12 ms·

I don't think it's this black and white. First, I'm sure plenty of companies are basically stealing from their employees, but this is also situational. I answe

I don't think it's this black and white. First, I'm sure plenty of companies are basically stealing from their employees, but this is also situational. I answer emails and slack whenever I can. On the flip side, I get work from home privileges, I show up when I want, I leave when I want, and I get put on exciting projects instead of boring ones. People who don't check their phones after-hours cannot be trusted to lead projects with demanding clients. I typically don't bill time until my laptop comes out. I'm two-minds about this. Companies really do abuse their employees and try to get all the work they can out of them. This is a problem that leads to abusive employers. But employees also look for ANY entitlement they can receive, whether or not it is useful to their professional development. This is also a problem that leads to lazy and useless employees. It's sort of a feedback loop. It's also probably very different outside of my field (and probably most people's field on this site), which is software development.

meko 8y ago
Nearly all companies "steal" from their employees. If the company makes any profit whatsoever, that is surplus value which has not been paid to the employees who generated it.
- 08-15 8y ago
  Then maybe those poor exploited employees should go and generate surplus value for themselves without the company.
  - chongli 8y ago
    They may not have the capital to do so. That doesn't mean they're not aggrieved. It just suggests they do not have the means to do anything about it.
    - 08-15 8y ago
      In other words, the employees can't generate the same surplus value without the company. So the company did in fact generate some of it, so the profit isn't stolen at all, it's earned. Marx has been dead for 135 years, and people still parrot his confused ramblings without thinking. Amazing.
      - tmnvix 8y ago
        > So the company did in fact generate some of it, so the profit isn't stolen at all, it's earned. It is common to refer to this as unearned income because it is income received by virtue of ownership not work.
        08-15 8y ago
        Doesn't matter, it still isn't stolen. Redefining the meaning of words doesn't magically turn confused ramblings into wisdom.
- barnesto 8y ago
  it's called business not socialism. if the company you work for treats you poorly then leave for another that won't. that or, as already recommended, go off on your own and create all the value for yourself that you can. either way, it's capitalism at work.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  That is a naive assumption - dating back to Marx who failed to see that not all value came from work of means of production and that the means themselves are not fixed. Intellectual work can provide continuous dividends for one. While factory workers may toil day in and day out the engineer who designed it do work. Investors and management are intertwinned and blurry. Smaller businesses usually have them the same and larger ones must compete with the alternative of starting ones own and thus pass down dividends. Even the most hands off "useless idiot heir" has an indirect management role via who they ultimately choose to support and what they do with it. Investment has a role aside from funding that they engage in by driving efficiency, expansion and the dreaded counterpart of contraction to match with demand. We have empirical evidence that while management and ownership often do in fact do useful work. Look at how farm appropriation has ended in reduced yields instead of increased as one would expect when farmhands gain the benefits of more ownership. Instead their production plunged and they started experiencing increased crop failure. Which brings to mind the related fallacy that farming is simple. It is true that management and ownership and investors are often overcompensated and worryingly self perpetuating at the expense of others - but they do in fact have a legitimate claim to profits.
Xylakant 8y ago
> People who don't check their phones after-hours cannot be trusted to lead projects with demanding clients. Why not? Requiring off-hour access is admitting project management failure. That’s what on-call is for, and on-call engineers and management should rotate and be paid for on-call duty. For them, it’s working hours. When I’m on call for a client, I bill _for being available_, so basically for keeping the phone on.
- sandworm101 8y ago
  "Demanding client" doesnt mean unlimited funding. i find that the most demanding ones also look most closely at their bills.
  - Xylakant 8y ago
    “Demanding client” is usually code for “behaves like a spoiled child because nobody dared to tell them no.” The most demanding clients I’ve witnessed were mid-level managers from MTV and Universal Music. Called for work being done on a weekend just because they felt like. The way I usually approach these discussions is “ok, you can have the feature built this weekend, this means people need to work their weekend, that costs 50% extra and means that the people working extra hours will be unavailable some time in the future.” Same thing with 24/7 support. It just costs money. Staff needs to be available. 90% of the people decide that Monday will be good enough. The hard fact is that someone needs to pay for 24/7. It’s either the client, the employer or the employee. It’s just that a lot of employees don’t realize that they’re getting shortchanged here with talk about engagement and promise of better projects and I’m trying my best that this doesn’t happen in my company on my watch.
    - sandworm101 8y ago
      Then they may go elsewhere, to someone not on a 9-5 monday-friday culture. Many now space people out (ie some on a w-th weekend) so the company can provide 7-day service at normal rates. I used to work in film/tv. 7-day service is a norm. 24-hour is harder, but when you have clients across different time zones, it is also a norm. Again, with big films scattering themselves across the globe, it is expected that someone in authority picks up 24/7 because your 3am is sometimes the client's 10am. You can charge more for this, but the client doesn't want to hear complaints. You will be judged on service rendered for a given price. The firm down the street, the one who can provide people on a sunday without overtime, will win the next contract.
sebazzz 8y ago
> I get put on exciting projects instead of boring ones Because you are often busy with work? (Even though you're not actually working, your mind is with your work)
Frondo 8y ago
"People who don't check their phones after-hours cannot be trusted to lead projects with demanding clients." If you own the business, you're always on, yeah. If you're a worker, this is paid work. Pinning career advancement to uncompensated work is bullshit.
- tvh 8y ago
  Yet so common.
swatcoder 8y ago
> People who don't check their phones after-hours cannot be trusted to lead projects with demanding clients. "Demanding clients" often respond positively to articulated, practiced boundaries. I'd be unimpressed with a project lead who simply allowed their client to set the rules. I expect the lead to know what's best for the project/team and to have the skills to communicate that to the client in a way they understand. We like the clients who "know the rules" implicitly, but that doesn't mean the others can't come to learn them. The rare clients who really are so demanding that you can't even establish a boundary like this is probably dragging a whole fleet of problems behind them. [And if you need to be available off-hours because that's what the project needs, that's different. Then it has nothing to do with how "demanding" the client is. It's the project that's setting the terms.]
konschubert 8y ago
If people call you after work a lot then it's probably not because it's necessary, but because they know you don't mind. If you manage your project in any half-decent way then phine calls after work should be a rare exception.

