4 ms·

Look, I appreciate your candor and all but I can't help but think if I was your coworker then I'd be pissed at having to carry your sorry arse. Shit or get off

Look, I appreciate your candor and all but I can't help but think if I was your coworker then I'd be pissed at having to carry your sorry arse. Shit or get off the pot.

flaneur 18y ago
Fair enough. For what it's worth, I've never received a negative performance review or been told I was underachieving. Maybe that sounds like a "Ooh, I'm a 10x rock star!" boast, but I think it more likely my work environments have been undemanding.
- nihilocrat 18y ago
  I think you're quite accurate. A performance review isn't an objective measure of performance or aptitude, it is too limited and restricted to the context of one company.
- anaphoric 18y ago
  What would you fellow workers say about you? I have worked with people doing the 4 hour work week and honestly I can't say I was impressed. Kills the morale around the office when you work with loafers...
  - jbjohns 18y ago
    (1) Who cares what fellow workers would say? Do work to make them happy, or yourself/your family? (2) What kills morale for me is idiot work-a-holics who think they will get ahead in the company by parking their butt in a seat more hours then anyone else. I worked on a team once with mostly contractors (paid hourly) and a couple of moron permis who were like that. They were averaging 12 hour days across the year. The contractors did it because they were well compensated for it. But the permis did it because they thought they could stand out this way. Get promotions, raises and bonuses. The problem was that working 12 hours would only make you average. I continued doing 42 hours. My boss told me I was not up to the standards of the team and needed to work more. I told him that wasn't going to happen, so they transferred me to a development team where I became a stand out (not hard to do given the kind of developers in IT), getting raises and good bonuses every time. Our salaries were comparable and bonuses have a cap, so basically they were throwing away 3-4 hours away every day to keep up with the little rat race they had created for themselves.
    - anaphoric 18y ago
      Certainly there are cases such as you describe. But when I am working on a team, I would prefer not to do so with 'four hour work week' types. I know a loafer when I see one. ;-)
      - jbjohns 18y ago
        What is the ;-) for? You think you've found one? If so, you would do better not to judge people for whom the sum of your knowledge is: "they don't completely agree with me". ;-) The last project I did at my last job I did several hours overtime every day until the projects completion. Not because I was asked, or because I felt it was expected. I did it because I was 40% into a refactoring that I didn't want to back out of. I could have, as my manager suggested, gone back to the main branch and added the new business feature requests and avoided the overtime, but the maintainability of the code means something to me. How "beautiful" it is, if you will. It didn't bother me to invest the extra time because I knew the several-months-long refactoring that was desperately needed (6+ year old code base that had changed hands 8 or so times) could happen no other way. I think you over-simplify and focus in the wrong area. In any thing people set out to do, the best ones truly love what they're doing. Micheal Jordon didn't wake up every morning saying "Oh, god, do I have to play basketball today?". This is also why many fighters retire so many times. They just can't stay away. The thing to look for in other programmers isn't "oh, look! He only worked 7 hours today, he's a free-loader!". What happens when you ask them about programming projects they do outside of work? Does the thought create an instant grimace on their face? It will for most, but not the best ones. Personally, I'd rather have one guy who works 4 hours a day that's passionate about programming then 2 of your non-loafers. They tend to cause me the most work in the end. ;-)
        anaphoric 18y ago
        > Personally, I'd rather have one guy who works 4 hours a day that's > passionate about programming then 2 of your non-loafers. They tend to > cause me the most work in the end. ;-) absolutely. I agree 100%.
ghshephard 18y ago
Difficult to tell. Our most highly respected individual contributor in our department comes in at 11:00, leaves at 5:00, and basically works on whatever catches his fancy whenever he pleases (Which, thankfully, usually results in a reduction in labor for our and other departments each time he releases some new code/product) When particular tasks are placed on his plate - he is so overwhelmingly competent, that he simply nails them and moves onto the next task. The goal is to get _very_ good at your job so you do _less_ work. And he is easily the most popular member of the team. People love him to pieces and I've never heard anyone suggest he isn't carrying twice the load of everyone else. As I tell my team - Our Goal in life is to become so proficient at our jobs that we only need to come into work for an hour a day. If we develop our level of excellence, or ability to automate, and our ability to deliver to that level, I'm more than happy to have them in the office for as little time as is required to complete the tasks of their position. (presuming that the median person with those responsibilities would take 40 hours a week, of course) As it turns out, with the exception of Director Level employees, the most highly paid _contractor_ in our company works for precisely 2 hours, from 9:00 - 11:00, each day. They are available 24x7 for assistance, but, if they do their job properly, they rarely are called in for help. That is where I think we want to be. That should be our goal. Spend our time with family, in nature, pursuing those objectives which bring us inner happiness.
- mickt 18y ago
  A laudable goal, but if you managed that do you really think your senior management (or at least the mgt in most companies) would agree? They'd think they're not getting value for money if your only "working" 2 hours a day.
  - ghshephard 18y ago
    Excellent point - thought somewhat distressing. Most companies place value on the number of hours that you put in at the office (though a good portion of them recognize your actual contribution with pay increases, stock compensation, and promotions). My position on this (and, I'm actually in a position to sign off on contractor invoices) - wouldn't you rather your top people do the same amount of work in _fewer_ hours, presuming they maintain the same level of quality? What's the value of doing something in 40 hours/week versus 8 hours/week?

