9 ms·

The problem is, people without children are told (or required) to pick up the workload left behind when the coworkers having children taking (multiple) weeks of

The problem is, people without children are told (or required) to pick up the workload left behind when the coworkers having children taking (multiple) weeks off. For once or twice that might be okay, but if became a chronic problem, no wonder they are not happy.

PeterisP 6y ago
Well then, direct the anger at those who do the telling or the requiring.
- pojzon 6y ago
  That not always help but for sure will backfire at you. Im writing next part as a parent of two. We have in team people who take multiple days off due to taking care of children, often not even counting it as taking a day off. Management doesnt care and expects people who do not “exploit” their privilages to do work for 2-3-4 people. Its also not the way to go, but any comment about that is a hard “stop being so selfish”. What to do in such a situation? Start doing the same to make company bleed money while frozen?
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    Honestly, this is why labor unions could help even highly-paid occupations such as software engineering. There needs to be something to serve as a counterweight to management, especially during economic downturns when finding a new job is more difficult.
  - slg 6y ago
    Dear boss, My team is really struggling with the challenges that have come along with this global pandemic. Everyone is doing their best given the situation, but we aren't able to deliver the same level of productivity on a consistent basis. Can we setup a call to discuss adjusting expectations and shifting workloads in order to keep everything running as smoothly as possible? Sincerely, pojzon There is an email template for you.
    - YarickR2 6y ago
      Sure. Just provide us with level of pay cut comfortable to you with respect to your reduced commitment
      - slg 6y ago
        >Well then, direct the anger at those who do the telling or the requiring. I will remind you that this is what kicked off the conversation. Forcing a pay cut on people who can't reach their normal level of productivity is a perfectly reasonable choice. To do it during a global pandemic if the survival of the business is not on the line is a choice that lacks empathy and compassion, but it is a choice that management can make. At least then it will be clear who is at fault for the decision. Refusing to do anything and letting your employees fight about it amongst themselves due to your own lack of management initiative is a cowardly way to lead.
      - alchemism 6y ago
        I’ve never seen it work the other way: “we had to let go of someone so you have to do the work of two people, here take 50% of their salary.” So why offer such a thing to management?
      - VRay 6y ago
        "Sure thing. I'll take a 0% pay cut, reflective of the market rate for someone with my skills and experience. I'm taking a few weeks of PTO starting today to look for a new job in the meantime in case this isn't tenable. Thanks." (Then you load up the "Who's Hiring" thread from last week on this site and line up a few juicy offers)
  - MaximumYComb 6y ago
    If a standard work day is 8 hours and management expects you to do the work of 4 people then I'd argue that the company is already bleeding money.
  - RHSeeger 6y ago
    > Management doesnt care and expects people who do not “exploit” their privilages to do work for 2-3-4 people. Out of curiosity, why is "just don't" not an option. You do what work you are capable of, maybe push a little harder because we're all pushing a little harder, and that's that. Things don't get done because there's less manpower doing it (people taking time off for kids; people taking time off for sickness; people working less efficiently because they're now working on the kitchen table etc). Everyone takes a hit because of covid; that includes parents, non-parents, AND companies.
Barrin92 6y ago
I'm perfectly fine with working more than people with children right now, because children are as the saying goes, quite literally our future. I don't have any but seeing how difficult it is for friends right now who do I am perfectly fine with picking up some extra work. I wish we could stop treating this like an individual issue, as we do everything nowadays, which is probably why we're getting so screwed by this virus to begin with.
- bzb5 6y ago
  > I'm perfectly fine with working more than people with children That’s cool. Seems like not everybody agrees with you
  - huanwin 6y ago
    This is an uncharitable interpretation. Here is GP's statement without the editorializing quotation: > I'm perfectly fine with working more than people with children right now,...
    - mynameisvlad 6y ago
      I mean, that doesn't really change the parent comment's response. It's clear from the article and even the discussion on this thread that not everyone agrees, whether it's permanent or right now.
      - huanwin 6y ago
        You're right, it doesn't. It's the principle I wanted to point out. How can there be meaningful or good-faith discussion if one party's perspective is misrepresented?
        pb7 6y ago
        Not sure it can be misrepresented when it's right there above the reply to it.
wbronchart 6y ago
If others have to consistently work overtime to cover for others, wouldn't it make sense to hire more? It's going to take some time for things to get back to normal.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  That depends on how profitable the company is (many companies are experiencing downturns in revenue right now) and whether that profitability is improved/protected by hiring more people or not.
- Aunche 6y ago
  After the pandemic is over, should you then lay someone off when everyone is 100% productive again? Otherwise, you would just be wasting money.
bonaldi 6y ago
Yes, they should be unhappy about that: at their managers. Not at their colleagues attempting to care for children during a pandemic. I've heard a related thing about US workers resenting colleagues for taking paid time off for similar reasons, and it's just as weird to my European eyes. The difference a decent labour movement (or the legacy of one) can make to industrial relations is stark
- luckylion 6y ago
