Employee X, a young, hard worker, works as hard as he can whenever he works. He does his work with quality and speed. Meanwhile old Employees Y and Z work slowly and do much less than Employee X. The Administrator discovers that when Employee X finishes all his work early, he goes and sits down until his shift is finished. The Administrator calls Employee X in, and cuts his hours, and therefore pay, and requires Employee X to do the same amount of work in less time. The sloth and inefficiency of Employee Y and Z are brought up, but no action is taken against them, on the bounds that 'it is fine because they are old'. Employee X states that discrimination is neutral, and that it works both ways. The Administrator states that if Employee X does no like it, he can quit. Employee X does not quit because he does not have his keys to throw at his Administrator. Employee X checks the highly liberal laws in his state, and there is nothing to help him. Now Employee X only works for his reduced paycheck and harbors no sympathy for his coworkers or supervisors. Employee X still finishes early and now hides out somewhere new, and the only reason Employee X doesn't quit is because he needs the money, and now the only saving grace for him is the fact that his intelligence is greater than all of his coworkers and supervisors combined, and that he possesses the work ethic and skill to have an actual career when he graduates college.

While my story certainly does not include harsh administrative action, it does involve favoritism. Mine is a story that would make Communists and Capitalists alike shudder. And how that seniority excuses poor work ethic, while a lack of seniority punishes a good work ethic.