6 ms·

> I am not a dead weight and I’ll never be, but I also do absolutely bare minimum to not get fired. That's the literal definition of dead weight.

fcatalan 4y ago
Dead weight would be people doing nothing. After those come the negative contributors: they do stuff but is all politicking and scheming, or just waste others time. Doing strictly what you are really paid for is bad now?
- toomuchtodo 4y ago
  “Enough” is not in the vocabulary of corporate vampires. Doing your job to the requirements should be acceptable, and that only works if your org is run by empathetic, reasonable leadership, you don’t tolerate the abuse of being squeezed, or you have a union. If the bar is never enough, you’re being gaslit, and that’s psychological abuse.
  - kelnos 4y ago
    And I think that's exactly the original commenter's point: if the company he works for ever decides that "enough" isn't sufficient to satisfy his boss, he's he'll move on.
  - ravenstine 4y ago
    That's exactly why most performance reviews are a scam. "Always room for improvement."
- Spooky23 4y ago
  Working to rule is the first labor action unions start doing ahead of a strike. If you want to do piecework/hourly work, you should be a contractor.
  - tormeh 4y ago
    Working to rule involves malicious compliance, which may very well be harder work than actually being productive. Just being unenthusiastic is not the same thing.
kelnos 4y ago
No, dead weight is someone who does little or no work, should be fired, but manages to fly under the radar somehow in order to keep their job. Someone who does the bare minimum in order to buy get fired is just a... satisfactory employee. Never gonna get big raises, never gonna get promoted, but gets their work done and doesn't go above or beyond.
a4isms 4y ago
This is the "pieces of flair" debate. If their manager asks for fifteen tickets a month, and they do exactly fifteen, the manager sits them down and asks why they don't do twenty, like their colleague over there. They ask the manager, "If you want twenty tickets, just ask me for twenty tickets. Why do you set fifteen as the standard, and then try to use cheap psychological tricks to get me to do twenty tickets?" I have managed teams going back to the nineties. If I want fifteen tickets, I ask for fifteen tickets. If someone just does the minimum, they just get paid the minimum, but I have set my expectations such that their work is a net benefit to the company, so they keep their job. If things change and I need twenty tickets, I will ask for twenty tickets. It's not complicated. The "bare minimum" is still enough to keep a job. If it isn't, it's on me to establish a different minimum such that the "minimum" is exactly that: The minimum needed to remain employed. "Dead weight" is someone whose work is not a net benefit to the company. If I as a manager set a minimum, and someone does the minimum, and they are not a net benefit, WTF am I doing as a a manager setting fifteen tickets as the minimum? Employees meeting expectations but not being a net benefit? That's a management problem. And if it's across the org, that's a SYSTEMIC management problem. So if this person is meeting the minimum, either they are NOT dead weight, or there is a management problem. Either way, they are not the problem.
- YZF 4y ago
  Since when is a software engineer's output measured in "tickets" per month? That said I agree with the idea that someone that adds value that is some reasonable multiple of their salary gets to keep their job. If they're not adding value because they can't perform their job or don't care they should not keep their job. If they're not adding value because of how they're managed their manager should not keep his job. If this issue is endemic in the company that probably means the CEO shouldn't keep their job... In an ideal world anyways.
  - boringg 4y ago
    TPM - bug squashing/or MBA manager would be my take. Would bounce if ever that was my metric. Its like GPM but for SEs.
croes 4y ago
>I mean, I will always finish my work in the time it is expected to be finished. But this isn't what a dead weight does.
thereare5lights 4y ago
> That's the literal definition of dead weight. No. literal definition > the weight of an inert person or thing. The metaphor refers to people that do nothing and are only a burden. Dead weight cannot positively contribute.
crossroadsguy 4y ago
You’re literally on the literal wrong path of understanding what dead weight is. I think you missed the productivity porn thread posted here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32335165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32335165
darth_avocado 4y ago
Just doing the job you are paid to do is called dead weight now? That’s the exact ideology I refuse to follow.
- khazhoux 4y ago
  The problem is when you tell your manager it'll take you X number of weeks to finish a task, and your manager trusts that you're working hard and that the task simply requires X weeks of work... but in reality you're barely spending any time on it every day, and could easily have done it in a few days. Meanwhile, the rest of the project is moving slowly because they need your piece to complete. If, on the other hand, the manager's trust has no relevance here, because you are not setting your own time-work estimates, then have at it!
  - adamesque 4y ago
    This is kind of a wild take. Estimates should be reviewed like anything else on a team, and if the estimate doesn’t fit the timeline, the team should try to either split up / parallelize the work, drop scope, or look for a creative solution (usually involving taking on some strategic tech debt). Work planning should be a team effort.
    - khazhoux 4y ago
      This is completely consistent with what I said. Even as a team effort, you want your manager to trust when you say something has some non-obvious complexity. And the manager wants to trust their team members. But my comment stems from someone above who said they do the minimum amount of work possible. This sucks for the team, who is working hard and trying to make progress, meanwhile this person is barely doing any work every day in between gaming or reddit or whatever, but (presumably) still joins stand-ups and Slack to chime in with whatever "complication" he's having to work through that day, and always gives the impression that their work is super tricky.
      - Apocryphon 4y ago
boringg 4y ago
No that's not dead weight. Dead weight is people who don't contribute and don't get their work done. Going above and beyond requirements is a personal decision.
- lazide 4y ago
  Sometimes it’s the even worse folks - the people who do things that are net negatives and need to be drug around by everyone else like they’re an anchor around the companies throat.
naikrovek 4y ago
Apparently you have never continually excelled at your job and been rewarded with zero raises, zero promotions, zero added trust, and zero added authority or influence. Every place I have ever worked has taken advantage of anyone who does more than they are asked. None of those individuals were ever rewarded for going above or beyond. Not a single time. Doing the bare minimum is what employers do. Why should employees do any more? I believe it is our moral duty to improve ourselves. I do not believe it is our moral duty to donate effort to an unthankful entity.
BGizzle 4y ago
No, the LITERAL definition of dead weight is " 1: the unrelieved weight of an inert mass 2: DEAD LOAD 3: a ship's load including the total weight of cargo, fuel, stores, crew, and passengers" https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deadweight https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deadweight Examples of literal in a Sentence: " The literal meaning of “know your ropes” is “to know a lot about ropes,” while figuratively it means “to know a lot about how to do something.” I was using the word in its literal sense. The story he told was basically true, even if it wasn't the literal truth. "
Aeolun 4y ago
> That's the literal definition of dead weight. You must not have worked in companies with actual dead weight.
mecha_ghidorah 4y ago
Is it? I'd interpret dead weight as being... well a dead weight, say an anchor holding back progress. Or being generous at least not contributing anything even they aren't actively holding things back. Doing "the bare minimum" isn't dead weight though, they are still contributing