  But they are unhappy about their managers' decision to favor their colleagues. If you give a tax rebate to anyone who's last name starts with A, are the other people not allowed to be annoyed, given that they have to pay more taxes to make up for the rebate? "Why can't you just be happy for the A people?" feels weird. Just pay those not taking time off for the time they would've taken off. It's not a complicated concept, it shows appreciation for them working harder than they'd need to if their colleagues were around.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - evan_ 6y ago
    If there are fewer people working the managers should be scheduling less work. In your “tax rebate” example you should be upset with whoever decided to issue rebates in that way, not the people who received the rebate.
    - YarickR2 6y ago
      "Scheduling less work" means less profit for everyone. Should everyone take a pay cut because of child-caring workers ?
      - evan_ 6y ago
        The company shouldn’t make promises it can’t keep. If they have to break one promise (keeping salaries the same) to keep another (paid time off) then it’s still the company that is breaking the promise, not other people to whom they have also made promises. If they have to cut salaries because they spent all the money on magic beans do you get mad at the beans?
WWLink 6y ago
Yeah that's the "they have x, why don't i?" attitude that causes a lot of problems. It should be an "everyone should have x!" attitude instead. At the end of the day, everyone's human, so there should be a little bit of slack in the staffing - long term - so that when someone's unavailable, nobody is drowning.
- owenmarshall 6y ago
  > At the end of the day, everyone's human, so there should be a little bit of slack in the staffing - long term - so that when someone's unavailable, nobody is drowning. I once as a very junior programmer asked a lead why we kept planning 75% of our capacity every month when we were hitting - and exceeding - our deliverables like clockwork. Then one month we had to do a death march to build features that had some $$$ tied to them. Did I ever learn why a little slack was critical.
  - WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
    I had a manager who kept saying "don't use fear-based estimates" since he had been picked to right the train. He looked good in front of the directors until he had to deploy the thing that was obviously rushed since "we can't use fear-based estimates". He wasn't able to pat his own back before the alert on the outage went out (all system outage)
- nicbou 6y ago
  That's the argument I made above. If they get paid 100% of their salary for 80% of the output, so should everyone else. I compared it to smokers taking smoke breaks while non-smokers aren't allowed to take random 5 minute breaks.
  - rootusrootus 6y ago
    The problem is that nobody can even define output accurately. I know people who output more in 25% of the time than some of their peers manage at 100%. But that's not how compensation in this industry is structured, so it is moot.
opportune 6y ago
Also, not that I necessarily think this way, but parents are told that working less won’t impact their ratings. And since the distribution of ratings is usually fixed, that effectively means you won’t get rewarded for picking up the slack from others. (Or in the case of Facebook it means everybody got the same rating regardless of how much/well they worked). Not necessarily due to just the parental policies, but I do believe Covid negatively affected my career progression as someone in my early career. I wouldn’t take my anger out on parents and would instead direct it at my company’s policies (and not just regarding parental leave). But I can see why someone might see others on their immediate team “benefitting” from the pandemic - not that they truly are, but that they are doing less work directly for the company - and take out their frustrations on them
- astura 6y ago
  I would hope that if someone was putting in more than 40 hours regularly they'd be rewarded with overtime pay? I, personally, wouldn't work overtime regularly without overtime pay. I've worked three software jobs when overtime was needed the overtime was paid. I also don't make SV-level salary though.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
newacct583 6y ago
> For once or twice that might be okay, but if became a chronic problem, no wonder they are not happy. It's a global pandemic, by definition it's not a chronic problem. I mean, look, we had this problem solved. That's what public education, daycare facilities, child care contractors, grandparents, etc... are for. And this system worked. And it's been disrupted. That loss is real, but it's not the parents' fault that the pandemic happened either. Why should they be (per your analysis) the ones to bear the costs of the disruption to their particular (and extremely common!) lifestyle?
627467 6y ago
Would anyone hate to "pickup workload" from anyone else for any other reason? I don't know: maybe colleague goes on PTO, maybe colleague is sick, maybe colleague isn't as experienced on doing something and takes longer, maybe colleague has a disability and not everything is in place to offset the handicap...etc If the problem is chronic isn't that a stronger indication that you're facing a management problem?
- mlang23 6y ago
  Bonus points for comparing parenthood with a disability. I am surprised you haven't been ripped into pieces yet.
d3ntb3ev1l 6y ago
And this is a fact you have established from what data?
MaximumYComb 6y ago
If the employers offer parental leave after the birth of a child then the managers should factor that in to their work allocations. You cannot blame the employee for using a benefit that's part of their contract.
celticninja 6y ago
That's definitely employer specific. That's has not been the case where I work.
rdtwo 6y ago
They aren’t happy but they have to deal. People with kids got fucked so hard by government mishandling of pandemic that a little bit of extra work for those without kids is minor in comparison. If we had to increase taxes to provide the additional support to even things out then I guarantee you it would be much worse.
RandoHolmes 6y ago
The same thing happens when a coworker gets sick or goes on vacation.
epx 6y ago
Personally I never had this problem, but some friends complain that, in their workplaces, they are automatically supposed to be on-call or available to travel on short notice because they were single/childless. Every place has its particular culture, I guess.

