5 ms·

How to go to war with your employer

33 points by samename 3y ago

cj 3y ago
> You don’t like agile/scrum and want to interact with it from the other end of a six foot pole and/or replace it with another system Honestly, if you disagree with fundamental ways your company operates, it’s usually a lot less effort and a lot less stressful to find a new job that is aligned better with how you like to work. I think one mistake a lot of job candidates make is accepting offers too quickly before making sure there’s a mutual culture fit. The same mistake is made by a lot of employers: not making sure there’s mutual culture fit from the employer’s perspective prior to extending an offer.
- helen___keller 3y ago
  On the contrary I think there’s almost certainly something that annoys you and could be improved about your position were it not against policy One time I was on a team developing a desktop client in a division of a major public cloud. We had endless process inherited from our division built around ensuring cloud services (of which we created 0) were of sufficient uptime and security. God how I wished I could find a way around the hours of pointless red tape involved in getting my job done. How many times did I write security documents explaining that our new product is not a cloud service and thus XYZ does not apply? Another example, my current role has a laptop refresh policy. These usually make sense except my laptop is a crap 2019 MacBook Pro which struggles with what I do. I’m not set for a refresh for another 1.5 years. I think there’s likely a route to improving my job performance and using a faster laptop, that don’t start by quitting my job.
  - skirmish 3y ago
    Re laptop, how about: it broke, into lots of tiny shattered pieces.
    - kylehotchkiss 3y ago
      It doesn’t have to break into many little pieces. Just get some food under the keys. Productivity denied!
- monsieurgaufre 3y ago
  accepting offers too quickly OR being homeless: It's the choice for a lot of candidates. Having a choice of opportunities is not common for most.
  - tennisflyi 3y ago
    A rare opinion on HN. Most people here are hot commodities. I agree with you.
  - EA-3167 3y ago
    Someone in that position shouldn't be "going to war" with their employer.
    - monsieurgaufre 3y ago
      On the contrary, as workers' rights are being attacked constantly by employers, workers should fight back.
tracerbulletx 3y ago
I think this is a delusional take. The fact of the matter is you do not have any leverage at all and your only option, like everyone else's, is to be a political entity operating in the confines of the system to effect change. This author is acting like some kind of primadona who is above it all and such a sneaky snake because he totally knows HRs game and is going to tattle to them to get his boss fired.
- hashstring 3y ago
  > the fact of the matter is you do not have any leverage at all … What evidence do you have to believe this?
  - cj 3y ago
    The only leverage any employee has (non-union, in the US) is purely political. All employment is “at will” in Tech, you can be fired for any reason. The only thing preventing you from being fired is your capacity to create value for the company (as seen in the company’s eyes) Unless you’re truly irreplaceable, you don’t have much leverage by default.
    - testacct22 3y ago
      > All employment is “at will” in Tech, you can be fired for any reason Wrong. The reason cannot be discriminatory An important distinction to make, one that can cost a great deal if not made
      - cj 3y ago
        Technically you’re right. Except in the US there are about 100 ways employers can still fire you even if the underlying reason is discriminatory. They just can’t expose the real reason in writing and they make up other reasons (or no reason at all). Edit: and just to be perfectly clear, I don’t applaud companies who discriminate (I myself am a minority frequently discriminated against). Just pointing out the unfortunate reality that non-discrimination laws are extremely weak and ineffective in the US when it comes to hiring/firing.
erehweb 3y ago
Note though that the marginal value of an employee is typically < the average value, and that managers may value control more than profits.
joezydeco 3y ago
If you install Linux on your work laptop because it allows you to work more efficiently, then you are doing your job better and making more money for the business; they have no right to object to this and you have a very defensible position for exercising agency in this respect. From my experience, this is becoming an area where you have no traction. Companies have increasingly complex security and record retention policies, your choice to use Linux (when the company is a sea of Windows machines) creates more work for your IT group to support. So guess what their blanket answer is going to be?
- opportune 3y ago
  Also, if you need privileged access to get things done and the IT team can’t install nanny software on your computer, you have created a big security threat. Yeah I know you Mr Hacker are responsible and would never fall victim to malware, because you personally audit all packages and their dependencies you download (eye roll). But imagine you are in charge of security for a company and some argumentative contrarian insists on running the sole Linux machine in your corp network. Potentially your entire business or reputation is at risk because of this guy’s unilateral decision. Wouldn’t it be reasonable to tell them to stop?
  - joezydeco 3y ago
    I think we've been fortunate so far that Windows has so many low-hanging vulnerabilities that Linux hasn't been targeted as much.
chrisdbanks 3y ago
If your company is not asking you to do the things that are most likely to make it money then I'd worry about your long-term job security. In my experience, most employees lack the context to understand what the best way to make their company money is. Therefore this argument seems flawed. However, if you have a better way to make money for your company than your boss does, then you should be promoted. A good company listens to bottom-up feedback and adjusts its approach accordingly.
glimshe 3y ago
This is not a good article. It basically thinks about the employer in Marxist-like ways (class relations, owner of means of production etc). Within the legal framework, here is what you have to do: whatever your employer asks you to do. No, if your employer believes that Linux isn't right for their business, or that you can't work from home, you are not supposed to do that. I think smart employers will give a lot of agency to engineers to make some of these decisions, but it's not your call. If you want to make these decisions, become an employer yourself.
- monsieurgaufre 3y ago
  You're basically saying that workers should be cogs devoid of reflexion and agency.
  - dang 3y ago
    Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - monsieurgaufre 3y ago
      I've edited my comment. I do believe what i wrote, tho. It was not meant as a personal attack.
      - dang 3y ago
        Yes, I was reacting to the name-calling part ("this is such drivel") which is against the site guidelines. Since you took that out (thanks!) I've taken the flags off the post.
        monsieurgaufre 3y ago
        Thank you as well. Have a nice weekend!
samename 3y ago
Why was this flagged?
testacct22 3y ago
Just something I've noticed here on this site: the sentiment is highly "pro-employer" (kinda like the wsj). It makes sense really, considering who finances the infra for this website. Not surprised this article was flagged The post connects two things I didn't consider before: collective action and internal tooling Something that I've seen: management mandates that everyone use shitty tooling. Using collective action to challenge this and put a fire under management's ass to make internal tooling not shit isn't a bad idea imo Really, I'm just happy I see an article here that speaks positively about organized labor and the adversarial relationship between employer and employee. The only flaw with this article is that it spends too much time talking about HR and not enough about litigation
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

