4 ms·

This is either an elaborate troll or profound stupidity.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ineedasername 4y ago
Nope, I found this fascinating so did a bit of searching. There a whole community (maybe a movement?) around OE (Over Employment), how to go about while 1) Legitimately doing the work required of you but 2) The practicalities of hiding dual employment status since it's often frowned upon if not outright banned (thoug some places baked it into their assumptions that employees may do this and simply set guidelines around how it must be done.. High level execs, especially in the C-level suites, are very commonly collecting multiple pay checks for sitting on the boards or advisory panels of a half dozen or more corporate entities. Why on earth should they be allowed to engage in that sort of activity while when others beneath them can't? Is the CEO putting in a 40 hour work week when they spend a decent % of their time jetting to their next board meeting for some other company or sitting in on conference calls for them etc.?
- chii 4y ago
  > High level execs, especially in the C-level suites, are very commonly collecting multiple pay checks for sitting on the boards or advisory panels of a half dozen or more corporate entities. which is fine as long as those boards knows of it, none of this is hidden. And as board members, you needed to have at least some sort of financial interest in the company, or be able to convince the shareholders of said company to elect you into the board, and you can assume that they do so knowing that you might sit on multiple boards.
  - kethinov 4y ago
    Maybe if we don't want people to hide it, we should eliminate the stigma and stop threatening to fire people who do it. Maybe instead we should focus on measuring performance through the work people deliver instead of micromanaging what people do in their free time. And maybe we should educate the bosses that "full-time" work doesn't mean you own 40 hours of a person's time per week on a set schedule. You have the right to assign that person tasks and expect them to be completed within a reasonable time. If it gets done in less time than you expect and that employee pockets those hours to use on a side project or a second job, it's none of your business. And if they do the work at midnight instead of 4pm, that's also none of your business. Your business is the work getting done before the deadline. That's it.
    - chii 4y ago
      > You have the right to assign that person tasks and expect them to be completed within a reasonable time. If it gets done in less time than you expect and that employee pockets those hours to use on a side project or a second job, it's none of your business. this is what a contractor does. You get paid per result/project/output. If you get it done fast, you can choose to take on more jobs from elsewhere. But this is not what is expected of a salaried employee. As an employee, you're expected to complete the max number of jobs in your allotted time. If you are assigned N tasks, and you are able to finish early, then the logical next step is to assign you N+1 tasks next time, until such that you end up using your 40hr week.
      - kethinov 4y ago
        What's expected of a salaried employee by the sort of boss who has that expectation is a fantasy. Very few people actually deliver that. What people actually do is their assigned tasks, complete that in well under 40 hours, then spend a ton of time at work socializing, taking long lunches, zoning out to reddit or something, and most especially doing make-work: filler activities that look like work but isn't terribly productive. From what I have observed over the years, a lot of people do make-work without even realizing it all due to the perception that they "owe" their employer 40 hours. So they waste countless hours of their time doing filler work to meet that obligation and convince themselves it was useful so they can sound convincing to their boss. It's not a lie if you believe it. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful drug. But as soon as you realize that obligation is a fantasy we all pretend to uphold, you free yourself to focus only on the work that actually matters and reclaim whatever time is left to do other things that actually matter too. Nobody should feel any guilt whatsoever for reclaiming that filler time to use for their personal enrichment, a side project, or a second job. And no boss should be under any illusion that people doing that is anything other than widespread and inevitable. Bosses can't stop it. And if they fire people they "detect" doing it, they'll probably just end up replacing that employee with another one who will do it more stealthily. But if we want a better society, maybe we should stop creating the requirement of stealth and just be honest with each other that "full-time" work is an illusion and it's been an illusion since the rise of the knowledge economy. We're not factory workers. You're not paying us for presence, you're paying us for deliverables. Act like it.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Nope, I found this fascinating so did a bit of searching. There a whole community (maybe a movement?) around OE (Over Employment), how to go about while 1) Legitimately doing the work required of you but 2) The practicalities of hiding dual employment status since it's often frowned upon if not outright banned (thoug some places baked it into their assumptions that employees may do this and simply set guidelines around how it must be done.. High level execs, especially in the C-level suites, are very commonly collecting multiple pay checks for sitting on the boards or advisory panels of a half dozen or more corporate entities. Why on earth should they be allowed to engage in that sort of activity while when others beneath them can't? Is the CEO putting in a 40 hour work week when they spend a decent % of their time jetting to their next board meeting for some other company or sitting in on conference calls for them etc.?

chii 4y ago
> High level execs, especially in the C-level suites, are very commonly collecting multiple pay checks for sitting on the boards or advisory panels of a half dozen or more corporate entities. which is fine as long as those boards knows of it, none of this is hidden. And as board members, you needed to have at least some sort of financial interest in the company, or be able to convince the shareholders of said company to elect you into the board, and you can assume that they do so knowing that you might sit on multiple boards.
- kethinov 4y ago
  Maybe if we don't want people to hide it, we should eliminate the stigma and stop threatening to fire people who do it. Maybe instead we should focus on measuring performance through the work people deliver instead of micromanaging what people do in their free time. And maybe we should educate the bosses that "full-time" work doesn't mean you own 40 hours of a person's time per week on a set schedule. You have the right to assign that person tasks and expect them to be completed within a reasonable time. If it gets done in less time than you expect and that employee pockets those hours to use on a side project or a second job, it's none of your business. And if they do the work at midnight instead of 4pm, that's also none of your business. Your business is the work getting done before the deadline. That's it.
  - chii 4y ago
    > You have the right to assign that person tasks and expect them to be completed within a reasonable time. If it gets done in less time than you expect and that employee pockets those hours to use on a side project or a second job, it's none of your business. this is what a contractor does. You get paid per result/project/output. If you get it done fast, you can choose to take on more jobs from elsewhere. But this is not what is expected of a salaried employee. As an employee, you're expected to complete the max number of jobs in your allotted time. If you are assigned N tasks, and you are able to finish early, then the logical next step is to assign you N+1 tasks next time, until such that you end up using your 40hr week.
    - kethinov 4y ago
      What's expected of a salaried employee by the sort of boss who has that expectation is a fantasy. Very few people actually deliver that. What people actually do is their assigned tasks, complete that in well under 40 hours, then spend a ton of time at work socializing, taking long lunches, zoning out to reddit or something, and most especially doing make-work: filler activities that look like work but isn't terribly productive. From what I have observed over the years, a lot of people do make-work without even realizing it all due to the perception that they "owe" their employer 40 hours. So they waste countless hours of their time doing filler work to meet that obligation and convince themselves it was useful so they can sound convincing to their boss. It's not a lie if you believe it. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful drug. But as soon as you realize that obligation is a fantasy we all pretend to uphold, you free yourself to focus only on the work that actually matters and reclaim whatever time is left to do other things that actually matter too. Nobody should feel any guilt whatsoever for reclaiming that filler time to use for their personal enrichment, a side project, or a second job. And no boss should be under any illusion that people doing that is anything other than widespread and inevitable. Bosses can't stop it. And if they fire people they "detect" doing it, they'll probably just end up replacing that employee with another one who will do it more stealthily. But if we want a better society, maybe we should stop creating the requirement of stealth and just be honest with each other that "full-time" work is an illusion and it's been an illusion since the rise of the knowledge economy. We're not factory workers. You're not paying us for presence, you're paying us for deliverables. Act like it.