Think you have heard this story before...the tale of the worker bee and the manager? Most likely not. This isn't the usual tale where the worker bee does all the work, on the job, while the boss [manager] gets all the glory. True, that scenario clearly exists in virtually every workplace but, then again, so too does this scenario. Manage the manager. Your manager may be charged with the official duties of managing people and budgets but the worker bee has a management role too - managing the manager to ensure stable employment.

Emotional Intelligence is the cryptic scientific name related to understanding emotions, behavior and how such influences decisions in the workplace, on a day to day basis. Bottom line, getting the job is one thing, keeping it is another. For those that want to keep their jobs and the glory and perks that may come, you must stay ahead of the game in dealing with emotions on the job, especially those of your manager.

With the massive influx of extroverts in the workplace, it's virtually impossible to simply show up, do a good job and expect that will carry you long term. Maybe that strategy will suffice for short term but sooner or later an emotional situational will show up that can make or break your future career, depending on how well you foresee such an emotional situation and more importantly how you respond. It could be something as small as a common courtesy gestures such as good morning and good evening or not picking up signals that your manager doesn't like surprises and, instead, expects a heads up before a potentially embarrassing or confrontational situation arises. Bottom line, the tale of worker bee and manager is that each has management responsibilities and the job seeker that knows this is not likely the one currently looking for a job.

No this is not a Walmart ad, but instead a reflection of the political climate that blames regulations for the sour economy. So what's the answer? Should we rollback regulations to create jobs? As anyone would guess, there are reasons on each side to support their cause. In that case, it's up to the picture (or should i say video) to shed some light on the truth.

So just when exactly does relaxed regulations create jobs? It depends on what you mean "create jobs." Sure relaxed regulations contribute to an environment favorable to businesses to jumpstart job growth, but invariably there are always those that abuse the purpose of streamlined regulations. Not convinced? Well if a picture is worth a thousand words, than a video must be work ten thousand words. Look for yourself. In the great state of Texas a horrible chemical fire is raging through Waxahachie. Who wants to bet is related to bumbling flagrant incompetence of workers at the plant under the direction of bean counters looking to cut corners at the expense of safety?

Given this example, just how many jobs did the Waxahachie plant create under the relaxed regulations of the great state of Texas? None -- when you count the lawsuits that will stem from this disaster, which will undoubtedly mean job cuts. This is precisely where the value of regulations come into play. Sorry Perry, big thumbs down on this one. Rolling back regulations to create jobs is merely an illusion and shortsighted as this video clearly illustrates.

Jobs are hard to come by these days; everyone knows this, especially the unemployed. So what is so bad, on the job, to make one even consider leaving? In a word - growth. If you are not going to grow on your current job, it may be time to go. That is at least what some people are thinking these days. Sounds like an arrogant position considering so many people wish they had a job. Here's the logic, should you settle for a paycheck now that will in the longer run prevent you from having a paycheck later via loss marketability of your skills since you aren't growing in your current position? Like most situations such as this, the only real answer is that - it depends. It depends on your situation.

For those who are close to retirement grow or go is a none issue for others it is real. At the end of the day if you're pretty close to retirement does it really matter if you growing your skills? Probably not. It is probably more important to simply collect a steady paycheck. Of course there are always the under achievers who have serious skill deficiencies that they do want to fix and simply want to milk the cow for all it is worth. Sounds like a HR hiring policy issue - you think? Why would you want to bring on under achievers except for the low wage benefits...susssh, don't tell Perry I said that. Somehow, Perrry thinks low wage jobs are the answer. As for the over/achievers, "riding the pine" and no playing time on the court is simply unacceptable. Can you blame them? After all most employees don't just want to earn a paycheck but they want to contribute in the process. What a terrible thing huh, you give them a paycheck and they are still complaining. Pull out the whipping post and show them a lesson or two. Bottom line is that yes, it's a tough career decision to say "grow" or "go" but it's one that has to be made or acknowledged as a none issue. That of course is an individual situation that must decided on a case-by-case basis.