5 ms·

Two things: * I'm writing software for over 20 years. All agreements I ever signed had something along the lines: "I guarantee, that I perform my work up to my

Two things: * I'm writing software for over 20 years. All agreements I ever signed had something along the lines: "I guarantee, that I perform my work up to my best knowledge and experience". This is flat out impossible, to bear cognitive load of doing it 16 hours a day without compromising quality. Of course there's argument, that you've completed given tasks earlier. Surely, there's no review to do, no questions to answer, no backlog to pull from? Surely employer hired experienced SWE, with intention of having code-monkey, who has no interest beyond current ticket? * I talked privately, outside of work, with people pulling two or three positions, also had displeasure working with some. There's always the same pattern: Hard to communicate with. Commited code shows lack of understanding of issue at hand. Cutting corners (missing tests etc.). Lack of engagement during refinements or analysis. Weird issues (CI/CD ate my commit, sorry). You hire senior and get zero senior-insight, as he/she is interested only in half-assing task, because of pressure they get from the other side. This all is sadly first-hand experience. Again - nothing wrong if all parties are aware, that this is part-time gig and set expectations accordingly. It's ok, if you're really paid by task or by hour and report work truthfully. Maybe not harmful if you're just pushing papers, with little-to-no own input. But for any creative work, reporting 8h a day to multiple companies is a fraud - plain and simple.

yellowapple 4y ago
> All agreements I ever signed had something along the lines: "I guarantee, that I perform my work up to my best knowledge and experience". This is flat out impossible, to bear cognitive load of doing it 16 hours a day without compromising quality. Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Unless those agreements you signed specifically say "I will not work other jobs" or something along those lines, it ain't fraud. At worst, it might be a fireable offense - but so are all sorts of frivolous things, like "the boss simply doesn't like you". > Of course there's argument, that you've completed given tasks earlier. Surely, there's no review to do, no questions to answer, no backlog to pull from? Surely employer hired experienced SWE, with intention of having code-monkey, who has no interest beyond current ticket? In a lot of cases, there ain't any of those things to do. Besides, "questions to answer" is trivial to juggle around without affecting one's ability to answer them. > You hire senior and get zero senior-insight, as he/she is interested only in half-assing task, because of pressure they get from the other side. Maybe pay better? Per the article, most intermediates/seniors considering this will do so with junior roles, specifically due to the relative lack of obligations. Most employers don't really give more than two shits about "senior insight" anyway. If your seniors are working multiple jobs, it's quite possible that the positions are senior in name only. That is: if the task was actually engaging (or the money was worth it), they would find a way to not "half-ass" it. > But for any creative work, reporting 8h a day to multiple companies is a fraud - plain and simple For any creative work, reporting 8h a day to even a single company is a fraud by your standard. I know of exactly zero programmers who spend every hour of every shift engaged. Zero designers, zero writers, zilch, nada. The brain doesn't work like that - sure, flow states happen, but in between the brain needs to be thinking about something else while it chews on whatever problems in the background. A second job if anything would help performance, given that it allows for that "thinking about something else" while maximizing the opportunities to notice insights / a-ha moments. If your colleagues working second jobs are unproductive, I can basically guarantee you they'd still be unproductive with just one job.
- dzikimarian 4y ago
  > Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Then you proceed to require exact wording in agreement :-) you're of course free to rationalize any way you want, but if it's so simple, why not bring it up with a manager? > Maybe pay better? Awesome. How much guarantees no issues? This much is fine? :-) https://mashable.com/article/google-waymo-bonuses https://mashable.com/article/google-waymo-bonuses > if the task was actually engaging (or the money was worth it), they would find a way to not "half-ass" it. Funny. Last time I had to deal with it, entire ten people team had zero issues with engagement. Only one guy had. All had comparable compensation. Care to explain this phenomenon? To make it even more funny his team brought up the issue first, as they got tired of this. Not every employer is shitty. Some of them being doesn't justify lying to all. > I know of exactly zero programmers who spend every hour of every shift engaged. Yup slack time is important. Every reasonable company knows that. You need to wind down sometimes. That's why you have table soccer, xboxes etc. You argue that, instead companies should assign second project to everyone, to help them relax? >If your colleagues working second jobs are unproductive, I can basically guarantee you they'd still be unproductive with just one job. Where can I exercise this guarantee? World is small - it's often easy to find common colleagues and find out about pre-remote performance of your teammates. It happened to me to be in such position and weirdly results were completely opposite from what you said.
  - yellowapple 4y ago
    > Then you proceed to require exact wording in agreement :-) Ain't my fault that lawyers are Sith :) > you're of course free to rationalize any way you want, but if it's so simple, why not bring it up with a manager? Because it's quite frankly none of their business. Corporations, contrary to what they might believe, do not own their employees. If they are dissatisfied with their employees' output, they are already more than willing to terminate employment for any reason, and that's that. > Funny. Last time I had to deal with it, entire ten people team had zero issues with engagement. Only one guy had And for all you know those ten people could be working second jobs, too, as is their right. You would have no idea because you are explicitly only measuring the ones who can't hack it, and have no visibility into those who can. > Yup slack time is important. Every reasonable company knows that. You need to wind down sometimes. That's why you have table soccer, xboxes etc Sorry to burst your Silicon Valley bubble, but such companies are very much in the minority. > You argue that, instead companies should assign second project to everyone, to help them relax? No, I argue that companies should not expect to own their employees 168 hours a week while only paying them for 40 at best. I further argue that employers hire and fire by productivity alone, and therefore employees have every right to contribute based on productivity alone rather than some archaic notion of ass-in-seat timekeeping.

