7 ms·

I've done a similar thing with a few past employers after I've moved on. "Hey, can you explain this code to the new person?". In some cases, I'd be glad to do a

I've done a similar thing with a few past employers after I've moved on. "Hey, can you explain this code to the new person?". In some cases, I'd be glad to do a 1 hour call or whatever. They frequently ask me to submit a bill for my time and I always refuse. I don't want to turn into some kind of staff augmentation and be at their beck and call "because they are paying". Way better to think of it as a gift and I get to decide the rules.

cheeseomlit 5y ago
That just sounds like you're being taken for a ride
- one_off_comment 5y ago
  It's a personal choice. I respect their choice.
  - BEEdwards 5y ago
    Working for free devalues the work of others and give them an excuse to not even offer pay next time.
    - JaimeThompson 5y ago
      There is nothing wrong with being nice to others.
    - one_off_comment 5y ago
      They'll get a rude awakening and realize OP is being nice and that's not standard operating procedure.
- Levitz 5y ago
  I do a similar thing when a friend asks me a favor that is going to take enough of my time, think the classic "Can you help me build my PC?" or "Something has happened to my computer! Can you fix it?" If I'm helping then I refuse any kind of money. I don't give guarantees or service like a business does, I don't want money like a business does. I do often ask that they try to learn from the experience, I'll gladly explain everything I'm doing. The other option is I refuse, for whatever reason that is. This keeps my choices those of a friend and my responsibilities those of a friend. I like keeping them that way.
  - Phenomenit 5y ago
    I'm with you on this but my question is, what happens if you brake your friends stuff? Like expensive components?
    - squeaky-clean 5y ago
      Not the original person you asked but I do the same thing and I would buy them a new one if I damage it. I'm confident that I'm not going to damage their things. And if it's something where I'm not confident, or its not replaceable / way too expensive, that's when I'll decline. But typical computer repair or building is really easy and safe. Need help delidding your CPU or some other uncommon thing? I'll give advice but I'm not handling it.
  - TimWolla 5y ago
    I am not taking raw money with friends either. But when it's assistance I can't offer virtually, i.e. when I need to drive to them in person, then I expect them to order pizza to eat together in return after the job's done. It brings the point across that my time's not free, but it's not as unpersonal as handing over a Euro bill. One can also have a nice chat while eating.
  - _carbyau_ 5y ago
    Close family I will do whatever. Anyone else I am happy to sit right next to them, happy chat and advise, be a pair of extra hands as required. But I won't sit there while they walk away and do anything else. If it isn't worth THEIR time to fix it, it isn't worth mine.
- circlefavshape 5y ago
  Nope. It's relationship maintenance. I've often done the same - totally worth an hour here or there
jyap 5y ago
Doing free labor is devaluing your work. You are free to decline this work.
- vorpalhex 5y ago
  There's a difference in doing someone a small polite favor and doing unpaid labor. I definitely have previous employers to whom I'd give an hour of my time to sort out a quick issue, and for a lone hour it is not worth generating an invoice and dealing with taxes. At most I might accept a meal or a pint.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- tut-urut-utut 5y ago
  In my books doing a favour to the old coworker is much more worth than writing an invoice for one hour of “consulting”. They’ll be grateful and owe you a favour.
  - exhilaration 5y ago
    I totally agree. I'm sure there's a significant number of us that have landed wonderful, well-paid jobs thanks to former co-workers. That's totally worth a few hours of unpaid support for a former employer.
- circlefavshape 5y ago
  There's a difference between getting exploited and making a deposit in the favour bank
- bsder 5y ago
  It may also cost you your current job if you take money. Most employment contracts have stipulations about working for competitors. They're rarely enforced, but you can sometimes get caught out if something goes pear-shaped. If you haven't taken any money, it's a lot harder to hang this on you.
ghufran_syed 5y ago
sounds more like you are uncomfortable billing your market value, like most of us - you should charge at least a day’s worth of your old (or current) salary for one hour of this kind of on-demand work. If they don’t want to pay, that’s great, it means it really wasn’t that important after all…
- munificent 5y ago
  No, there is real psychological research behind this. If you charge people for something, it kicks their perception of the act into a different category. That in turn effects how they think about the interaction and what their sense of entitlement and expectations are in ways that can be counter-intuitive. A famous related study is: https://freakonomics.com/2013/10/23/what-makes-people-do-what-they-do/ https://freakonomics.com/2013/10/23/what-makes-people-do-wha... They found that when daycares fined parents for picking up their kids late, the result was parents picking them up even later. Because, without the fine, parents treated the pick-up time as a moral/social obligation that they did not want to uphold. Once the fine was introduced, they treated this as a simple financial transaction where if it's worth it to pay the extra to pick them up later, why not?
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    What you're skipping is that it was a tiny fine. $3 per incident! Small amounts of money can be really distorting that way. Paying a full day's salary for the consultation is not the same, and it's pretty likely it would increase the company's respect of their time.
    - munificent 5y ago
      It's hard to know how the company would respond, or what the ideal charge would be. What I do know is that I completely respect snarf21's choice to either charge or not as they see fit.
    - owenversteeg 5y ago
      Sure, it was a small fine (NIS 10 per incident per child) but keep in mind: - Israel has the highest fertility rate in the developed world (3.1 children per mother on average) - The average gross monthly salary at the time of the study was NIS 5,595 - If the average parent comes late 4 times a month, that's 4 * 3.1 * 10 = NIS 124 = 2.2% of their monthly salary, or the majority of an entire day's pay (!) - that's not nothing. That said, there are two interesting conclusions from the paper. Firstly, the well known one: > Parents may have interpreted the action of the teachers in the first period as a generous, nonmarket activity. They may have thought: "The contract with the day-care center only covers the period until four in the afternoon. After that time, the teacher is just a nice and generous person. I should not take advantage of her patience." The introduction of the fine changes the perception into the following: "The teacher is taking care of the child in much the same way as she did earlier in the day. In fact this activity has a price (which is called a ‘fine’). Therefore, I can buy this service as much as needed." But there's also this: > The behavior in the third period, however, is still difficult to explain. Now the first social norm would predict a low level of delay. We may think that a period of 4 weeks is not sufficient to bring the behavior back to the appropriate level. But considering that 2 or 3 weeks had been enough to double the level of delays after the introduction of the fine, we should estimate that the learning rate of the parents is too fast to justify so much inertia. Perhaps a third social norm is needed: "Once a commodity, always a commodity." This norm and second clause of the first norm explain the behavior in the final period: a commodity at zero price is bought in large quantities. Overall, three norms seem necessary to explain three facts.
version_five 5y ago
I generally would do the same thing. I'm amazed at all the hostility towards this. And most importantly, it doesn't read to me like you're being taken for a ride. Much better to help if you want, dictate your terms, generate good will and maintain the relationship etc than get a few hundred dollars, unless you're actually trying to make a living that way. Even from a purely selfish perspective, long term you're approach will serve you much better than trying to be transactional about ever interaction you have. And obviously you could always just say no if you didn't want to do it.
- snarf21 5y ago
  Exactly, I've never spent more than 5 hours on a previous company doing this. However, it allows me to not burn bridges and one of the reasons it never goes beyond 5 hours is that this approach doesn't lead to a situation where I am "working for them".
quickthrower2 5y ago
There’s a lot of debate on this. So here is my spin. Charge them $1000 to not turn up. Why? Because by not turning up they get used to figuring it out without you which is long term more valuable for resilience and beneficial to them.

