6 ms·

Is hackernews on the side of QA people? What’s the general feeling? I can’t see their working conditions being genuinely terrible or unsafe, or the pay being t

Is hackernews on the side of QA people? What’s the general feeling? I can’t see their working conditions being genuinely terrible or unsafe, or the pay being that unfair. Perhaps they’re being driven too hard?

ThemalSpan 4y ago
I don't think looking at hacker news as a hive mind is a good idea tbh. I'm on the side of those unionizing. Work conditions don't need to be unsafe for folks to unionize, and I'm fairly confident in saying that the vast majority of folks everywhere (in tech anyway) are paid an unfairly low amount for the value they generate.
- zapataband1 4y ago
  I remember McDonalds workers striking and a post about how their CEO makes ~1300x their salary. I looked up our dual CEO salary and together they were making like ~2000x our salaries.
- nightski 4y ago
  Except value you generate is not a good metric for salary. If I have an employee that generates 100M a year, but I have boundless applicants that can perform that same task then the unfortunate reality is that person is not that valuable.
  - nkjnlknlk 4y ago
    Then you are free to replace them with these boundless applicants. Weirdly, every tech company claims there is a shortage of talented employees.
    - bonestamp2 4y ago
      ... and it doesn't matter how easy the job is, you need people to do those jobs. In this labor market, it's hard to find people of all skill levels. I'm not suggesting QA is easy or doesn't require a lot of skill either -- it's very hard to find a really talented QA person.
      - munk-a 4y ago
        People outside the industry really undervalue talented QA people - yes there are hordes of 20 year olds that have always wanted to "work on the fortnite" but their productivity compared to someone long in the industry who understands how to effectively test, can write clear test plans and knows the importance of reproduction steps and who understands test automation... it's a night and day comparison.
    - nightski 4y ago
      Correct, but a shortage works in favor of the employee. No Union needed.
      - ncallaway 4y ago
        A union makes it easier for employees to take full advantage of the shortage. Just because a union isn’t “needed”, doesn’t mean it can’t be helpful.
        nightski 4y ago
        It can also be harmful and unless you admit that you aren’t being honest based on history.
  - khuey 4y ago
    > If I have an employee that generates 100M a year, but I have boundless applicants that can perform that same task The 100M a year here is generally rapidly competed away in this situation.
  - FrenchDevRemote 4y ago
    How do you know they can do the exact same task? After how many months? And what if the new guy quit after a month and after you wasted weeks on trying to hire them? Value generation should be +/- the only metric for salary(besides whether or not you negatively affect the rest of team because of your behavior)
    - nightski 4y ago
      It’s also very difficult if not impossible to calculate generally and many people tend to vastly overestimate their personal contribution to value generation.
rychco 4y ago
A friend of mine was on the QA team at Blizzard Albany and his complaints were straightforward: the pay is awful & the hours are long (especially during crunch).
- bonestamp2 4y ago
  Crunch is likely why the gaming companies will throw everything they have at stopping unionization. The first thing the unions will do is get rid of crunch. Rightfully so too -- none of the programming jobs I've had have made me believe that crunch time is actually necessary. But, management has to plan not to have crunch time rather than rely on it regularly. Under a union, the gaming industry will have to give a lot more time to work on tasks that have a specific deadline that can't be moved (like tie-ins with external events that won't get delayed, such as the super bowl for example).
  - spicymaki 4y ago
    That is a good thing. Crunch time is due to poor project planning. Limits on employee abuse can lead to needed productivity innovation. Another thing that could help is if customers would stop buying AAA games that push graphical limits to unnecessary extremes. Nintendo has demonstrated what you can accomplish through good game design and less reliance on extreme graphics.
    - bonestamp2 4y ago
      I agree. I hope unionization makes the gaming industry less toxic for workers.
  - munk-a 4y ago
    When I was working in the gaming industry there were days we (on the server team) had overtime because the client team was behind on their work and everyone staying late was better for morale... but we were ahead on ours since we'd fought hard for our timelines and my manager was a badass. The result was we server people sitting around chatting in the office while the client team struggled not to be distracted, I don't think it helped morale.
ekianjo 4y ago
> or the pay being that unfair. Isn't that the equivalent of other jobs in other industries where no qualification is required?
zapataband1 4y ago
Workers have a right to bargain for fair working conditions, it doesn't really matter what we think tbh. But why would you say that you assume the pay is 'fair'? We got bought by Oracle and no-one saw a raise in years, even through pandemic, where the ceo that makes 2000x our salary emailed us about how he was over the pandemic and decided to move to his private island in hawaii and make it 'a better place with the locals'
- munk-a 4y ago
  Damn dude, you guys should really unionize. I know it's got a particularly bad reputation in SV but software developers are long overdue a strong union.
ziddoap 4y ago
>I can’t see their working conditions being genuinely terrible or unsafe, or the pay being that unfair. Can I ask what you are basing this assumption on?
- gotoeleven 4y ago
  The fact that they accepted the job?
  - munk-a 4y ago
    Considering the churn at most QA shops I'm pretty sure they accepted the job while being told it was all rosy and are just there long enough to realize they were duped and find another job. EA in particular is famous for literally vomiting out disillusioned QA veterans.
  - ziddoap 4y ago
    Interviewers don't air dirty laundry? They sell a position to a qualified candidate. Keyword is sell. They're not going to tell you what frustrations other staff have, or if they treat their workers like shit, or if they make unreasonable demands that aren't in the job description, or if scope-creep on a project 4 months down the line will require me to start putting in overtime I didn't agree to, etc. If you know of an accurate way to determine what the day-to-day working conditions are for any arbitrary position in any company over an extended period of employment (including how work conditions will change with things like leadership changes, mergers, departmental transfers, special projects, etc.), shoot me an email because I will invest in whatever magic it is.
- blobbers 4y ago
  This comment has drawn the ire of hackernews, simply for posing it, with a slight tilt. The general consensus seems to be that good QA is highly valuable. As for if their pay were unfair, would they not leave for a better pay/safer working conditions? My personal take is that people in the software industry don’t understand what terrible working conditions are. Running out of odwalla or having non-organic fruit in the micro kitchen is not terrible.
corrral 4y ago
> or the pay being that unfair. What's "fair" got to do with it? If they can get more, they should. Companies don't stop at "fair". CEOs don't stop at "fair".
dylan604 4y ago
>Is hackernews on the side of QA people? Is this in general or in this specific case of defending their decision to unionize? In general, I feel that QA should be paid as much as devs, when they are good. I've worked with a couple of "holy shit, how did you find that?" level of exceptional, and I felt they deserved more than I was paid and actively argued as much with our manager. Those people made me better, they made the products better, which ultimately made the company better. Keeping these people around make other QA people better. Instead, they get hired away because nobody pays them their worth, and you're left with a much less capable QA team.
spicymaki 4y ago
> Is hackernews on the side of QA people? That is such a trash comment. Good QA/test/validation engineers are worth their weight in gold! It is a absolute crime we don't pay the profession more.