meko 8y ago

Nearly all companies "steal" from their employees. If the company makes any profit whatsoever, that is surplus value which has not been paid to the employees who generated it.

08-15 8y ago
Then maybe those poor exploited employees should go and generate surplus value for themselves without the company.
- chongli 8y ago
  They may not have the capital to do so. That doesn't mean they're not aggrieved. It just suggests they do not have the means to do anything about it.
  - 08-15 8y ago
    In other words, the employees can't generate the same surplus value without the company. So the company did in fact generate some of it, so the profit isn't stolen at all, it's earned. Marx has been dead for 135 years, and people still parrot his confused ramblings without thinking. Amazing.
    - tmnvix 8y ago
      > So the company did in fact generate some of it, so the profit isn't stolen at all, it's earned. It is common to refer to this as unearned income because it is income received by virtue of ownership not work.
      - 08-15 8y ago
        Doesn't matter, it still isn't stolen. Redefining the meaning of words doesn't magically turn confused ramblings into wisdom.
barnesto 8y ago
it's called business not socialism. if the company you work for treats you poorly then leave for another that won't. that or, as already recommended, go off on your own and create all the value for yourself that you can. either way, it's capitalism at work.
Nasrudith 8y ago
That is a naive assumption - dating back to Marx who failed to see that not all value came from work of means of production and that the means themselves are not fixed. Intellectual work can provide continuous dividends for one. While factory workers may toil day in and day out the engineer who designed it do work. Investors and management are intertwinned and blurry. Smaller businesses usually have them the same and larger ones must compete with the alternative of starting ones own and thus pass down dividends. Even the most hands off "useless idiot heir" has an indirect management role via who they ultimately choose to support and what they do with it. Investment has a role aside from funding that they engage in by driving efficiency, expansion and the dreaded counterpart of contraction to match with demand. We have empirical evidence that while management and ownership often do in fact do useful work. Look at how farm appropriation has ended in reduced yields instead of increased as one would expect when farmhands gain the benefits of more ownership. Instead their production plunged and they started experiencing increased crop failure. Which brings to mind the related fallacy that farming is simple. It is true that management and ownership and investors are often overcompensated and worryingly self perpetuating at the expense of others - but they do in fact have a legitimate claim to profits.

