4 ms·

I'm currently negotiating with two potential employers, one of them one of the bigs. It would be great if they would pay me to learn at work, but I don't feel

I'm currently negotiating with two potential employers, one of them one of the bigs. It would be great if they would pay me to learn at work, but I don't feel like I'm in a position to ask for that — that's an industry=wide problem. So I'm trying to hack the system to get fewer hours: 30-32 per week. That gives me enough time to self-study, handle some of my own training and overdeliver, yet still have a life. I have extremely strong open source bona fides, I'm an inveterate organizer of study groups both at work and elsewhere, I speak regularly at meetups in order to force myself to learn new things well. Giving me the space to train myself is a great deal for potential employers. But they aren't biting. 40 hours is what they are set up for and it is hard for them to figure out how to be flexible, even if they want to. At my last job with a small growth-stage startup, I successfully negotiated for 32 hours, and it worked out great for all parties. But it seems harder than I think it should be to close such deals.

Ididntdothis 7y ago
“40 hours is what they are set up for and it is hard for them to figure out how to be flexible, even if they want to.” I had the same experience. asked for 32 hours week with corresponding pay cut. The HR people barely could comprehend the idea and certainly didn’t have a process for dealing with such a request.
- Viliam1234 7y ago
  I also tried to get a 32-hour week, interviewed with multiple companies, and at the end got a deal for mere 50% of my usual (40-hour) salary. And the company still felt they were doing me a big favor. Within my probationary period I decided that 50% of money for 80% of time is too much of a discount; that I could simply work full-time for a year or two and then take a break for a year or two instead. But I never actually took that break. There are many companies complaining how they can't find enough competent programmers. But almost none of them is willing to provide part-time work as a benefit. I believe that a software company that would publicly declare a 4-day workweek would soon have hundreds of people begging for an interview.
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    I don’t think they would even lose much productivity. When I count the number of useless meetings I have to attend I could probably produce the same results with a 3 day week.
  - Hannan 7y ago
    I currently work 28 hours per week. This is the second time this has happened in my career. Both times the path was "be an FTE for a while at 40hr/wk, produce, wait for something bad to be suggested, quit, take contractor offer for same pay at reduced hours." I don't imagine this works for companies with employees numbering over ~250 or so, so I've been very lucky.
- Aeolun 7y ago
  It was fairly common (when I lived there a few years ago) in the Netherlands to negotiate down to 80% time, and I even managed 60% once. Of course it’s a pay cut, but it was fantastic :)
erikpukinskis 7y ago
I would just take the job and spend 90 minutes a day doing the things you mentioned. If anyone objects, well that’s conflict about how the flow of work will proceed, and dealing with those conflicts is everyone’s job. You’re presuming that you’re not allowed to do the things you think are crucial as part of your daily work, but that’s already conceding too much to your superiors. You do have to wait for the right time to do things, so it is justifiable as part of some near-term team goal. And be willing to wait when it’s not the time.
downerending 7y ago
Voice of experience: Companies are incapable of thinking this way. Instead, take the 40 and simply siphon off 8-10 for your personal education. As long as you're not actually working for a different company during this time, it's all good. If company doesn't like it, move on.
- thrav 7y ago
  Yep. Prove that you can do your job in less time, and use the slack for learning. Dip out early on days you need to speak at things. Work from home on days you know will be slow and do learning while no one is around. It’s not difficult to pull that off at a big company.
  - stronglikedan 7y ago
    > Prove that you can do your job in less time If you prove it, they may just expect more from you in the same amount of time.
    - thrav 7y ago
      I’m not advocating for announcing completion and broadcasting your efficiency. I’m just saying, ensure you won’t fall behind working on your real job 32 hours a week. That shouldn’t be too difficult in most cases, given all the research on productivity. If you can’t do that, they were right to refuse the 32hr/wk proposal. If you can, just do it, sneak in some studying, and act like it took you 40.
- hnick 7y ago
  My experience has been that KPIs, metrics, and reviews don't matter a whole lot. Do what you want. Get the job done, and done well. Management knows who is worth keeping and the numbers will somehow magically show that. And if that doesn't work out then move on.
- stakhanov 7y ago
  ...some bigger learning projects require more time or different rhythms from what can be made available through siphoning off time, which seems to be what most people in this thread are saying they're doing. For example, if you're doing daily standups, then one hour of an 8-hour workday is doable. But if you want to learn something that requires from time to time that you concentrate deeply for a longer period of time, say 4 hours, then that's half a workday, which may well show on daily standups. If you have a manager who has a tendency to show up at your desk unannounced and they glimpse you watching a video, they probably won't say anything or ask what you were watching, but may walk away having mentally applied a discount factor to what they think your rate of productivity might be. Also, while siphoning-off may work well in a good culture of consistent non-rushed problem solving, it may not work so well in a culture where it's constantly management by crisis. Like tomorrow may be the deadline for delivering something in the context of a crisis. The crisis may be entirely made up, but you would still end up looking really bad if you didn't deliver. Then you're probably not going to spend an hour learning that day if you know there's a risk you will have to stay at the office for an hour longer as a result.
ryanmercer 7y ago
> It would be great if they would pay me to learn at work, but I don't feel like I'm in a position to ask for that — that's an industry=wide problem. It's a society wide thing. I don't work in tech, I don't do anything CS related, for certification/licensing that will assist us in our jobs (and that is used to prioritize applicants for positions) we are expected to do it on our own time, outside of work, on our own dime which if you actually get the license/certification they will then refund a portion of a course you took IF it was graded and the only ones that carry grades require you to attend in person for 40 hours where you'd have to take a week off then go put yourself up in another state... and then annually the exam for the one with a license has a 3-20% annual pass rate, with the average around 15%.
susijdjdjxa 7y ago
Someone who asks for reduced hours is probably shooting themselves in the foot wrt comp. It suggests you are negotiating against yourself. If you aren’t asking for more money you are leaving money on the table. Just work effectively for 30 hours and nobody is going to know you aren’t working 40. Measurement of productivity in software is very vague.