ThemalSpan 4y ago

I don't think looking at hacker news as a hive mind is a good idea tbh. I'm on the side of those unionizing. Work conditions don't need to be unsafe for folks to unionize, and I'm fairly confident in saying that the vast majority of folks everywhere (in tech anyway) are paid an unfairly low amount for the value they generate.

zapataband1 4y ago
I remember McDonalds workers striking and a post about how their CEO makes ~1300x their salary. I looked up our dual CEO salary and together they were making like ~2000x our salaries.
nightski 4y ago
Except value you generate is not a good metric for salary. If I have an employee that generates 100M a year, but I have boundless applicants that can perform that same task then the unfortunate reality is that person is not that valuable.
- nkjnlknlk 4y ago
  Then you are free to replace them with these boundless applicants. Weirdly, every tech company claims there is a shortage of talented employees.
  - bonestamp2 4y ago
    ... and it doesn't matter how easy the job is, you need people to do those jobs. In this labor market, it's hard to find people of all skill levels. I'm not suggesting QA is easy or doesn't require a lot of skill either -- it's very hard to find a really talented QA person.
    - munk-a 4y ago
      People outside the industry really undervalue talented QA people - yes there are hordes of 20 year olds that have always wanted to "work on the fortnite" but their productivity compared to someone long in the industry who understands how to effectively test, can write clear test plans and knows the importance of reproduction steps and who understands test automation... it's a night and day comparison.
  - nightski 4y ago
    Correct, but a shortage works in favor of the employee. No Union needed.
    - ncallaway 4y ago
      A union makes it easier for employees to take full advantage of the shortage. Just because a union isn’t “needed”, doesn’t mean it can’t be helpful.
      - nightski 4y ago
        It can also be harmful and unless you admit that you aren’t being honest based on history.
- khuey 4y ago
  > If I have an employee that generates 100M a year, but I have boundless applicants that can perform that same task The 100M a year here is generally rapidly competed away in this situation.
- FrenchDevRemote 4y ago
  How do you know they can do the exact same task? After how many months? And what if the new guy quit after a month and after you wasted weeks on trying to hire them? Value generation should be +/- the only metric for salary(besides whether or not you negatively affect the rest of team because of your behavior)
  - nightski 4y ago
    It’s also very difficult if not impossible to calculate generally and many people tend to vastly overestimate their personal contribution to value generation.

