses a great financial burden few can meet.

Even if the co-worker has outstanding skills, an excellent performance record and comes highly recommended by former employers, it is extremely difficult to secure work when the economy is in the tank. If the co-worker lost his job, he might have to accept a position at far less pay, or might not be able to obtain any job at all.

In addition to accepting the pay cut for altruistic reasons, the decision can yield personal benefits. For one thing, you have probably gained a friend for life. In these times when it's "every man for himself," no one can have too many friends.

Consider that we all spend just as much time each day with co-workers as we do our family. In the process, close relationships are formed. It is only through helping each other and working together that mutual work goals are met. It is only right that we help our co-workers whenever possible in their time of need.

Most importantly, consider the effect on the workplace if the co-worker was laid off and not replaced. The company would certainly not cut back on its business, because that would negatively impact the bottom line. The standard operating procedure would be for the company to distribute the laid-off employee's workload among staff members who remain. So, if you sit back and allowed the co-worker to be laid off, the end result would likely be additional responsibilities thrown on your plate, with no additional compensation.

Learn more about this author, Jake Betz.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.