5 ms·

Also, sky is blue. Check http://www.bnet.com/blog/entry-level/jason-calacanis-gen-y-job-hoppers-are-destroying-america/2283 http://www.bnet.com/blog/entry-level

by praptak 16y ago

Also, sky is blue. Check http://www.bnet.com/blog/entry-level/jason-calacanis-gen-y-job-hoppers-are-destroying-america/2283 http://www.bnet.com/blog/entry-level/jason-calacanis-gen-y-j... Says Calacanis: "... the majority of Gen Y seem to operating under the bizarre rallying cry of: More money! Less responsibility! Shorter hours! No stress! More freedom! It’s all about me!" Yeah, shame on the employees for wanting better job conditions and admitting they actually care about own interest.

alnayyir 16y ago
Rational self-interest is a right afforded only to the C-level executives, landlords, and entrepreneurs of the world apparently.
marcamillion 16y ago
Jason wonders why people 'job hop' at Mahalo. Are you kidding me right now?
- alnayyir 16y ago
  Oh man, don't get me started on that job-hoppers fiasco from a couple/few months ago. That thread put people into hysterics. You had people rallying behind the opposing flags of "work like damn dirty apes and love us for it!" and "we want our paternity leave and paid vacation!". Blood was spilt. :(
  - phlux 16y ago
    link?
    - Evgeny 16y ago
      Could be this one: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1287110 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1287110
    - alnayyir 16y ago
      Ev has it. It was a low-point for the discourse here.
- jasonmcalacanis 16y ago
  Actually, we haven't had any (volentary) turnover in about a year. Ever since we did our "culture document" and started hiring based on it, we've had an almost flawless hiring process. I'm going to write a newsletter on building a culture document, so you might want to signup for my newsletter at www.jasonnation.com.
  - staunch 16y ago
    How many non-voluntary in the past 2 years?
  - alnayyir 16y ago
    >so you might want to signup for my newsletter at www.jasonnation.com I bet we should totally buy your book too. Speak for yourself here or submit the link. That's how this place works. This isn't a blogroll subscribe-fest between a bunch of aspiring "SEOs". I don't require that people subscribe to my [blog/newsletter/cult newsgroup] in order to hear my opinion on the subject at hand and you don't merit special treatment either. Do you read what you write?
jasonmcalacanis 16y ago
Not exactly my point. a) We have amazing job conditions: organic food cooked all day by our chefs, laundry service, car washing, personal trainers, unlimited monitors, killer espresso machine, developer-driven product design, etc. b) My point is it is fine to care about your own interests--but not more than the mission and success of the company. There is no 'i' in team, and you either succeed as a team or you fail as a team. That's the reality of startups, so the players who are concerned with their stat line are not the players you want on your team. About 2/3rds of the Gen Y folks I meet at thinking of themselves first and the company 2nd or 3rd--if at all in some cases.The other 1/3rd are hard working, dedicated and have a sense of Giri.
- marcamillion 16y ago
  Jason, I have a theory, based on what I view as the most optimal way that labor markets work. Based on the system that we live in, everybody tends to benefit, when (in aggregate) everybody looks out for their self-interest. If they are not allowed to, there are distortions which actually impairs the benefits to both parties. For instance, if employees look out for their own self-interest, they will do everything to get the best benefits. Likewise, if the company looks out for its own self-interest, it will aggressively try to attract the best talent. By doing that, they force existing employees to look out for their own self-interest by being the best they can be (i.e. as good as, or better than, incoming employees). Also, when companies aggressively try to attract the best talent, they tend to do things like listen to what the talents want and employ those things (more paid sick time, cafeterias, the best development machines, reasonable working hours, etc.). When employees are the best they can be, and their employer is not doing everything they can to retain them, they can leave. That forces the employer to become better at retaining employees - which forces other employers to do the same and creates a perpetuating cycle. So when a company undermines that, by for instance cancelling sick leave, or forcing 80-hour work weeks into perpetuity, the short term effects are that employees will leave (if they are the best they can be at what they do, which we can assume they are otherwise they wouldn't be at the company) to greener pastures and if the company self corrects, they will once again attract and retain the best talent. If they don't self-correct, they will die. Perhaps a slow, long, death. Or just exist in limbo with lots of D class employees providing mediocre service. We see this phenomena playing itself out in the Valley now between Google and Facebook. But it's not new. Before it was Yahoo and Google, Google and Microsoft, Microsoft and IBM, Apple and Microsoft, etc. That's one of the reasons that I think that unions are a bad idea - because they distort this mechanism and allow employees to get lazy and not make sure they are the best at what they do (or add significant value in some other way). Based on my theory, I think you are missing the idea. Forcing your employees to live through hell, but spraying their face with mist every now and then (with chefs, and laundry service - which were, quite ironically, forced on you by your other successful competitors) and telling them they are cool, doesn't make hell any cooler. At the end of the day, it's still hell. And they know it. I don't believe that you would have a chef, laundry service, car washing, etc. if Google, Facebook, et al. didn't have similar services and you weren't competing with them. That, however, is just based on what I have deduced from public statements that you have made - so that could be wrong.

