3 ms·

In a couple Wall Street companies I've experienced, the penalties were harsher for being a few minutes late than just calling in sick, so there were a lot of un

In a couple Wall Street companies I've experienced, the penalties were harsher for being a few minutes late than just calling in sick, so there were a lot of unnecessary sick days that happened because a person would rather "throw a sickie" than get reamed for showing up at 9:08. It's really stupid and counterproductive.

afterburner 17y ago
"It's really stupid and counterproductive" One might say the same about Wall Street in general... alright, maybe not completely, but a little?
- pw0ncakes 17y ago
  The culture sucks, and the reasons for that are deep and sociological, but Wall Street firms are definitely not stupid. As for counterproductive, that's a very long discussion, because financial markets are probably a necessary evil. The short version is: most people suck at capturing the value they add. Wall Streeters are great at snaring this surplus value, so you have a lot of ridiculously overcompensated people at the top.
  - jacobolus 17y ago
    It’s pretty counterproductive to have 30 or 40 percent of the graduates of the top colleges in the country going to work on Wall Street, as was the case in the mid-2000s, “snaring surplus” rather than producing something of their own.
    - pw0ncakes 17y ago
      No disagreement there. I think Wall Street's only constructive purpose is to bid up the price of talent. This makes analyst programs (staffed with the untalented) a total waste, but that's another discussion.
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
jedc 17y ago
At a previous employer, we were supposed to be in at 8:30am. Our boss even spoke to myself and a friend if we regularly arrived at 8:45, even if we didn't have any specific appointments. (And we stayed plenty late at the end of the day.) I wouldn't have minded, except that he would regularly be 30-60 minutes late for meetings with clients! Yes, rules like this can be extremely stupid and counterproductive.
- pw0ncakes 17y ago
  This is a direct consequence of middle management. It works like this: marketing boss and accounting boss have to have everyone in at 9:00 for specific reasons (customers, time-specific responsibilities). Programming boss doesn't need his people in at 9 for any good reason, but his peers all need their subordinates in at that time, and he gets scared for his image among his peer group. If his people are more disheveled and work at weird times, he might look like he doesn't "have them under control". This is also why you get in more trouble for being 20 minutes late than for "throwing a sickie". The first is taken to reflect upon your boss, while the second isn't, even though it's a much bigger hit to productivity.
- jrockway 17y ago
  Hah. I remember having a job where my boss would complain about how late I was every day. He said I should come in earlier. I didn't. He asked me if I had trouble understanding his instructions. I told him I understood perfectly, but I just wasn't awake at that hour. He then asked, "so you're intentionally disobeying my instructions." I smiled and said yes. The issue was not raised again. (Compare this to my current job, where I got weird looks when I asked if I should be in at 9 on my first day. Little did I realize that this was a place where people came in at 7:00 pm and nobody batted an eye :)
andylei 17y ago
traders have to be in before the market opens. that's not really stupid or counterproductive.
- pw0ncakes 17y ago
  Traders should be in before the market opens, but being late on this is less disruptive than being out sick, and being absent the whole day. Although there's an ethical distinction between being legitimately sick and "throwing a sickie", and the latter will usually get you fired if caught-- although it's unlikely that this would happen-- they're both equal in terms of disruptiveness and loss to the firm. My point is that it's counterproductive to have an incentive system in which being 8 minutes late is worse than missing a whole day.

afterburner 17y ago

"It's really stupid and counterproductive" One might say the same about Wall Street in general... alright, maybe not completely, but a little?

pw0ncakes 17y ago
The culture sucks, and the reasons for that are deep and sociological, but Wall Street firms are definitely not stupid. As for counterproductive, that's a very long discussion, because financial markets are probably a necessary evil. The short version is: most people suck at capturing the value they add. Wall Streeters are great at snaring this surplus value, so you have a lot of ridiculously overcompensated people at the top.
- jacobolus 17y ago
  It’s pretty counterproductive to have 30 or 40 percent of the graduates of the top colleges in the country going to work on Wall Street, as was the case in the mid-2000s, “snaring surplus” rather than producing something of their own.
  - pw0ncakes 17y ago
    No disagreement there. I think Wall Street's only constructive purpose is to bid up the price of talent. This makes analyst programs (staffed with the untalented) a total waste, but that's another discussion.
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]

jedc 17y ago

At a previous employer, we were supposed to be in at 8:30am. Our boss even spoke to myself and a friend if we regularly arrived at 8:45, even if we didn't have any specific appointments. (And we stayed plenty late at the end of the day.) I wouldn't have minded, except that he would regularly be 30-60 minutes late for meetings with clients! Yes, rules like this can be extremely stupid and counterproductive.

pw0ncakes 17y ago
This is a direct consequence of middle management. It works like this: marketing boss and accounting boss have to have everyone in at 9:00 for specific reasons (customers, time-specific responsibilities). Programming boss doesn't need his people in at 9 for any good reason, but his peers all need their subordinates in at that time, and he gets scared for his image among his peer group. If his people are more disheveled and work at weird times, he might look like he doesn't "have them under control". This is also why you get in more trouble for being 20 minutes late than for "throwing a sickie". The first is taken to reflect upon your boss, while the second isn't, even though it's a much bigger hit to productivity.
jrockway 17y ago
Hah. I remember having a job where my boss would complain about how late I was every day. He said I should come in earlier. I didn't. He asked me if I had trouble understanding his instructions. I told him I understood perfectly, but I just wasn't awake at that hour. He then asked, "so you're intentionally disobeying my instructions." I smiled and said yes. The issue was not raised again. (Compare this to my current job, where I got weird looks when I asked if I should be in at 9 on my first day. Little did I realize that this was a place where people came in at 7:00 pm and nobody batted an eye :)

andylei 17y ago

traders have to be in before the market opens. that's not really stupid or counterproductive.

pw0ncakes 17y ago
Traders should be in before the market opens, but being late on this is less disruptive than being out sick, and being absent the whole day. Although there's an ethical distinction between being legitimately sick and "throwing a sickie", and the latter will usually get you fired if caught-- although it's unlikely that this would happen-- they're both equal in terms of disruptiveness and loss to the firm. My point is that it's counterproductive to have an incentive system in which being 8 minutes late is worse than missing a whole day.