4 ms·
In the article, they says that "a smart business should appreciate those who can accomplish tasks in less than 8 hours, as they can achieve more in less time, a
by bratao 3y ago
In the article, they says that "a smart business should appreciate those who can accomplish tasks in less than 8 hours, as they can achieve more in less time, and if they're engaging in non-competitive side work, perhaps their compensation should be increased to prevent them from pursuing it full-time."
However, this places employers in an impossible situation. Many companies already provide competitive salaries for software developers. Additionally, if an employee has a second job, it can be argued that their performance might suffer due to being overworked in such a cognitively demanding role.
- YetAnotherNick 3y agoAnd there is a real cost of firing someone for the company. e.g. I know Google employees morale and respect for the company is very different now it laid off employees, which a year back it didn't even bothered employees for slacking off completely.
- renewedrebecca 3y agoI bet the number of people working a side job like this is tiny. RTO advocates bring it up like everybody is doing it, but save for an anecdote here and there, I doubt it's happening that often. I've seen people go and "work" for decades in an office and do nothing all day. There's nothing new under the sun.
- raverbashing 3y ago> I've seen people go and "work" for decades in an office and do nothing all day. Exactly. So either the 'butts in seats' are to please the managers or they're incompetent at discovering/dealing with unproductive employees, whatever that might be the reason. So which is it?