rychco 4y ago

A friend of mine was on the QA team at Blizzard Albany and his complaints were straightforward: the pay is awful & the hours are long (especially during crunch).

bonestamp2 4y ago
Crunch is likely why the gaming companies will throw everything they have at stopping unionization. The first thing the unions will do is get rid of crunch. Rightfully so too -- none of the programming jobs I've had have made me believe that crunch time is actually necessary. But, management has to plan not to have crunch time rather than rely on it regularly. Under a union, the gaming industry will have to give a lot more time to work on tasks that have a specific deadline that can't be moved (like tie-ins with external events that won't get delayed, such as the super bowl for example).
- spicymaki 4y ago
  That is a good thing. Crunch time is due to poor project planning. Limits on employee abuse can lead to needed productivity innovation. Another thing that could help is if customers would stop buying AAA games that push graphical limits to unnecessary extremes. Nintendo has demonstrated what you can accomplish through good game design and less reliance on extreme graphics.
  - bonestamp2 4y ago
    I agree. I hope unionization makes the gaming industry less toxic for workers.
- munk-a 4y ago
  When I was working in the gaming industry there were days we (on the server team) had overtime because the client team was behind on their work and everyone staying late was better for morale... but we were ahead on ours since we'd fought hard for our timelines and my manager was a badass. The result was we server people sitting around chatting in the office while the client team struggled not to be distracted, I don't think it helped morale.

ekianjo 4y ago

> or the pay being that unfair. Isn't that the equivalent of other jobs in other industries where no qualification is required?

zapataband1 4y ago

Workers have a right to bargain for fair working conditions, it doesn't really matter what we think tbh. But why would you say that you assume the pay is 'fair'? We got bought by Oracle and no-one saw a raise in years, even through pandemic, where the ceo that makes 2000x our salary emailed us about how he was over the pandemic and decided to move to his private island in hawaii and make it 'a better place with the locals'

munk-a 4y ago
Damn dude, you guys should really unionize. I know it's got a particularly bad reputation in SV but software developers are long overdue a strong union.

ziddoap 4y ago

>I can’t see their working conditions being genuinely terrible or unsafe, or the pay being that unfair. Can I ask what you are basing this assumption on?

gotoeleven 4y ago
The fact that they accepted the job?
- munk-a 4y ago
  Considering the churn at most QA shops I'm pretty sure they accepted the job while being told it was all rosy and are just there long enough to realize they were duped and find another job. EA in particular is famous for literally vomiting out disillusioned QA veterans.
- ziddoap 4y ago
  Interviewers don't air dirty laundry? They sell a position to a qualified candidate. Keyword is sell. They're not going to tell you what frustrations other staff have, or if they treat their workers like shit, or if they make unreasonable demands that aren't in the job description, or if scope-creep on a project 4 months down the line will require me to start putting in overtime I didn't agree to, etc. If you know of an accurate way to determine what the day-to-day working conditions are for any arbitrary position in any company over an extended period of employment (including how work conditions will change with things like leadership changes, mergers, departmental transfers, special projects, etc.), shoot me an email because I will invest in whatever magic it is.
blobbers 4y ago
This comment has drawn the ire of hackernews, simply for posing it, with a slight tilt. The general consensus seems to be that good QA is highly valuable. As for if their pay were unfair, would they not leave for a better pay/safer working conditions? My personal take is that people in the software industry don’t understand what terrible working conditions are. Running out of odwalla or having non-organic fruit in the micro kitchen is not terrible.

corrral 4y ago

> or the pay being that unfair. What's "fair" got to do with it? If they can get more, they should. Companies don't stop at "fair". CEOs don't stop at "fair".

dylan604 4y ago

>Is hackernews on the side of QA people? Is this in general or in this specific case of defending their decision to unionize? In general, I feel that QA should be paid as much as devs, when they are good. I've worked with a couple of "holy shit, how did you find that?" level of exceptional, and I felt they deserved more than I was paid and actively argued as much with our manager. Those people made me better, they made the products better, which ultimately made the company better. Keeping these people around make other QA people better. Instead, they get hired away because nobody pays them their worth, and you're left with a much less capable QA team.

spicymaki 4y ago

> Is hackernews on the side of QA people? That is such a trash comment. Good QA/test/validation engineers are worth their weight in gold! It is a absolute crime we don't pay the profession more.