fcatalan 4y ago

Dead weight would be people doing nothing. After those come the negative contributors: they do stuff but is all politicking and scheming, or just waste others time. Doing strictly what you are really paid for is bad now?

toomuchtodo 4y ago
“Enough” is not in the vocabulary of corporate vampires. Doing your job to the requirements should be acceptable, and that only works if your org is run by empathetic, reasonable leadership, you don’t tolerate the abuse of being squeezed, or you have a union. If the bar is never enough, you’re being gaslit, and that’s psychological abuse.
- kelnos 4y ago
  And I think that's exactly the original commenter's point: if the company he works for ever decides that "enough" isn't sufficient to satisfy his boss, he's he'll move on.
- ravenstine 4y ago
  That's exactly why most performance reviews are a scam. "Always room for improvement."
Spooky23 4y ago
Working to rule is the first labor action unions start doing ahead of a strike. If you want to do piecework/hourly work, you should be a contractor.
- tormeh 4y ago
  Working to rule involves malicious compliance, which may very well be harder work than actually being productive. Just being unenthusiastic is not the same thing.

kelnos 4y ago

No, dead weight is someone who does little or no work, should be fired, but manages to fly under the radar somehow in order to keep their job. Someone who does the bare minimum in order to buy get fired is just a... satisfactory employee. Never gonna get big raises, never gonna get promoted, but gets their work done and doesn't go above or beyond.

a4isms 4y ago

This is the "pieces of flair" debate. If their manager asks for fifteen tickets a month, and they do exactly fifteen, the manager sits them down and asks why they don't do twenty, like their colleague over there. They ask the manager, "If you want twenty tickets, just ask me for twenty tickets. Why do you set fifteen as the standard, and then try to use cheap psychological tricks to get me to do twenty tickets?" I have managed teams going back to the nineties. If I want fifteen tickets, I ask for fifteen tickets. If someone just does the minimum, they just get paid the minimum, but I have set my expectations such that their work is a net benefit to the company, so they keep their job. If things change and I need twenty tickets, I will ask for twenty tickets. It's not complicated. The "bare minimum" is still enough to keep a job. If it isn't, it's on me to establish a different minimum such that the "minimum" is exactly that: The minimum needed to remain employed. "Dead weight" is someone whose work is not a net benefit to the company. If I as a manager set a minimum, and someone does the minimum, and they are not a net benefit, WTF am I doing as a a manager setting fifteen tickets as the minimum? Employees meeting expectations but not being a net benefit? That's a management problem. And if it's across the org, that's a SYSTEMIC management problem. So if this person is meeting the minimum, either they are NOT dead weight, or there is a management problem. Either way, they are not the problem.