Ididntdothis 7y ago

“40 hours is what they are set up for and it is hard for them to figure out how to be flexible, even if they want to.” I had the same experience. asked for 32 hours week with corresponding pay cut. The HR people barely could comprehend the idea and certainly didn’t have a process for dealing with such a request.

Viliam1234 7y ago
I also tried to get a 32-hour week, interviewed with multiple companies, and at the end got a deal for mere 50% of my usual (40-hour) salary. And the company still felt they were doing me a big favor. Within my probationary period I decided that 50% of money for 80% of time is too much of a discount; that I could simply work full-time for a year or two and then take a break for a year or two instead. But I never actually took that break. There are many companies complaining how they can't find enough competent programmers. But almost none of them is willing to provide part-time work as a benefit. I believe that a software company that would publicly declare a 4-day workweek would soon have hundreds of people begging for an interview.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  I don’t think they would even lose much productivity. When I count the number of useless meetings I have to attend I could probably produce the same results with a 3 day week.
- Hannan 7y ago
  I currently work 28 hours per week. This is the second time this has happened in my career. Both times the path was "be an FTE for a while at 40hr/wk, produce, wait for something bad to be suggested, quit, take contractor offer for same pay at reduced hours." I don't imagine this works for companies with employees numbering over ~250 or so, so I've been very lucky.
Aeolun 7y ago
It was fairly common (when I lived there a few years ago) in the Netherlands to negotiate down to 80% time, and I even managed 60% once. Of course it’s a pay cut, but it was fantastic :)

erikpukinskis 7y ago

I would just take the job and spend 90 minutes a day doing the things you mentioned. If anyone objects, well that’s conflict about how the flow of work will proceed, and dealing with those conflicts is everyone’s job. You’re presuming that you’re not allowed to do the things you think are crucial as part of your daily work, but that’s already conceding too much to your superiors. You do have to wait for the right time to do things, so it is justifiable as part of some near-term team goal. And be willing to wait when it’s not the time.

downerending 7y ago

Voice of experience: Companies are incapable of thinking this way. Instead, take the 40 and simply siphon off 8-10 for your personal education. As long as you're not actually working for a different company during this time, it's all good. If company doesn't like it, move on.

thrav 7y ago
Yep. Prove that you can do your job in less time, and use the slack for learning. Dip out early on days you need to speak at things. Work from home on days you know will be slow and do learning while no one is around. It’s not difficult to pull that off at a big company.
- stronglikedan 7y ago
  > Prove that you can do your job in less time If you prove it, they may just expect more from you in the same amount of time.
  - thrav 7y ago
    I’m not advocating for announcing completion and broadcasting your efficiency. I’m just saying, ensure you won’t fall behind working on your real job 32 hours a week. That shouldn’t be too difficult in most cases, given all the research on productivity. If you can’t do that, they were right to refuse the 32hr/wk proposal. If you can, just do it, sneak in some studying, and act like it took you 40.
hnick 7y ago
My experience has been that KPIs, metrics, and reviews don't matter a whole lot. Do what you want. Get the job done, and done well. Management knows who is worth keeping and the numbers will somehow magically show that. And if that doesn't work out then move on.
stakhanov 7y ago
...some bigger learning projects require more time or different rhythms from what can be made available through siphoning off time, which seems to be what most people in this thread are saying they're doing. For example, if you're doing daily standups, then one hour of an 8-hour workday is doable. But if you want to learn something that requires from time to time that you concentrate deeply for a longer period of time, say 4 hours, then that's half a workday, which may well show on daily standups. If you have a manager who has a tendency to show up at your desk unannounced and they glimpse you watching a video, they probably won't say anything or ask what you were watching, but may walk away having mentally applied a discount factor to what they think your rate of productivity might be. Also, while siphoning-off may work well in a good culture of consistent non-rushed problem solving, it may not work so well in a culture where it's constantly management by crisis. Like tomorrow may be the deadline for delivering something in the context of a crisis. The crisis may be entirely made up, but you would still end up looking really bad if you didn't deliver. Then you're probably not going to spend an hour learning that day if you know there's a risk you will have to stay at the office for an hour longer as a result.

ryanmercer 7y ago

> It would be great if they would pay me to learn at work, but I don't feel like I'm in a position to ask for that — that's an industry=wide problem. It's a society wide thing. I don't work in tech, I don't do anything CS related, for certification/licensing that will assist us in our jobs (and that is used to prioritize applicants for positions) we are expected to do it on our own time, outside of work, on our own dime which if you actually get the license/certification they will then refund a portion of a course you took IF it was graded and the only ones that carry grades require you to attend in person for 40 hours where you'd have to take a week off then go put yourself up in another state... and then annually the exam for the one with a license has a 3-20% annual pass rate, with the average around 15%.

susijdjdjxa 7y ago

Someone who asks for reduced hours is probably shooting themselves in the foot wrt comp. It suggests you are negotiating against yourself. If you aren’t asking for more money you are leaving money on the table. Just work effectively for 30 hours and nobody is going to know you aren’t working 40. Measurement of productivity in software is very vague.