3 ms·

Why? Why would someone do that? Does Hell have a VIP area?

by uniqueid 6y ago

matz1 6y ago
Provided he/she can manage it, Why would someone not do that ?
dbbk 6y ago
I can only think of the short-term money as the motivator
mtnGoat 6y ago
Greed! Mixed with some possible stupidity.
toolz 6y ago
I fail to see how upholding two contracts is unethical in the slightest. Do you think a company should be able to pay groups of people similar compensation but hold the rights to each individuals peak performance? I'd suggest it's very greedy for already megarich companies to expect anything beyond meeting the obligations specified in the contract.
- eythian 6y ago
  It depends, for example I have to get approval for any second jobs to my employer. This is certainly in part for competition reasons, but it's also so they can ensure that I'm not materially increasing my risk of burn-out, which would cost them (and I think they have a legal obligation to ensure I'm remaining healthy within their scope, though I'm not sure where the boundaries of that lie.) So if I said I was doing 5 hours or so per week for something else unrelated to my company, it'd probably be fine. If I instead was doing 30, there'd be cause to not give me approval, or step me down to reduced hours with them, or similar.
  - toolz 6y ago
    I think you mean well, but that's a strawman. If your contract obligates you to let your employer know of other jobs you'd be in breech of contract. It's not okay to just assume these people are in breech of contract just because you might be if you did the same. As for future risk should a company be able to limit you from partying on a sunday simply because statistically you'd probably perform worse on monday? If that clause is not in the agreed employment contract then the company gets no say in what you do on sunday, right? It's amazing to me that people feel so morally beholden to companies that would dispose of them the second it would be obviously profitable to do so. Companies feel no moral obligation to employees, they behave just as ethically as the workforce and consumers demand they behave. They do not volunteer extra consideration just because it might feel right. The idea that any employee should afford them extra consideration beyond their contract is arguably wrong and potentially unethical. If the workforce holds that employees owe companies more than they receive, would that workforce not be partially responsible for setting up unfair relationships and toxic work environments?
    - eythian 6y ago
      Well, I was presenting as an example as to why such a thing might be the case thereby adding nuance, not really an argument per se. They can't limit me from partying on Sunday, but they are legally obliged to prevent over-work, and that includes being aware of other employment. It's nothing to do with corporate morality or anything like that. It's just that they must do this because the government says they must.
- uniqueid 6y ago
  Well, an explanation can't transform my wisecrack from being inscrutable to being hilarious now, but nevertheless I'll add one: it's not holding a full time job at two companies, I find evil; it's holding a full time job at two companies I find evil, I find evil.
  - toolz 6y ago
    oh lol, welp sorry for making an assumption about what you meant. That alternative interpretation never occurred to me. I should've been more charitable in my interpretation, oh well.
deepsun 6y ago
It's perfectly legal and good for country economy. What if the employee is really able to perform up to employer's expectations, but it was hard for them to convince employer to pay double?
DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
When you leave an employer in the US you generally cash-out your PTO rather than getting paid gardening-leave if you have a NDA/non-compete (such niceties in the US? hah!) - at the same time, it isn't unheard of to instead use your PTO to spend time starting with your new employer - so that if things don't work-out (or rather: things going disastrously wrong in the first couple of weeks) you can go back to your old employer and pretend that you were legitimately on holiday somewhere far, far away for that time. Being able to safely "undo" something as major as an employment change is a huge stress-reliever and I think more people should consider doing it. Granted, this isn't the same thing as actively working for both companies. However it's possible the subject of the tweet was someone who was a vendor/contractor at FB or GOOG - or vice-versa - which has certain appearances.
- felideon 6y ago
  How does that work out in practice? At what point would you put in your two-week notice? If you wait until the last day of your PTO, that means you'd overlap in two jobs for two weeks.

Why? Why would someone do that? Does Hell have a VIP area?

matz1 6y ago

Provided he/she can manage it, Why would someone not do that ?

dbbk 6y ago

I can only think of the short-term money as the motivator

mtnGoat 6y ago

Greed! Mixed with some possible stupidity.

toolz 6y ago

I fail to see how upholding two contracts is unethical in the slightest. Do you think a company should be able to pay groups of people similar compensation but hold the rights to each individuals peak performance? I'd suggest it's very greedy for already megarich companies to expect anything beyond meeting the obligations specified in the contract.

eythian 6y ago
It depends, for example I have to get approval for any second jobs to my employer. This is certainly in part for competition reasons, but it's also so they can ensure that I'm not materially increasing my risk of burn-out, which would cost them (and I think they have a legal obligation to ensure I'm remaining healthy within their scope, though I'm not sure where the boundaries of that lie.) So if I said I was doing 5 hours or so per week for something else unrelated to my company, it'd probably be fine. If I instead was doing 30, there'd be cause to not give me approval, or step me down to reduced hours with them, or similar.
- toolz 6y ago
  I think you mean well, but that's a strawman. If your contract obligates you to let your employer know of other jobs you'd be in breech of contract. It's not okay to just assume these people are in breech of contract just because you might be if you did the same. As for future risk should a company be able to limit you from partying on a sunday simply because statistically you'd probably perform worse on monday? If that clause is not in the agreed employment contract then the company gets no say in what you do on sunday, right? It's amazing to me that people feel so morally beholden to companies that would dispose of them the second it would be obviously profitable to do so. Companies feel no moral obligation to employees, they behave just as ethically as the workforce and consumers demand they behave. They do not volunteer extra consideration just because it might feel right. The idea that any employee should afford them extra consideration beyond their contract is arguably wrong and potentially unethical. If the workforce holds that employees owe companies more than they receive, would that workforce not be partially responsible for setting up unfair relationships and toxic work environments?
  - eythian 6y ago
    Well, I was presenting as an example as to why such a thing might be the case thereby adding nuance, not really an argument per se. They can't limit me from partying on Sunday, but they are legally obliged to prevent over-work, and that includes being aware of other employment. It's nothing to do with corporate morality or anything like that. It's just that they must do this because the government says they must.
uniqueid 6y ago
Well, an explanation can't transform my wisecrack from being inscrutable to being hilarious now, but nevertheless I'll add one: it's not holding a full time job at two companies, I find evil; it's holding a full time job at two companies I find evil, I find evil.
- toolz 6y ago
  oh lol, welp sorry for making an assumption about what you meant. That alternative interpretation never occurred to me. I should've been more charitable in my interpretation, oh well.

deepsun 6y ago

It's perfectly legal and good for country economy. What if the employee is really able to perform up to employer's expectations, but it was hard for them to convince employer to pay double?

DaiPlusPlus 6y ago

When you leave an employer in the US you generally cash-out your PTO rather than getting paid gardening-leave if you have a NDA/non-compete (such niceties in the US? hah!) - at the same time, it isn't unheard of to instead use your PTO to spend time starting with your new employer - so that if things don't work-out (or rather: things going disastrously wrong in the first couple of weeks) you can go back to your old employer and pretend that you were legitimately on holiday somewhere far, far away for that time. Being able to safely "undo" something as major as an employment change is a huge stress-reliever and I think more people should consider doing it. Granted, this isn't the same thing as actively working for both companies. However it's possible the subject of the tweet was someone who was a vendor/contractor at FB or GOOG - or vice-versa - which has certain appearances.

felideon 6y ago
How does that work out in practice? At what point would you put in your two-week notice? If you wait until the last day of your PTO, that means you'd overlap in two jobs for two weeks.