by praptak 16y ago

alnayyir 16y ago

Rational self-interest is a right afforded only to the C-level executives, landlords, and entrepreneurs of the world apparently.

marcamillion 16y ago

Jason wonders why people 'job hop' at Mahalo. Are you kidding me right now?

alnayyir 16y ago
Oh man, don't get me started on that job-hoppers fiasco from a couple/few months ago. That thread put people into hysterics. You had people rallying behind the opposing flags of "work like damn dirty apes and love us for it!" and "we want our paternity leave and paid vacation!". Blood was spilt. :(
- phlux 16y ago
  link?
  - Evgeny 16y ago
    Could be this one: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1287110 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1287110
  - alnayyir 16y ago
    Ev has it. It was a low-point for the discourse here.
jasonmcalacanis 16y ago
Actually, we haven't had any (volentary) turnover in about a year. Ever since we did our "culture document" and started hiring based on it, we've had an almost flawless hiring process. I'm going to write a newsletter on building a culture document, so you might want to signup for my newsletter at www.jasonnation.com.
- staunch 16y ago
  How many non-voluntary in the past 2 years?
- alnayyir 16y ago
  >so you might want to signup for my newsletter at www.jasonnation.com I bet we should totally buy your book too. Speak for yourself here or submit the link. That's how this place works. This isn't a blogroll subscribe-fest between a bunch of aspiring "SEOs". I don't require that people subscribe to my [blog/newsletter/cult newsgroup] in order to hear my opinion on the subject at hand and you don't merit special treatment either. Do you read what you write?

jasonmcalacanis 16y ago

Not exactly my point. a) We have amazing job conditions: organic food cooked all day by our chefs, laundry service, car washing, personal trainers, unlimited monitors, killer espresso machine, developer-driven product design, etc. b) My point is it is fine to care about your own interests--but not more than the mission and success of the company. There is no 'i' in team, and you either succeed as a team or you fail as a team. That's the reality of startups, so the players who are concerned with their stat line are not the players you want on your team. About 2/3rds of the Gen Y folks I meet at thinking of themselves first and the company 2nd or 3rd--if at all in some cases.The other 1/3rd are hard working, dedicated and have a sense of Giri.

marcamillion 16y ago
Jason, I have a theory, based on what I view as the most optimal way that labor markets work. Based on the system that we live in, everybody tends to benefit, when (in aggregate) everybody looks out for their self-interest. If they are not allowed to, there are distortions which actually impairs the benefits to both parties. For instance, if employees look out for their own self-interest, they will do everything to get the best benefits. Likewise, if the company looks out for its own self-interest, it will aggressively try to attract the best talent. By doing that, they force existing employees to look out for their own self-interest by being the best they can be (i.e. as good as, or better than, incoming employees). Also, when companies aggressively try to attract the best talent, they tend to do things like listen to what the talents want and employ those things (more paid sick time, cafeterias, the best development machines, reasonable working hours, etc.). When employees are the best they can be, and their employer is not doing everything they can to retain them, they can leave. That forces the employer to become better at retaining employees - which forces other employers to do the same and creates a perpetuating cycle. So when a company undermines that, by for instance cancelling sick leave, or forcing 80-hour work weeks into perpetuity, the short term effects are that employees will leave (if they are the best they can be at what they do, which we can assume they are otherwise they wouldn't be at the company) to greener pastures and if the company self corrects, they will once again attract and retain the best talent. If they don't self-correct, they will die. Perhaps a slow, long, death. Or just exist in limbo with lots of D class employees providing mediocre service. We see this phenomena playing itself out in the Valley now between Google and Facebook. But it's not new. Before it was Yahoo and Google, Google and Microsoft, Microsoft and IBM, Apple and Microsoft, etc. That's one of the reasons that I think that unions are a bad idea - because they distort this mechanism and allow employees to get lazy and not make sure they are the best at what they do (or add significant value in some other way). Based on my theory, I think you are missing the idea. Forcing your employees to live through hell, but spraying their face with mist every now and then (with chefs, and laundry service - which were, quite ironically, forced on you by your other successful competitors) and telling them they are cool, doesn't make hell any cooler. At the end of the day, it's still hell. And they know it. I don't believe that you would have a chef, laundry service, car washing, etc. if Google, Facebook, et al. didn't have similar services and you weren't competing with them. That, however, is just based on what I have deduced from public statements that you have made - so that could be wrong.