3 ms·
And there's... "hey Joe's got young kids and needs to be 9-5 now, you're single so can't you pick up the slack?" Or "you're not married, can't you be on the pag
by kurthr 8y ago
And there's... "hey Joe's got young kids and needs to be 9-5 now, you're single so can't you pick up the slack?" Or "you're not married, can't you be on the pager during Xmas/Turkey-day/weekend". They are two abusive sides of the same coin.
- Spooky23 8y agoThe abuse is the compulsory, unpaid pager, and the expectation that you’re working 7a-9p. “Joe” with the young kids pushes back because he has to. You’re the sucker saying yes. The fix for this is easy. You pay for on-call, and have a understood system for assigning it. My brother in law is a fireman... he misses many holidays, but can plan around it because there is such a system.
- kurthr 8y agoI think you're agreeing with me but, actually it's not clear that Joe pushed back or that "I'm a sucker"... it's that boss Fred has kids too and gives some slack to people like himself. And the reason your brother-in-law has such a system with paid overtime is a union... which is unlikely to affect IT until AIs organize and demand work-life balance.
- jobigoud 8y ago> “Joe” with the young kids pushes back because he has to. Having children is just a choice of a hobby that takes a lot of time, but in our current culture it's reprehensible for me to say I can't fill in his hours because I have my own hobbies that I want to do instead.
- doktrin 8y agoChildren are sort of a social necessity, hence carrying more gravitas than conventional hobbies. Obviously "I can't work because I'm cartooning" is gonna be met with more skepticism than "I'm taking care of a sick kid"
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]