yellowapple 4y ago

> All agreements I ever signed had something along the lines: "I guarantee, that I perform my work up to my best knowledge and experience". This is flat out impossible, to bear cognitive load of doing it 16 hours a day without compromising quality. Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Unless those agreements you signed specifically say "I will not work other jobs" or something along those lines, it ain't fraud. At worst, it might be a fireable offense - but so are all sorts of frivolous things, like "the boss simply doesn't like you". > Of course there's argument, that you've completed given tasks earlier. Surely, there's no review to do, no questions to answer, no backlog to pull from? Surely employer hired experienced SWE, with intention of having code-monkey, who has no interest beyond current ticket? In a lot of cases, there ain't any of those things to do. Besides, "questions to answer" is trivial to juggle around without affecting one's ability to answer them. > You hire senior and get zero senior-insight, as he/she is interested only in half-assing task, because of pressure they get from the other side. Maybe pay better? Per the article, most intermediates/seniors considering this will do so with junior roles, specifically due to the relative lack of obligations. Most employers don't really give more than two shits about "senior insight" anyway. If your seniors are working multiple jobs, it's quite possible that the positions are senior in name only. That is: if the task was actually engaging (or the money was worth it), they would find a way to not "half-ass" it. > But for any creative work, reporting 8h a day to multiple companies is a fraud - plain and simple For any creative work, reporting 8h a day to even a single company is a fraud by your standard. I know of exactly zero programmers who spend every hour of every shift engaged. Zero designers, zero writers, zilch, nada. The brain doesn't work like that - sure, flow states happen, but in between the brain needs to be thinking about something else while it chews on whatever problems in the background. A second job if anything would help performance, given that it allows for that "thinking about something else" while maximizing the opportunities to notice insights / a-ha moments. If your colleagues working second jobs are unproductive, I can basically guarantee you they'd still be unproductive with just one job.

dzikimarian 4y ago
> Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Then you proceed to require exact wording in agreement :-) you're of course free to rationalize any way you want, but if it's so simple, why not bring it up with a manager? > Maybe pay better? Awesome. How much guarantees no issues? This much is fine? :-) https://mashable.com/article/google-waymo-bonuses https://mashable.com/article/google-waymo-bonuses > if the task was actually engaging (or the money was worth it), they would find a way to not "half-ass" it. Funny. Last time I had to deal with it, entire ten people team had zero issues with engagement. Only one guy had. All had comparable compensation. Care to explain this phenomenon? To make it even more funny his team brought up the issue first, as they got tired of this. Not every employer is shitty. Some of them being doesn't justify lying to all. > I know of exactly zero programmers who spend every hour of every shift engaged. Yup slack time is important. Every reasonable company knows that. You need to wind down sometimes. That's why you have table soccer, xboxes etc. You argue that, instead companies should assign second project to everyone, to help them relax? >If your colleagues working second jobs are unproductive, I can basically guarantee you they'd still be unproductive with just one job. Where can I exercise this guarantee? World is small - it's often easy to find common colleagues and find out about pre-remote performance of your teammates. It happened to me to be in such position and weirdly results were completely opposite from what you said.
- yellowapple 4y ago
  > Then you proceed to require exact wording in agreement :-) Ain't my fault that lawyers are Sith :) > you're of course free to rationalize any way you want, but if it's so simple, why not bring it up with a manager? Because it's quite frankly none of their business. Corporations, contrary to what they might believe, do not own their employees. If they are dissatisfied with their employees' output, they are already more than willing to terminate employment for any reason, and that's that. > Funny. Last time I had to deal with it, entire ten people team had zero issues with engagement. Only one guy had And for all you know those ten people could be working second jobs, too, as is their right. You would have no idea because you are explicitly only measuring the ones who can't hack it, and have no visibility into those who can. > Yup slack time is important. Every reasonable company knows that. You need to wind down sometimes. That's why you have table soccer, xboxes etc Sorry to burst your Silicon Valley bubble, but such companies are very much in the minority. > You argue that, instead companies should assign second project to everyone, to help them relax? No, I argue that companies should not expect to own their employees 168 hours a week while only paying them for 40 at best. I further argue that employers hire and fire by productivity alone, and therefore employees have every right to contribute based on productivity alone rather than some archaic notion of ass-in-seat timekeeping.