cheeseomlit 5y ago

That just sounds like you're being taken for a ride

one_off_comment 5y ago
It's a personal choice. I respect their choice.
- BEEdwards 5y ago
  Working for free devalues the work of others and give them an excuse to not even offer pay next time.
  - JaimeThompson 5y ago
    There is nothing wrong with being nice to others.
  - one_off_comment 5y ago
    They'll get a rude awakening and realize OP is being nice and that's not standard operating procedure.
Levitz 5y ago
I do a similar thing when a friend asks me a favor that is going to take enough of my time, think the classic "Can you help me build my PC?" or "Something has happened to my computer! Can you fix it?" If I'm helping then I refuse any kind of money. I don't give guarantees or service like a business does, I don't want money like a business does. I do often ask that they try to learn from the experience, I'll gladly explain everything I'm doing. The other option is I refuse, for whatever reason that is. This keeps my choices those of a friend and my responsibilities those of a friend. I like keeping them that way.
- Phenomenit 5y ago
  I'm with you on this but my question is, what happens if you brake your friends stuff? Like expensive components?
  - squeaky-clean 5y ago
    Not the original person you asked but I do the same thing and I would buy them a new one if I damage it. I'm confident that I'm not going to damage their things. And if it's something where I'm not confident, or its not replaceable / way too expensive, that's when I'll decline. But typical computer repair or building is really easy and safe. Need help delidding your CPU or some other uncommon thing? I'll give advice but I'm not handling it.
- TimWolla 5y ago
  I am not taking raw money with friends either. But when it's assistance I can't offer virtually, i.e. when I need to drive to them in person, then I expect them to order pizza to eat together in return after the job's done. It brings the point across that my time's not free, but it's not as unpersonal as handing over a Euro bill. One can also have a nice chat while eating.
- _carbyau_ 5y ago
  Close family I will do whatever. Anyone else I am happy to sit right next to them, happy chat and advise, be a pair of extra hands as required. But I won't sit there while they walk away and do anything else. If it isn't worth THEIR time to fix it, it isn't worth mine.
circlefavshape 5y ago
Nope. It's relationship maintenance. I've often done the same - totally worth an hour here or there

jyap 5y ago

Doing free labor is devaluing your work. You are free to decline this work.