PeterisP 6y ago

Well then, direct the anger at those who do the telling or the requiring.

pojzon 6y ago
That not always help but for sure will backfire at you. Im writing next part as a parent of two. We have in team people who take multiple days off due to taking care of children, often not even counting it as taking a day off. Management doesnt care and expects people who do not “exploit” their privilages to do work for 2-3-4 people. Its also not the way to go, but any comment about that is a hard “stop being so selfish”. What to do in such a situation? Start doing the same to make company bleed money while frozen?
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  Honestly, this is why labor unions could help even highly-paid occupations such as software engineering. There needs to be something to serve as a counterweight to management, especially during economic downturns when finding a new job is more difficult.
- slg 6y ago
  Dear boss, My team is really struggling with the challenges that have come along with this global pandemic. Everyone is doing their best given the situation, but we aren't able to deliver the same level of productivity on a consistent basis. Can we setup a call to discuss adjusting expectations and shifting workloads in order to keep everything running as smoothly as possible? Sincerely, pojzon There is an email template for you.
  - YarickR2 6y ago
    Sure. Just provide us with level of pay cut comfortable to you with respect to your reduced commitment
    - slg 6y ago
      >Well then, direct the anger at those who do the telling or the requiring. I will remind you that this is what kicked off the conversation. Forcing a pay cut on people who can't reach their normal level of productivity is a perfectly reasonable choice. To do it during a global pandemic if the survival of the business is not on the line is a choice that lacks empathy and compassion, but it is a choice that management can make. At least then it will be clear who is at fault for the decision. Refusing to do anything and letting your employees fight about it amongst themselves due to your own lack of management initiative is a cowardly way to lead.
    - alchemism 6y ago
      I’ve never seen it work the other way: “we had to let go of someone so you have to do the work of two people, here take 50% of their salary.” So why offer such a thing to management?
    - VRay 6y ago
      "Sure thing. I'll take a 0% pay cut, reflective of the market rate for someone with my skills and experience. I'm taking a few weeks of PTO starting today to look for a new job in the meantime in case this isn't tenable. Thanks." (Then you load up the "Who's Hiring" thread from last week on this site and line up a few juicy offers)
- MaximumYComb 6y ago
  If a standard work day is 8 hours and management expects you to do the work of 4 people then I'd argue that the company is already bleeding money.
- RHSeeger 6y ago
  > Management doesnt care and expects people who do not “exploit” their privilages to do work for 2-3-4 people. Out of curiosity, why is "just don't" not an option. You do what work you are capable of, maybe push a little harder because we're all pushing a little harder, and that's that. Things don't get done because there's less manpower doing it (people taking time off for kids; people taking time off for sickness; people working less efficiently because they're now working on the kitchen table etc). Everyone takes a hit because of covid; that includes parents, non-parents, AND companies.

