4 ms·

I worked 60-70 hours a week for 6 months and destroyed by health (actually programming for 50+ of those hours, tracked time since it was billable hours for a co

I worked 60-70 hours a week for 6 months and destroyed by health (actually programming for 50+ of those hours, tracked time since it was billable hours for a consulting firm). Finished the project by the deadline I was hired for, but quit soon afterwards and within 2 months I was in the ICU, and then in and out of the hospital several times with some serious chronic health issues that I'm still recovering from 2 years later. I made a lot of money but spent the next year barely working and recovering my health. Doctor's weren't 100% sure it was stress/work related("possible" it contributed), but I was pretty sure. All things considered, it was a losing option despite the pay. I could have done it at age 25 but not at age 45. Now I work 40-50 hours and week, make even more money(for where I live, average by SV standards), but it's still a high pressure job. I'd gladly work 25 hours a week for 1/3 the pay. Why isn't there someone disrupting software development paying experienced people like me a low salary for 20-30 hours a week? I'd still get over half as much done as I do working 50 hours a week, I'm sure.

Retric 7y ago
Communication overhead is a major limitation when growing team sizes.
alexpetralia 7y ago
I have no idea why this isn't more common. You basically get _huge experience_ for 10-20 hours a week and you don't have to shell out that cost at 40 hours a week. I believe there are many people who don't mind working an extra 10-20 hours a week. Yes, they may not be your Googlers, but there is still a lot of talent/experience you are able to access without breaking the bank. (Yes, there are also non-compete agreements and various types of reasons why this doesn't work, but I maintain that many experienced devs wouldn't mind working on projects in their spare time and leading/learning/getting paid for it.)
otakucode 7y ago
>Why isn't there someone disrupting software development paying experienced people like me a low salary for 20-30 hours a week? I've wondered this for quite awhile myself. Many companies would benefit from being able to keep software developers "on retainer" like a lawyer even. That sort of arrangement might mitigate the cycle of a product becoming excellent, and then immediately starting to go down hill because the company feels compelled to make the developers do something. I'm not confident it would help as you would still face managers who want to 'make a name for themselves' pioneering changes just to get some credit regardless of how beneficial the users would find it. My personal theory on the matter is that it's a combination of "this is just how things are done", lingering influence of the Protestant Work Ethic, and managers who measure their personal and organizational value based upon how many people they control and how much they control them. It's always good to keep in mind that the 40 hour work week and the way work, offices, and much else in society is structured was optimized for very predictable constant physical labor in manufacturing. It was never meant to be used for mental labor or intellectual pursuits at all. We're still adapting to pure mental work being the most valuable sort of work to society. We haven't dealt with things like human beings having much different capacities for extended exertion between physical and mental types. We recognize an awful lot of problems (the destructive nature of interruptions, the diminished returns of long work days, etc) but there are very few organizations dedicating themselves to finding working solutions.
scarecrowbob 7y ago
"Why isn't there someone disrupting software development paying experienced people like me a low salary for 20-30 hours a week? I'd still get over half as much done as I do working 50 hours a week, I'm sure." That's what I do. I started out freelancing and eventually I found a client who eventually needed buy all my available time. 30/h a week, at a salary that feeds me fine. For reference, I do PHP and linux admin for WordPress and some linux admin work. It's not super fun, but I work for a tiny company and have to look at all parts of a bunch of rando tech stacks (like, moodle, drupal, java applications, mail servers, etc and everything from firewalls to CSS for IE10). It doesn't "scale". So there there is nothing to "disrupt". I just work with a couple of smart people who do good work, and if we tied to make the business grow substantially we'd probably just work more for the same amount of money, so we are just really selective about what jobs we take. I think. I don't have a great analysis of what makes it work cause I am in the middle of it.
feistypharit 7y ago
Agreed! I feel the same way...flexible time is better than money. I think part of the problem in the US is health care. Employees still want it, but employers view it as a high fixed cost for a partial employee. That being said, I get healthcare through my wife, so wouldn't need it.
- tonyedgecombe 7y ago
  I'm not sure it is health care because the situation is broadly similar in the UK.
freetime2 7y ago
> Why isn't there someone disrupting software development paying experienced people like me a low salary for 20-30 hours a week? I'd still get over half as much done as I do working 50 hours a week, I'm sure. I've seen many, many developers working 30 hours a week. It's generally not acknowledged openly or written into the contract, but it takes the form of coming in late in the morning, "working from home" at least one day a week. Or leaving work early "to beat traffic", pick up the kids etc. The key in my experience is finding a manager who is willing to evaluate you on your performance rather than time spent at your desk, and to be a little flexible about accepting a job that doesn't pay top dollar. An experienced engineer should be able to get more done in 20-30 hours anyway than a junior engineer can in 50 hours. As long as you're reasonably productive and you don't cause trouble for anyone, I have seen people sustain jobs like that for more than a decade.
- stjohnswarts 7y ago
  I'm in this situation. I spend about 30 hours on real development and 10 hours on self improvement (trying new stuff/learning new techniques) . I easily get as much done as my co-workers who go to every meeting and work overtime. Difference is I'm not burned out like the ones who try to look like "company men" by putting in 50 hours a week and attending every little corporate meeting and event that happens.
langitbiru 7y ago
I think society needs to push more this part-time culture. There are many people who prefers part-time jobs but with additional free time. They may want to take care children or old folks. Or they want to pursue their dreams, like writing novels, building indie games, etc. Maybe I should build a startup based on this premise. :)
- tonyedgecombe 7y ago
  If the rest of the industry won't employ women, older workers, part timers, ex convicts, etc then perhaps there is an opportunity there.
Pimpus 7y ago
You might want to read The Mindbody Prescription to resolve your lingering chronic health issues.