vorpalhex 5y ago
There's a difference in doing someone a small polite favor and doing unpaid labor. I definitely have previous employers to whom I'd give an hour of my time to sort out a quick issue, and for a lone hour it is not worth generating an invoice and dealing with taxes. At most I might accept a meal or a pint.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
tut-urut-utut 5y ago
In my books doing a favour to the old coworker is much more worth than writing an invoice for one hour of “consulting”. They’ll be grateful and owe you a favour.
- exhilaration 5y ago
  I totally agree. I'm sure there's a significant number of us that have landed wonderful, well-paid jobs thanks to former co-workers. That's totally worth a few hours of unpaid support for a former employer.
circlefavshape 5y ago
There's a difference between getting exploited and making a deposit in the favour bank
bsder 5y ago
It may also cost you your current job if you take money. Most employment contracts have stipulations about working for competitors. They're rarely enforced, but you can sometimes get caught out if something goes pear-shaped. If you haven't taken any money, it's a lot harder to hang this on you.

ghufran_syed 5y ago

sounds more like you are uncomfortable billing your market value, like most of us - you should charge at least a day’s worth of your old (or current) salary for one hour of this kind of on-demand work. If they don’t want to pay, that’s great, it means it really wasn’t that important after all…

munificent 5y ago
No, there is real psychological research behind this. If you charge people for something, it kicks their perception of the act into a different category. That in turn effects how they think about the interaction and what their sense of entitlement and expectations are in ways that can be counter-intuitive. A famous related study is: https://freakonomics.com/2013/10/23/what-makes-people-do-what-they-do/ https://freakonomics.com/2013/10/23/what-makes-people-do-wha... They found that when daycares fined parents for picking up their kids late, the result was parents picking them up even later. Because, without the fine, parents treated the pick-up time as a moral/social obligation that they did not want to uphold. Once the fine was introduced, they treated this as a simple financial transaction where if it's worth it to pay the extra to pick them up later, why not?
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  What you're skipping is that it was a tiny fine. $3 per incident! Small amounts of money can be really distorting that way. Paying a full day's salary for the consultation is not the same, and it's pretty likely it would increase the company's respect of their time.
  - munificent 5y ago
    It's hard to know how the company would respond, or what the ideal charge would be. What I do know is that I completely respect snarf21's choice to either charge or not as they see fit.
  - owenversteeg 5y ago
    Sure, it was a small fine (NIS 10 per incident per child) but keep in mind: - Israel has the highest fertility rate in the developed world (3.1 children per mother on average) - The average gross monthly salary at the time of the study was NIS 5,595 - If the average parent comes late 4 times a month, that's 4 * 3.1 * 10 = NIS 124 = 2.2% of their monthly salary, or the majority of an entire day's pay (!) - that's not nothing. That said, there are two interesting conclusions from the paper. Firstly, the well known one: > Parents may have interpreted the action of the teachers in the first period as a generous, nonmarket activity. They may have thought: "The contract with the day-care center only covers the period until four in the afternoon. After that time, the teacher is just a nice and generous person. I should not take advantage of her patience." The introduction of the fine changes the perception into the following: "The teacher is taking care of the child in much the same way as she did earlier in the day. In fact this activity has a price (which is called a ‘fine’). Therefore, I can buy this service as much as needed." But there's also this: > The behavior in the third period, however, is still difficult to explain. Now the first social norm would predict a low level of delay. We may think that a period of 4 weeks is not sufficient to bring the behavior back to the appropriate level. But considering that 2 or 3 weeks had been enough to double the level of delays after the introduction of the fine, we should estimate that the learning rate of the parents is too fast to justify so much inertia. Perhaps a third social norm is needed: "Once a commodity, always a commodity." This norm and second clause of the first norm explain the behavior in the final period: a commodity at zero price is bought in large quantities. Overall, three norms seem necessary to explain three facts.

version_five 5y ago

I generally would do the same thing. I'm amazed at all the hostility towards this. And most importantly, it doesn't read to me like you're being taken for a ride. Much better to help if you want, dictate your terms, generate good will and maintain the relationship etc than get a few hundred dollars, unless you're actually trying to make a living that way. Even from a purely selfish perspective, long term you're approach will serve you much better than trying to be transactional about ever interaction you have. And obviously you could always just say no if you didn't want to do it.

snarf21 5y ago
Exactly, I've never spent more than 5 hours on a previous company doing this. However, it allows me to not burn bridges and one of the reasons it never goes beyond 5 hours is that this approach doesn't lead to a situation where I am "working for them".

quickthrower2 5y ago

There’s a lot of debate on this. So here is my spin. Charge them $1000 to not turn up. Why? Because by not turning up they get used to figuring it out without you which is long term more valuable for resilience and beneficial to them.