Xylakant 8y ago

> People who don't check their phones after-hours cannot be trusted to lead projects with demanding clients. Why not? Requiring off-hour access is admitting project management failure. That’s what on-call is for, and on-call engineers and management should rotate and be paid for on-call duty. For them, it’s working hours. When I’m on call for a client, I bill _for being available_, so basically for keeping the phone on.

sandworm101 8y ago
"Demanding client" doesnt mean unlimited funding. i find that the most demanding ones also look most closely at their bills.
- Xylakant 8y ago
  “Demanding client” is usually code for “behaves like a spoiled child because nobody dared to tell them no.” The most demanding clients I’ve witnessed were mid-level managers from MTV and Universal Music. Called for work being done on a weekend just because they felt like. The way I usually approach these discussions is “ok, you can have the feature built this weekend, this means people need to work their weekend, that costs 50% extra and means that the people working extra hours will be unavailable some time in the future.” Same thing with 24/7 support. It just costs money. Staff needs to be available. 90% of the people decide that Monday will be good enough. The hard fact is that someone needs to pay for 24/7. It’s either the client, the employer or the employee. It’s just that a lot of employees don’t realize that they’re getting shortchanged here with talk about engagement and promise of better projects and I’m trying my best that this doesn’t happen in my company on my watch.
  - sandworm101 8y ago
    Then they may go elsewhere, to someone not on a 9-5 monday-friday culture. Many now space people out (ie some on a w-th weekend) so the company can provide 7-day service at normal rates. I used to work in film/tv. 7-day service is a norm. 24-hour is harder, but when you have clients across different time zones, it is also a norm. Again, with big films scattering themselves across the globe, it is expected that someone in authority picks up 24/7 because your 3am is sometimes the client's 10am. You can charge more for this, but the client doesn't want to hear complaints. You will be judged on service rendered for a given price. The firm down the street, the one who can provide people on a sunday without overtime, will win the next contract.

sebazzz 8y ago

> I get put on exciting projects instead of boring ones Because you are often busy with work? (Even though you're not actually working, your mind is with your work)

Frondo 8y ago

"People who don't check their phones after-hours cannot be trusted to lead projects with demanding clients." If you own the business, you're always on, yeah. If you're a worker, this is paid work. Pinning career advancement to uncompensated work is bullshit.

tvh 8y ago
Yet so common.

swatcoder 8y ago

> People who don't check their phones after-hours cannot be trusted to lead projects with demanding clients. "Demanding clients" often respond positively to articulated, practiced boundaries. I'd be unimpressed with a project lead who simply allowed their client to set the rules. I expect the lead to know what's best for the project/team and to have the skills to communicate that to the client in a way they understand. We like the clients who "know the rules" implicitly, but that doesn't mean the others can't come to learn them. The rare clients who really are so demanding that you can't even establish a boundary like this is probably dragging a whole fleet of problems behind them. [And if you need to be available off-hours because that's what the project needs, that's different. Then it has nothing to do with how "demanding" the client is. It's the project that's setting the terms.]

konschubert 8y ago

If people call you after work a lot then it's probably not because it's necessary, but because they know you don't mind. If you manage your project in any half-decent way then phine calls after work should be a rare exception.