Retric 7y ago

Communication overhead is a major limitation when growing team sizes.

alexpetralia 7y ago

I have no idea why this isn't more common. You basically get _huge experience_ for 10-20 hours a week and you don't have to shell out that cost at 40 hours a week. I believe there are many people who don't mind working an extra 10-20 hours a week. Yes, they may not be your Googlers, but there is still a lot of talent/experience you are able to access without breaking the bank. (Yes, there are also non-compete agreements and various types of reasons why this doesn't work, but I maintain that many experienced devs wouldn't mind working on projects in their spare time and leading/learning/getting paid for it.)

otakucode 7y ago

>Why isn't there someone disrupting software development paying experienced people like me a low salary for 20-30 hours a week? I've wondered this for quite awhile myself. Many companies would benefit from being able to keep software developers "on retainer" like a lawyer even. That sort of arrangement might mitigate the cycle of a product becoming excellent, and then immediately starting to go down hill because the company feels compelled to make the developers do something. I'm not confident it would help as you would still face managers who want to 'make a name for themselves' pioneering changes just to get some credit regardless of how beneficial the users would find it. My personal theory on the matter is that it's a combination of "this is just how things are done", lingering influence of the Protestant Work Ethic, and managers who measure their personal and organizational value based upon how many people they control and how much they control them. It's always good to keep in mind that the 40 hour work week and the way work, offices, and much else in society is structured was optimized for very predictable constant physical labor in manufacturing. It was never meant to be used for mental labor or intellectual pursuits at all. We're still adapting to pure mental work being the most valuable sort of work to society. We haven't dealt with things like human beings having much different capacities for extended exertion between physical and mental types. We recognize an awful lot of problems (the destructive nature of interruptions, the diminished returns of long work days, etc) but there are very few organizations dedicating themselves to finding working solutions.

scarecrowbob 7y ago

"Why isn't there someone disrupting software development paying experienced people like me a low salary for 20-30 hours a week? I'd still get over half as much done as I do working 50 hours a week, I'm sure." That's what I do. I started out freelancing and eventually I found a client who eventually needed buy all my available time. 30/h a week, at a salary that feeds me fine. For reference, I do PHP and linux admin for WordPress and some linux admin work. It's not super fun, but I work for a tiny company and have to look at all parts of a bunch of rando tech stacks (like, moodle, drupal, java applications, mail servers, etc and everything from firewalls to CSS for IE10). It doesn't "scale". So there there is nothing to "disrupt". I just work with a couple of smart people who do good work, and if we tied to make the business grow substantially we'd probably just work more for the same amount of money, so we are just really selective about what jobs we take. I think. I don't have a great analysis of what makes it work cause I am in the middle of it.

feistypharit 7y ago

Agreed! I feel the same way...flexible time is better than money. I think part of the problem in the US is health care. Employees still want it, but employers view it as a high fixed cost for a partial employee. That being said, I get healthcare through my wife, so wouldn't need it.

tonyedgecombe 7y ago
I'm not sure it is health care because the situation is broadly similar in the UK.

freetime2 7y ago

> Why isn't there someone disrupting software development paying experienced people like me a low salary for 20-30 hours a week? I'd still get over half as much done as I do working 50 hours a week, I'm sure. I've seen many, many developers working 30 hours a week. It's generally not acknowledged openly or written into the contract, but it takes the form of coming in late in the morning, "working from home" at least one day a week. Or leaving work early "to beat traffic", pick up the kids etc. The key in my experience is finding a manager who is willing to evaluate you on your performance rather than time spent at your desk, and to be a little flexible about accepting a job that doesn't pay top dollar. An experienced engineer should be able to get more done in 20-30 hours anyway than a junior engineer can in 50 hours. As long as you're reasonably productive and you don't cause trouble for anyone, I have seen people sustain jobs like that for more than a decade.

stjohnswarts 7y ago
I'm in this situation. I spend about 30 hours on real development and 10 hours on self improvement (trying new stuff/learning new techniques) . I easily get as much done as my co-workers who go to every meeting and work overtime. Difference is I'm not burned out like the ones who try to look like "company men" by putting in 50 hours a week and attending every little corporate meeting and event that happens.

langitbiru 7y ago

I think society needs to push more this part-time culture. There are many people who prefers part-time jobs but with additional free time. They may want to take care children or old folks. Or they want to pursue their dreams, like writing novels, building indie games, etc. Maybe I should build a startup based on this premise. :)

tonyedgecombe 7y ago
If the rest of the industry won't employ women, older workers, part timers, ex convicts, etc then perhaps there is an opportunity there.

Pimpus 7y ago

You might want to read The Mindbody Prescription to resolve your lingering chronic health issues.