Barrin92 6y ago

I'm perfectly fine with working more than people with children right now, because children are as the saying goes, quite literally our future. I don't have any but seeing how difficult it is for friends right now who do I am perfectly fine with picking up some extra work. I wish we could stop treating this like an individual issue, as we do everything nowadays, which is probably why we're getting so screwed by this virus to begin with.

bzb5 6y ago
> I'm perfectly fine with working more than people with children That’s cool. Seems like not everybody agrees with you
- huanwin 6y ago
  This is an uncharitable interpretation. Here is GP's statement without the editorializing quotation: > I'm perfectly fine with working more than people with children right now,...
  - mynameisvlad 6y ago
    I mean, that doesn't really change the parent comment's response. It's clear from the article and even the discussion on this thread that not everyone agrees, whether it's permanent or right now.
    - huanwin 6y ago
      You're right, it doesn't. It's the principle I wanted to point out. How can there be meaningful or good-faith discussion if one party's perspective is misrepresented?
      - pb7 6y ago
        Not sure it can be misrepresented when it's right there above the reply to it.

wbronchart 6y ago

If others have to consistently work overtime to cover for others, wouldn't it make sense to hire more? It's going to take some time for things to get back to normal.

sokoloff 6y ago
That depends on how profitable the company is (many companies are experiencing downturns in revenue right now) and whether that profitability is improved/protected by hiring more people or not.
Aunche 6y ago
After the pandemic is over, should you then lay someone off when everyone is 100% productive again? Otherwise, you would just be wasting money.

bonaldi 6y ago

Yes, they should be unhappy about that: at their managers. Not at their colleagues attempting to care for children during a pandemic. I've heard a related thing about US workers resenting colleagues for taking paid time off for similar reasons, and it's just as weird to my European eyes. The difference a decent labour movement (or the legacy of one) can make to industrial relations is stark

luckylion 6y ago
But they are unhappy about their managers' decision to favor their colleagues. If you give a tax rebate to anyone who's last name starts with A, are the other people not allowed to be annoyed, given that they have to pay more taxes to make up for the rebate? "Why can't you just be happy for the A people?" feels weird. Just pay those not taking time off for the time they would've taken off. It's not a complicated concept, it shows appreciation for them working harder than they'd need to if their colleagues were around.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- evan_ 6y ago
  If there are fewer people working the managers should be scheduling less work. In your “tax rebate” example you should be upset with whoever decided to issue rebates in that way, not the people who received the rebate.
  - YarickR2 6y ago
    "Scheduling less work" means less profit for everyone. Should everyone take a pay cut because of child-caring workers ?
    - evan_ 6y ago
      The company shouldn’t make promises it can’t keep. If they have to break one promise (keeping salaries the same) to keep another (paid time off) then it’s still the company that is breaking the promise, not other people to whom they have also made promises. If they have to cut salaries because they spent all the money on magic beans do you get mad at the beans?

