4 ms·

You and I may choose not to work at such a place, but is it morally wrong? Is designing your business in this way equivalent to racism, as the author explicitl

by jlebar 11y ago

You and I may choose not to work at such a place, but is it morally wrong? Is designing your business in this way equivalent to racism, as the author explicitly claims?

toomuchtodo 11y ago
Yes, its morally wrong to take advantage of young workers (arguably in violation of labor law).
- jlebar 11y ago
  If you think "making work fun" so you can pay people less is "taking advantage" of workers, I encourage you to hang out with some food-service workers, or retail workers, or migrant farm workers, or...basically anyone who makes minimum wage (or less).
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    Don't get me wrong; I'm an advocate for all labor, not just underpaid office workers.
- trav4225 11y ago
  No offense intended at all, but personally I am unable to see how an employer can take advantage of an employee when employment contracts involve voluntary free-will agreement by both parties. Now, misrepresenting the situation to an employee as to disadvantage them is something I can easily see as morally wrong (although not necessarily illegal). Just my 2¢... :)
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    You can't sign away your rights. If your employer's contract or environment violates labor law, it violates labor law.
    - lsc 11y ago
      yes, of course, and explicitly targeting workers under 45 over workers over 45 does violate labor law in many jurisdictions. However, to the best of my knowledge, there's nothing illegal about offering people $35,000 a year for full time work. I mean, you are delusional if you think you are getting any but the programmers nobody else wants at that rate, and right now, there's not a lot of those, but there's nothing illegal about hiring people who don't have a lot of other options, and from experience, when you underpay, people will use you as a stepping stone to get to a job that pays well, but none of that is illegal, or I think even unethical. One could argue that you are giving people who otherwise wouldn't have a chance a chance, and once they have a programming job, even if it's a job that pays shit, it's way easier to get a programming job that pays okay. (at $35,000 you are going to have a hard time arguing that they are exempt, of course, which could be a problem... but you could legally pay them a lower hourly wage and time and a half overtime, if you wanted; that's just an accounting/planning "compliance issue." And there's a lot to be said for just working eight hours, which is more common in my experience than it is in conversation.) To me, this whole conversation is weird... my experience interviewing at startups is that yes, they expect me to be younger and cooler than I am... but they also pay way less and expect more work than big companies do. I kinda think that the "young and cool" thing might just be a cover for the "not willing to pay very much" thing. It's more socially acceptable to be openly discriminatory than it is to just openly say "Hey, I'm cheap"
  - serge2k 11y ago
    > I am unable to see how an employer can take advantage of an employee when employment contracts involve voluntary free-will agreement by both parties. You don't see how the implicit threat of being able to fire you at any time, for almost any reason, gives employers an advantage? You don't see how the (horrible/disgusting/bullshit) law exempting IT workers from overtime gives employers an advantage. I do tire of the endless "young people are so stupid, working past 5!" refrain. If you don't really have anything to do at home then staying an extra hour and doing some work while chatting with people isn't really a big deal. People lower down on the totem pole working more to try and move up isn't unusual either.
    - trav4225 11y ago
      > You don't see how the implicit threat of being able to fire you at any time, for almost any reason, gives employers an advantage? No, I don't. At all. I can fire my employer at any time as well -- and for a wider variety of reasons than the law allows for them to fire me.

by jlebar 11y ago

You and I may choose not to work at such a place, but is it morally wrong? Is designing your business in this way equivalent to racism, as the author explicitly claims?

toomuchtodo 11y ago

Yes, its morally wrong to take advantage of young workers (arguably in violation of labor law).

jlebar 11y ago
If you think "making work fun" so you can pay people less is "taking advantage" of workers, I encourage you to hang out with some food-service workers, or retail workers, or migrant farm workers, or...basically anyone who makes minimum wage (or less).
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  Don't get me wrong; I'm an advocate for all labor, not just underpaid office workers.
trav4225 11y ago
No offense intended at all, but personally I am unable to see how an employer can take advantage of an employee when employment contracts involve voluntary free-will agreement by both parties. Now, misrepresenting the situation to an employee as to disadvantage them is something I can easily see as morally wrong (although not necessarily illegal). Just my 2¢... :)
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  You can't sign away your rights. If your employer's contract or environment violates labor law, it violates labor law.
  - lsc 11y ago
    yes, of course, and explicitly targeting workers under 45 over workers over 45 does violate labor law in many jurisdictions. However, to the best of my knowledge, there's nothing illegal about offering people $35,000 a year for full time work. I mean, you are delusional if you think you are getting any but the programmers nobody else wants at that rate, and right now, there's not a lot of those, but there's nothing illegal about hiring people who don't have a lot of other options, and from experience, when you underpay, people will use you as a stepping stone to get to a job that pays well, but none of that is illegal, or I think even unethical. One could argue that you are giving people who otherwise wouldn't have a chance a chance, and once they have a programming job, even if it's a job that pays shit, it's way easier to get a programming job that pays okay. (at $35,000 you are going to have a hard time arguing that they are exempt, of course, which could be a problem... but you could legally pay them a lower hourly wage and time and a half overtime, if you wanted; that's just an accounting/planning "compliance issue." And there's a lot to be said for just working eight hours, which is more common in my experience than it is in conversation.) To me, this whole conversation is weird... my experience interviewing at startups is that yes, they expect me to be younger and cooler than I am... but they also pay way less and expect more work than big companies do. I kinda think that the "young and cool" thing might just be a cover for the "not willing to pay very much" thing. It's more socially acceptable to be openly discriminatory than it is to just openly say "Hey, I'm cheap"
- serge2k 11y ago
  > I am unable to see how an employer can take advantage of an employee when employment contracts involve voluntary free-will agreement by both parties. You don't see how the implicit threat of being able to fire you at any time, for almost any reason, gives employers an advantage? You don't see how the (horrible/disgusting/bullshit) law exempting IT workers from overtime gives employers an advantage. I do tire of the endless "young people are so stupid, working past 5!" refrain. If you don't really have anything to do at home then staying an extra hour and doing some work while chatting with people isn't really a big deal. People lower down on the totem pole working more to try and move up isn't unusual either.
  - trav4225 11y ago
    > You don't see how the implicit threat of being able to fire you at any time, for almost any reason, gives employers an advantage? No, I don't. At all. I can fire my employer at any time as well -- and for a wider variety of reasons than the law allows for them to fire me.