YZF 4y ago
Since when is a software engineer's output measured in "tickets" per month? That said I agree with the idea that someone that adds value that is some reasonable multiple of their salary gets to keep their job. If they're not adding value because they can't perform their job or don't care they should not keep their job. If they're not adding value because of how they're managed their manager should not keep his job. If this issue is endemic in the company that probably means the CEO shouldn't keep their job... In an ideal world anyways.
- boringg 4y ago
  TPM - bug squashing/or MBA manager would be my take. Would bounce if ever that was my metric. Its like GPM but for SEs.

croes 4y ago

>I mean, I will always finish my work in the time it is expected to be finished. But this isn't what a dead weight does.

thereare5lights 4y ago

> That's the literal definition of dead weight. No. literal definition > the weight of an inert person or thing. The metaphor refers to people that do nothing and are only a burden. Dead weight cannot positively contribute.

crossroadsguy 4y ago

You’re literally on the literal wrong path of understanding what dead weight is. I think you missed the productivity porn thread posted here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32335165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32335165

darth_avocado 4y ago

Just doing the job you are paid to do is called dead weight now? That’s the exact ideology I refuse to follow.

khazhoux 4y ago
The problem is when you tell your manager it'll take you X number of weeks to finish a task, and your manager trusts that you're working hard and that the task simply requires X weeks of work... but in reality you're barely spending any time on it every day, and could easily have done it in a few days. Meanwhile, the rest of the project is moving slowly because they need your piece to complete. If, on the other hand, the manager's trust has no relevance here, because you are not setting your own time-work estimates, then have at it!
- adamesque 4y ago
  This is kind of a wild take. Estimates should be reviewed like anything else on a team, and if the estimate doesn’t fit the timeline, the team should try to either split up / parallelize the work, drop scope, or look for a creative solution (usually involving taking on some strategic tech debt). Work planning should be a team effort.
  - khazhoux 4y ago
    This is completely consistent with what I said. Even as a team effort, you want your manager to trust when you say something has some non-obvious complexity. And the manager wants to trust their team members. But my comment stems from someone above who said they do the minimum amount of work possible. This sucks for the team, who is working hard and trying to make progress, meanwhile this person is barely doing any work every day in between gaming or reddit or whatever, but (presumably) still joins stand-ups and Slack to chime in with whatever "complication" he's having to work through that day, and always gives the impression that their work is super tricky.
    - Apocryphon 4y ago

boringg 4y ago

No that's not dead weight. Dead weight is people who don't contribute and don't get their work done. Going above and beyond requirements is a personal decision.

lazide 4y ago
Sometimes it’s the even worse folks - the people who do things that are net negatives and need to be drug around by everyone else like they’re an anchor around the companies throat.

naikrovek 4y ago

Apparently you have never continually excelled at your job and been rewarded with zero raises, zero promotions, zero added trust, and zero added authority or influence. Every place I have ever worked has taken advantage of anyone who does more than they are asked. None of those individuals were ever rewarded for going above or beyond. Not a single time. Doing the bare minimum is what employers do. Why should employees do any more? I believe it is our moral duty to improve ourselves. I do not believe it is our moral duty to donate effort to an unthankful entity.

BGizzle 4y ago

No, the LITERAL definition of dead weight is " 1: the unrelieved weight of an inert mass 2: DEAD LOAD 3: a ship's load including the total weight of cargo, fuel, stores, crew, and passengers" https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deadweight https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deadweight Examples of literal in a Sentence: " The literal meaning of “know your ropes” is “to know a lot about ropes,” while figuratively it means “to know a lot about how to do something.” I was using the word in its literal sense. The story he told was basically true, even if it wasn't the literal truth. "

Aeolun 4y ago

> That's the literal definition of dead weight. You must not have worked in companies with actual dead weight.

mecha_ghidorah 4y ago

Is it? I'd interpret dead weight as being... well a dead weight, say an anchor holding back progress. Or being generous at least not contributing anything even they aren't actively holding things back. Doing "the bare minimum" isn't dead weight though, they are still contributing