WWLink 6y ago

Yeah that's the "they have x, why don't i?" attitude that causes a lot of problems. It should be an "everyone should have x!" attitude instead. At the end of the day, everyone's human, so there should be a little bit of slack in the staffing - long term - so that when someone's unavailable, nobody is drowning.

owenmarshall 6y ago
> At the end of the day, everyone's human, so there should be a little bit of slack in the staffing - long term - so that when someone's unavailable, nobody is drowning. I once as a very junior programmer asked a lead why we kept planning 75% of our capacity every month when we were hitting - and exceeding - our deliverables like clockwork. Then one month we had to do a death march to build features that had some $$$ tied to them. Did I ever learn why a little slack was critical.
- WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
  I had a manager who kept saying "don't use fear-based estimates" since he had been picked to right the train. He looked good in front of the directors until he had to deploy the thing that was obviously rushed since "we can't use fear-based estimates". He wasn't able to pat his own back before the alert on the outage went out (all system outage)
nicbou 6y ago
That's the argument I made above. If they get paid 100% of their salary for 80% of the output, so should everyone else. I compared it to smokers taking smoke breaks while non-smokers aren't allowed to take random 5 minute breaks.
- rootusrootus 6y ago
  The problem is that nobody can even define output accurately. I know people who output more in 25% of the time than some of their peers manage at 100%. But that's not how compensation in this industry is structured, so it is moot.

opportune 6y ago

Also, not that I necessarily think this way, but parents are told that working less won’t impact their ratings. And since the distribution of ratings is usually fixed, that effectively means you won’t get rewarded for picking up the slack from others. (Or in the case of Facebook it means everybody got the same rating regardless of how much/well they worked). Not necessarily due to just the parental policies, but I do believe Covid negatively affected my career progression as someone in my early career. I wouldn’t take my anger out on parents and would instead direct it at my company’s policies (and not just regarding parental leave). But I can see why someone might see others on their immediate team “benefitting” from the pandemic - not that they truly are, but that they are doing less work directly for the company - and take out their frustrations on them

astura 6y ago
I would hope that if someone was putting in more than 40 hours regularly they'd be rewarded with overtime pay? I, personally, wouldn't work overtime regularly without overtime pay. I've worked three software jobs when overtime was needed the overtime was paid. I also don't make SV-level salary though.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

newacct583 6y ago

> For once or twice that might be okay, but if became a chronic problem, no wonder they are not happy. It's a global pandemic, by definition it's not a chronic problem. I mean, look, we had this problem solved. That's what public education, daycare facilities, child care contractors, grandparents, etc... are for. And this system worked. And it's been disrupted. That loss is real, but it's not the parents' fault that the pandemic happened either. Why should they be (per your analysis) the ones to bear the costs of the disruption to their particular (and extremely common!) lifestyle?

627467 6y ago

Would anyone hate to "pickup workload" from anyone else for any other reason? I don't know: maybe colleague goes on PTO, maybe colleague is sick, maybe colleague isn't as experienced on doing something and takes longer, maybe colleague has a disability and not everything is in place to offset the handicap...etc If the problem is chronic isn't that a stronger indication that you're facing a management problem?

mlang23 6y ago
Bonus points for comparing parenthood with a disability. I am surprised you haven't been ripped into pieces yet.

d3ntb3ev1l 6y ago

And this is a fact you have established from what data?

MaximumYComb 6y ago

If the employers offer parental leave after the birth of a child then the managers should factor that in to their work allocations. You cannot blame the employee for using a benefit that's part of their contract.

celticninja 6y ago

That's definitely employer specific. That's has not been the case where I work.

rdtwo 6y ago

They aren’t happy but they have to deal. People with kids got fucked so hard by government mishandling of pandemic that a little bit of extra work for those without kids is minor in comparison. If we had to increase taxes to provide the additional support to even things out then I guarantee you it would be much worse.

RandoHolmes 6y ago

The same thing happens when a coworker gets sick or goes on vacation.

epx 6y ago

Personally I never had this problem, but some friends complain that, in their workplaces, they are automatically supposed to be on-call or available to travel on short notice because they were single/childless. Every place has its particular culture, I guess.