4 ms·

> While long hours would be permitted for those interested in working them, crunch would not be made “mandatory.” Yeah, I'm sure that works well. How can you c

by dom96 6y ago

> While long hours would be permitted for those interested in working them, crunch would not be made “mandatory.” Yeah, I'm sure that works well. How can you compete with those that do work long hours when it comes time for performance reviews? The fear of losing your job is very real and I'm sure that creates a culture where in effect everyone is working long hours, no matter what the CD Projekt co-founder says.

uberman 6y ago
Those that work harder or longer than others get ahead. This is a universal truism and also very distinct from the mandated overtime dictated by many developers.
- blamestross 6y ago
  Yes, but an employer attempting to absolve themselves of responsibility for pressures to overwork by "it is not required" is basically the same thing as "unlimited time off".
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
orev 6y ago
This is the same problem with companies that have a “no vacation tracking, just take off when you want policy”. It ends up that no one takes vacation for this same reason.
- uberman 6y ago
  I see two people with this viewpoint, and I would be interested in knowing more. Is the thought here that a company that offers unlimited vacation would see people take none? I have never worked in such an environment, and I also don't tend to take all of my allotted vacation anyways, but at first glance, I'm not sure how: "take off as much as you like" could possibly be more restrictive than: "take off as much as you like, but no more that 2 weeks." Assuming of course we are not talking about mandatory vacation policies (that some companies/countries) effectively have.
  - geofft 6y ago
    Here's the dynamic: When you don't take all your allotted vacation, and someone else does, there's no possible claim that you were a harder or more dedicated worker than they were. They did exactly what they were permitted to. And, therefore, I'm guessing that if you wanted to take your vacation, you wouldn't have too much trouble finding time to take it, and nobody would complain that you did. If there's unlimited vacation, and someone takes two weeks of vacation when the whole company tends to take one, and they were on vacation during a critical project, once time comes for performance reviews, people will say "I'm not sure how committed they are to the company" / "They don't have a great work ethic" / etc. etc. Because it was their choice to decide that two weeks was reasonable, it's easier to hold them responsible for the consequences of that choice. So, everyone feels like they need to take at most as much vacation as average, possibly less.
    - jakelazaroff 6y ago
      One thing I've wondered is how the dynamic would work if you combined unlimited vacation with a minimum requirement. Would that be enough to foster a culture of taking the time you want/need and not worrying? Or would your minimum essentially become the expected amount, with any excess frowned upon?
      - geofft 6y ago
        The thing about "unlimited vacation" policies is there's always a limit. Obviously it can't be 52 weeks. Probably it can't even be 10 weeks. So the question is where that unstated number is. If the number is the same for everyone, state it. Go ahead and say "Everyone gets 6 weeks vacation." If you don't feel comfortable saying that, then it wasn't unlimited at all, was it? If the number is different, i.e., junior employees can take less, politically-connected folks and people who figured out how to coast can take more, that's probably a bad thing for your company. At best, make additional vacation a defined promotion benefit.
        jakelazaroff 6y ago
- wan23 6y ago
  This is definitely something that varies from company to company. I have been at three companies with untracked vacation where people used the policy well.
nasmorn 6y ago
Losing your game dev job is probably the best thing that could happen to you financially. It is a strange industry
alkonaut 6y ago
One has to ask “do I like my role and what I’m paid when working 40h weeks?” I’m happy with my comp and my role. I don’t need a raise or promotion. I can work at this job until 70 with pay rises corresponding to inflation. Given that, I’m fine if people work 70h weeks all around me. I’m also confident my work output will rival that of the crunchers, because after even just a few weeks it’s not effective.

by dom96 6y ago

uberman 6y ago

Those that work harder or longer than others get ahead. This is a universal truism and also very distinct from the mandated overtime dictated by many developers.

blamestross 6y ago
Yes, but an employer attempting to absolve themselves of responsibility for pressures to overwork by "it is not required" is basically the same thing as "unlimited time off".
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

orev 6y ago

This is the same problem with companies that have a “no vacation tracking, just take off when you want policy”. It ends up that no one takes vacation for this same reason.

uberman 6y ago
I see two people with this viewpoint, and I would be interested in knowing more. Is the thought here that a company that offers unlimited vacation would see people take none? I have never worked in such an environment, and I also don't tend to take all of my allotted vacation anyways, but at first glance, I'm not sure how: "take off as much as you like" could possibly be more restrictive than: "take off as much as you like, but no more that 2 weeks." Assuming of course we are not talking about mandatory vacation policies (that some companies/countries) effectively have.
- geofft 6y ago
  Here's the dynamic: When you don't take all your allotted vacation, and someone else does, there's no possible claim that you were a harder or more dedicated worker than they were. They did exactly what they were permitted to. And, therefore, I'm guessing that if you wanted to take your vacation, you wouldn't have too much trouble finding time to take it, and nobody would complain that you did. If there's unlimited vacation, and someone takes two weeks of vacation when the whole company tends to take one, and they were on vacation during a critical project, once time comes for performance reviews, people will say "I'm not sure how committed they are to the company" / "They don't have a great work ethic" / etc. etc. Because it was their choice to decide that two weeks was reasonable, it's easier to hold them responsible for the consequences of that choice. So, everyone feels like they need to take at most as much vacation as average, possibly less.
  - jakelazaroff 6y ago
    One thing I've wondered is how the dynamic would work if you combined unlimited vacation with a minimum requirement. Would that be enough to foster a culture of taking the time you want/need and not worrying? Or would your minimum essentially become the expected amount, with any excess frowned upon?
    - geofft 6y ago
      The thing about "unlimited vacation" policies is there's always a limit. Obviously it can't be 52 weeks. Probably it can't even be 10 weeks. So the question is where that unstated number is. If the number is the same for everyone, state it. Go ahead and say "Everyone gets 6 weeks vacation." If you don't feel comfortable saying that, then it wasn't unlimited at all, was it? If the number is different, i.e., junior employees can take less, politically-connected folks and people who figured out how to coast can take more, that's probably a bad thing for your company. At best, make additional vacation a defined promotion benefit.
      - jakelazaroff 6y ago
wan23 6y ago
This is definitely something that varies from company to company. I have been at three companies with untracked vacation where people used the policy well.

nasmorn 6y ago

Losing your game dev job is probably the best thing that could happen to you financially. It is a strange industry

alkonaut 6y ago

One has to ask “do I like my role and what I’m paid when working 40h weeks?” I’m happy with my comp and my role. I don’t need a raise or promotion. I can work at this job until 70 with pay rises corresponding to inflation. Given that, I’m fine if people work 70h weeks all around me. I’m also confident my work output will rival that of the crunchers, because after even just a few weeks it’s not effective.