4 ms·

I don't think being valuable implies they can't get by without you. Not at all! It means that you are worth your salary and that they'd rather take you back af

I don't think being valuable implies they can't get by without you. Not at all! It means that you are worth your salary and that they'd rather take you back after some leave than not have you at all or replace you with someone else. If things go awry when you leave it could mean there is a bus factor problem to be addressed.

dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
It's a bit nuanced. There is a whole spectrum starting from Amazon warehouse workers who are easily replaceable (or, as we recently heard, will be replaced no matter what) to a guy who trenched himself so that he holds everybody hostage. I consider both extremes unethical because of power imbalance. In any case, it's in the best interest of the company to reduce the bus factor to zero, and by the same token, it's in the best interest of the employee to keep it above zero. You can understand how much it is above zero during salary negotiations, or when you say "I quit" and you are offered a raise. It's mainly because in order to replace you, the new employee needs to be trained and this takes time usually proportional to your experience. Now, in the case we're discussing (paternal leave), you don't just make a threat to leave, you actually just quit - you allow the company to test the scenario of working without you. So basically you lose some bargaining power. I'm not saying this is how things should be, but similar thinking processes are going on in the heads of many people in management positions, especially recently, when you need to put some extra effort justifying your position.
- pedrosorio 5y ago
  I believe you have it backwards regarding the bus factor. The company wants the bus factor to be as high as possible. From Wikipedia: “The "bus factor" is the minimum number of team members that have to suddenly disappear from a project before the project stalls due to lack of knowledgeable or competent personnel.” The issue here is you are treating employees as cogs that have to be “in the machine” for it to work (i.e. the value they provide is to keep the business running). Valuable employees don’t necessarily cause the business to stop working if they leave. They just continuously add value (individually, making people around them better, designing systems that provide advantages over the long term, etc.) when working that wouldn’t be created if they weren’t there.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
    You're right, also the situation you describe is an ideal one. I might be skewed working for a company that is being "optimized" (it's been several years already). It's not like the financial results are bad, but the CEO assigned the middle management the aim of finding all non-essential jobs and do away with them. Before the pandemic we were throwing goodbye parties to a couple of people each month; now the most they can count are sad Teams meetings that make the thing even more depressing. The work of these people is being distributed among those left, with mixed results. The company is still great to work for for various reasons so basically everybody developed the skills and attitude I mentioned above.
  - orthoxerox 5y ago
    > I believe you have it backwards regarding the bus factor. It's like the learning curve. A steep one is supposed to mean something is easy to learn, but more people have it backwards.

dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago

It's a bit nuanced. There is a whole spectrum starting from Amazon warehouse workers who are easily replaceable (or, as we recently heard, will be replaced no matter what) to a guy who trenched himself so that he holds everybody hostage. I consider both extremes unethical because of power imbalance. In any case, it's in the best interest of the company to reduce the bus factor to zero, and by the same token, it's in the best interest of the employee to keep it above zero. You can understand how much it is above zero during salary negotiations, or when you say "I quit" and you are offered a raise. It's mainly because in order to replace you, the new employee needs to be trained and this takes time usually proportional to your experience. Now, in the case we're discussing (paternal leave), you don't just make a threat to leave, you actually just quit - you allow the company to test the scenario of working without you. So basically you lose some bargaining power. I'm not saying this is how things should be, but similar thinking processes are going on in the heads of many people in management positions, especially recently, when you need to put some extra effort justifying your position.

pedrosorio 5y ago
I believe you have it backwards regarding the bus factor. The company wants the bus factor to be as high as possible. From Wikipedia: “The "bus factor" is the minimum number of team members that have to suddenly disappear from a project before the project stalls due to lack of knowledgeable or competent personnel.” The issue here is you are treating employees as cogs that have to be “in the machine” for it to work (i.e. the value they provide is to keep the business running). Valuable employees don’t necessarily cause the business to stop working if they leave. They just continuously add value (individually, making people around them better, designing systems that provide advantages over the long term, etc.) when working that wouldn’t be created if they weren’t there.
- dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
  You're right, also the situation you describe is an ideal one. I might be skewed working for a company that is being "optimized" (it's been several years already). It's not like the financial results are bad, but the CEO assigned the middle management the aim of finding all non-essential jobs and do away with them. Before the pandemic we were throwing goodbye parties to a couple of people each month; now the most they can count are sad Teams meetings that make the thing even more depressing. The work of these people is being distributed among those left, with mixed results. The company is still great to work for for various reasons so basically everybody developed the skills and attitude I mentioned above.
- orthoxerox 5y ago
  > I believe you have it backwards regarding the bus factor. It's like the learning curve. A steep one is supposed to mean something is easy to learn, but more people have it backwards.