4 ms·

This also begs the question, why don't companies hire more part-time programmers? In my experience it's literally an order of magnitude easier to find a quality

by jrbapna 10y ago

This also begs the question, why don't companies hire more part-time programmers? In my experience it's literally an order of magnitude easier to find a quality full time gig than a part time gig. As many of us enjoy working on side projects and don't want to work 40 hours a week for somebody else, why is nearly every hiring post for full-time?

audleman 10y ago
As the technical lead for an 8 person startup, my needs are for team members who can take on responsibility for part of the operation. Part time employees don't usually do this; instead you pass off well-defined projects that they can complete mostly independently. That work of carving off projects in a well-defined manner is work! Work that I have to do and I've got more than enough other work to keep me busy. TL;DR I need a dedicated team, not low-investment part timers
- dwaltrip 10y ago
  Why is the assumption that someone working 3-4 days a week can't take on a large project or won't be dedicated? That seems completely non-obvious to me. Sure a project might take a week longer, but it also might not. A lot of my best work comes after extended periods of letting my subconscious mull things over. One possible compromise I could imagine is something like three 9 hour days with an hour of emailing/communication/brainstorming the other two days. And maybe once every month or two they come to work an extra half day for an important meeting. With a 30-50% pay cut, this setup will be positively affecting the burn rate/payroll expenses and it could easily be a better investment than the standard work arrangement. Obviously not every potential team member would be the right fit for this, but I think many would.
  - Retra 10y ago
    >Why is the assumption that someone working 3-4 days a week can't take on a large project or won't be dedicated? This is because those huge projects tend to require a high degree of coordination and planning, and that means the people involved need to be available to the rest of the team. And if they're not available, they aren't involved.
    - dwaltrip 10y ago
      This is a starkly false dichotomy. Less that 40 hours a week does not mean "not available".
      - kmike84 10y ago
        It may be true for "less than 40 hours", but 3-4 days a week literally means they are not available 1-2 days a week, right?
        dwaltrip 10y ago
        In my above post, I mentioned an idea where they work for an hour on those 1-2 days, focusing on communication/team stuff.
        kmike84 10y ago
        makes sense!

by jrbapna 10y ago

audleman 10y ago

As the technical lead for an 8 person startup, my needs are for team members who can take on responsibility for part of the operation. Part time employees don't usually do this; instead you pass off well-defined projects that they can complete mostly independently. That work of carving off projects in a well-defined manner is work! Work that I have to do and I've got more than enough other work to keep me busy. TL;DR I need a dedicated team, not low-investment part timers

dwaltrip 10y ago
Why is the assumption that someone working 3-4 days a week can't take on a large project or won't be dedicated? That seems completely non-obvious to me. Sure a project might take a week longer, but it also might not. A lot of my best work comes after extended periods of letting my subconscious mull things over. One possible compromise I could imagine is something like three 9 hour days with an hour of emailing/communication/brainstorming the other two days. And maybe once every month or two they come to work an extra half day for an important meeting. With a 30-50% pay cut, this setup will be positively affecting the burn rate/payroll expenses and it could easily be a better investment than the standard work arrangement. Obviously not every potential team member would be the right fit for this, but I think many would.
- Retra 10y ago
  >Why is the assumption that someone working 3-4 days a week can't take on a large project or won't be dedicated? This is because those huge projects tend to require a high degree of coordination and planning, and that means the people involved need to be available to the rest of the team. And if they're not available, they aren't involved.
  - dwaltrip 10y ago
    This is a starkly false dichotomy. Less that 40 hours a week does not mean "not available".
    - kmike84 10y ago
      It may be true for "less than 40 hours", but 3-4 days a week literally means they are not available 1-2 days a week, right?
      - dwaltrip 10y ago
        In my above post, I mentioned an idea where they work for an hour on those 1-2 days, focusing on communication/team stuff.
        kmike84 10y ago
        makes sense!