33 points by samename 3y ago

cj 3y ago

> You don’t like agile/scrum and want to interact with it from the other end of a six foot pole and/or replace it with another system Honestly, if you disagree with fundamental ways your company operates, it’s usually a lot less effort and a lot less stressful to find a new job that is aligned better with how you like to work. I think one mistake a lot of job candidates make is accepting offers too quickly before making sure there’s a mutual culture fit. The same mistake is made by a lot of employers: not making sure there’s mutual culture fit from the employer’s perspective prior to extending an offer.

helen___keller 3y ago
On the contrary I think there’s almost certainly something that annoys you and could be improved about your position were it not against policy One time I was on a team developing a desktop client in a division of a major public cloud. We had endless process inherited from our division built around ensuring cloud services (of which we created 0) were of sufficient uptime and security. God how I wished I could find a way around the hours of pointless red tape involved in getting my job done. How many times did I write security documents explaining that our new product is not a cloud service and thus XYZ does not apply? Another example, my current role has a laptop refresh policy. These usually make sense except my laptop is a crap 2019 MacBook Pro which struggles with what I do. I’m not set for a refresh for another 1.5 years. I think there’s likely a route to improving my job performance and using a faster laptop, that don’t start by quitting my job.
- skirmish 3y ago
  Re laptop, how about: it broke, into lots of tiny shattered pieces.
  - kylehotchkiss 3y ago
    It doesn’t have to break into many little pieces. Just get some food under the keys. Productivity denied!
monsieurgaufre 3y ago
accepting offers too quickly OR being homeless: It's the choice for a lot of candidates. Having a choice of opportunities is not common for most.
- tennisflyi 3y ago
  A rare opinion on HN. Most people here are hot commodities. I agree with you.
- EA-3167 3y ago
  Someone in that position shouldn't be "going to war" with their employer.
  - monsieurgaufre 3y ago
    On the contrary, as workers' rights are being attacked constantly by employers, workers should fight back.

tracerbulletx 3y ago

I think this is a delusional take. The fact of the matter is you do not have any leverage at all and your only option, like everyone else's, is to be a political entity operating in the confines of the system to effect change. This author is acting like some kind of primadona who is above it all and such a sneaky snake because he totally knows HRs game and is going to tattle to them to get his boss fired.