Look, I appreciate your candor and all but I can't help but think if I was your coworker then I'd be pissed at having to carry your sorry arse. Shit or get off the pot.

flaneur 18y ago

Fair enough. For what it's worth, I've never received a negative performance review or been told I was underachieving. Maybe that sounds like a "Ooh, I'm a 10x rock star!" boast, but I think it more likely my work environments have been undemanding.

nihilocrat 18y ago
I think you're quite accurate. A performance review isn't an objective measure of performance or aptitude, it is too limited and restricted to the context of one company.
anaphoric 18y ago
What would you fellow workers say about you? I have worked with people doing the 4 hour work week and honestly I can't say I was impressed. Kills the morale around the office when you work with loafers...
- jbjohns 18y ago
  (1) Who cares what fellow workers would say? Do work to make them happy, or yourself/your family? (2) What kills morale for me is idiot work-a-holics who think they will get ahead in the company by parking their butt in a seat more hours then anyone else. I worked on a team once with mostly contractors (paid hourly) and a couple of moron permis who were like that. They were averaging 12 hour days across the year. The contractors did it because they were well compensated for it. But the permis did it because they thought they could stand out this way. Get promotions, raises and bonuses. The problem was that working 12 hours would only make you average. I continued doing 42 hours. My boss told me I was not up to the standards of the team and needed to work more. I told him that wasn't going to happen, so they transferred me to a development team where I became a stand out (not hard to do given the kind of developers in IT), getting raises and good bonuses every time. Our salaries were comparable and bonuses have a cap, so basically they were throwing away 3-4 hours away every day to keep up with the little rat race they had created for themselves.
  - anaphoric 18y ago
    Certainly there are cases such as you describe. But when I am working on a team, I would prefer not to do so with 'four hour work week' types. I know a loafer when I see one. ;-)
    - jbjohns 18y ago
      What is the ;-) for? You think you've found one? If so, you would do better not to judge people for whom the sum of your knowledge is: "they don't completely agree with me". ;-) The last project I did at my last job I did several hours overtime every day until the projects completion. Not because I was asked, or because I felt it was expected. I did it because I was 40% into a refactoring that I didn't want to back out of. I could have, as my manager suggested, gone back to the main branch and added the new business feature requests and avoided the overtime, but the maintainability of the code means something to me. How "beautiful" it is, if you will. It didn't bother me to invest the extra time because I knew the several-months-long refactoring that was desperately needed (6+ year old code base that had changed hands 8 or so times) could happen no other way. I think you over-simplify and focus in the wrong area. In any thing people set out to do, the best ones truly love what they're doing. Micheal Jordon didn't wake up every morning saying "Oh, god, do I have to play basketball today?". This is also why many fighters retire so many times. They just can't stay away. The thing to look for in other programmers isn't "oh, look! He only worked 7 hours today, he's a free-loader!". What happens when you ask them about programming projects they do outside of work? Does the thought create an instant grimace on their face? It will for most, but not the best ones. Personally, I'd rather have one guy who works 4 hours a day that's passionate about programming then 2 of your non-loafers. They tend to cause me the most work in the end. ;-)
      - anaphoric 18y ago
        > Personally, I'd rather have one guy who works 4 hours a day that's > passionate about programming then 2 of your non-loafers. They tend to > cause me the most work in the end. ;-) absolutely. I agree 100%.

ghshephard 18y ago

Difficult to tell. Our most highly respected individual contributor in our department comes in at 11:00, leaves at 5:00, and basically works on whatever catches his fancy whenever he pleases (Which, thankfully, usually results in a reduction in labor for our and other departments each time he releases some new code/product) When particular tasks are placed on his plate - he is so overwhelmingly competent, that he simply nails them and moves onto the next task. The goal is to get _very_ good at your job so you do _less_ work. And he is easily the most popular member of the team. People love him to pieces and I've never heard anyone suggest he isn't carrying twice the load of everyone else. As I tell my team - Our Goal in life is to become so proficient at our jobs that we only need to come into work for an hour a day. If we develop our level of excellence, or ability to automate, and our ability to deliver to that level, I'm more than happy to have them in the office for as little time as is required to complete the tasks of their position. (presuming that the median person with those responsibilities would take 40 hours a week, of course) As it turns out, with the exception of Director Level employees, the most highly paid _contractor_ in our company works for precisely 2 hours, from 9:00 - 11:00, each day. They are available 24x7 for assistance, but, if they do their job properly, they rarely are called in for help. That is where I think we want to be. That should be our goal. Spend our time with family, in nature, pursuing those objectives which bring us inner happiness.

mickt 18y ago
A laudable goal, but if you managed that do you really think your senior management (or at least the mgt in most companies) would agree? They'd think they're not getting value for money if your only "working" 2 hours a day.
- ghshephard 18y ago
  Excellent point - thought somewhat distressing. Most companies place value on the number of hours that you put in at the office (though a good portion of them recognize your actual contribution with pay increases, stock compensation, and promotions). My position on this (and, I'm actually in a position to sign off on contractor invoices) - wouldn't you rather your top people do the same amount of work in _fewer_ hours, presuming they maintain the same level of quality? What's the value of doing something in 40 hours/week versus 8 hours/week?