4 ms·

On a company level in the market there are Service Level Agreements (with requisite adjustments in price) for this sort of thing. It's clear that the market ass

by TrevorJ 10y ago

On a company level in the market there are Service Level Agreements (with requisite adjustments in price) for this sort of thing. It's clear that the market assigns a value to different response times. Further, if there isn't an value to having an employee on pager duty then the company would not do it. If that value is not reflected when compensating the employee then from an economic perspective, yes, the employee is losing out.

CaptSpify 10y ago
> If that value is not reflected when compensating the employee then from an economic perspective, yes, the employee is losing out. I agree, but it is worth noting that the compensation might not be monetary: To some people getting more time-off for being on-call might be a better "value" than extra pay. There's many other additional avenues for compensation to consider.
- jlgaddis 10y ago
  Yep. I am, for all intents and purposes, "on call" 24/7. I really don't mind, though. In return, I go to bed when I feel like it, I get up when I feel like it, and I work when I feel like it. I work from home, too. I think it was around 7:00 a.m. this morning when I fell asleep and I woke up just before 3:00 p.m. I can't remember the last time I set an alarm. There's times that I'll go for two weeks without talking to my boss. On a nice, beautiful, summer day, I often say "f--k work" and go for a nice ride on the Harley instead. In the evening, after I get home, then I'll "go to work". From the company's standpoint (we're an ISP), they're glad to have someone available in the middle of the night that can fix any problems that may arise (a.k.a. SHTF). Certainly, there are times when my boss might prefer that my ass was in a chair in our office every day from 8-5. In that case, though, something that broke at 5:05 p.m. wouldn't get fixed until I came in at 8 a.m. the next day. It's not perfect and it definitely isn't for everybody but it seems to work out for us and, really, that's all that matters.

by TrevorJ 10y ago

CaptSpify 10y ago

> If that value is not reflected when compensating the employee then from an economic perspective, yes, the employee is losing out. I agree, but it is worth noting that the compensation might not be monetary: To some people getting more time-off for being on-call might be a better "value" than extra pay. There's many other additional avenues for compensation to consider.

jlgaddis 10y ago
Yep. I am, for all intents and purposes, "on call" 24/7. I really don't mind, though. In return, I go to bed when I feel like it, I get up when I feel like it, and I work when I feel like it. I work from home, too. I think it was around 7:00 a.m. this morning when I fell asleep and I woke up just before 3:00 p.m. I can't remember the last time I set an alarm. There's times that I'll go for two weeks without talking to my boss. On a nice, beautiful, summer day, I often say "f--k work" and go for a nice ride on the Harley instead. In the evening, after I get home, then I'll "go to work". From the company's standpoint (we're an ISP), they're glad to have someone available in the middle of the night that can fix any problems that may arise (a.k.a. SHTF). Certainly, there are times when my boss might prefer that my ass was in a chair in our office every day from 8-5. In that case, though, something that broke at 5:05 p.m. wouldn't get fixed until I came in at 8 a.m. the next day. It's not perfect and it definitely isn't for everybody but it seems to work out for us and, really, that's all that matters.