hashstring 3y ago
> the fact of the matter is you do not have any leverage at all … What evidence do you have to believe this?
- cj 3y ago
  The only leverage any employee has (non-union, in the US) is purely political. All employment is “at will” in Tech, you can be fired for any reason. The only thing preventing you from being fired is your capacity to create value for the company (as seen in the company’s eyes) Unless you’re truly irreplaceable, you don’t have much leverage by default.
  - testacct22 3y ago
    > All employment is “at will” in Tech, you can be fired for any reason Wrong. The reason cannot be discriminatory An important distinction to make, one that can cost a great deal if not made
    - cj 3y ago
      Technically you’re right. Except in the US there are about 100 ways employers can still fire you even if the underlying reason is discriminatory. They just can’t expose the real reason in writing and they make up other reasons (or no reason at all). Edit: and just to be perfectly clear, I don’t applaud companies who discriminate (I myself am a minority frequently discriminated against). Just pointing out the unfortunate reality that non-discrimination laws are extremely weak and ineffective in the US when it comes to hiring/firing.

erehweb 3y ago

Note though that the marginal value of an employee is typically < the average value, and that managers may value control more than profits.

joezydeco 3y ago

If you install Linux on your work laptop because it allows you to work more efficiently, then you are doing your job better and making more money for the business; they have no right to object to this and you have a very defensible position for exercising agency in this respect. From my experience, this is becoming an area where you have no traction. Companies have increasingly complex security and record retention policies, your choice to use Linux (when the company is a sea of Windows machines) creates more work for your IT group to support. So guess what their blanket answer is going to be?

opportune 3y ago
Also, if you need privileged access to get things done and the IT team can’t install nanny software on your computer, you have created a big security threat. Yeah I know you Mr Hacker are responsible and would never fall victim to malware, because you personally audit all packages and their dependencies you download (eye roll). But imagine you are in charge of security for a company and some argumentative contrarian insists on running the sole Linux machine in your corp network. Potentially your entire business or reputation is at risk because of this guy’s unilateral decision. Wouldn’t it be reasonable to tell them to stop?
- joezydeco 3y ago
  I think we've been fortunate so far that Windows has so many low-hanging vulnerabilities that Linux hasn't been targeted as much.

chrisdbanks 3y ago

If your company is not asking you to do the things that are most likely to make it money then I'd worry about your long-term job security. In my experience, most employees lack the context to understand what the best way to make their company money is. Therefore this argument seems flawed. However, if you have a better way to make money for your company than your boss does, then you should be promoted. A good company listens to bottom-up feedback and adjusts its approach accordingly.

glimshe 3y ago

This is not a good article. It basically thinks about the employer in Marxist-like ways (class relations, owner of means of production etc). Within the legal framework, here is what you have to do: whatever your employer asks you to do. No, if your employer believes that Linux isn't right for their business, or that you can't work from home, you are not supposed to do that. I think smart employers will give a lot of agency to engineers to make some of these decisions, but it's not your call. If you want to make these decisions, become an employer yourself.

monsieurgaufre 3y ago
You're basically saying that workers should be cogs devoid of reflexion and agency.
- dang 3y ago
  Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - monsieurgaufre 3y ago
    I've edited my comment. I do believe what i wrote, tho. It was not meant as a personal attack.
    - dang 3y ago
      Yes, I was reacting to the name-calling part ("this is such drivel") which is against the site guidelines. Since you took that out (thanks!) I've taken the flags off the post.
      - monsieurgaufre 3y ago
        Thank you as well. Have a nice weekend!

samename 3y ago

Why was this flagged?

testacct22 3y ago

Just something I've noticed here on this site: the sentiment is highly "pro-employer" (kinda like the wsj). It makes sense really, considering who finances the infra for this website. Not surprised this article was flagged The post connects two things I didn't consider before: collective action and internal tooling Something that I've seen: management mandates that everyone use shitty tooling. Using collective action to challenge this and put a fire under management's ass to make internal tooling not shit isn't a bad idea imo Really, I'm just happy I see an article here that speaks positively about organized labor and the adversarial relationship between employer and employee. The only flaw with this article is that it spends too much time talking about HR and not enough about litigation

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]