9 ms·

The secretive rise of the 'overemployed'

63 points by bratao 3y ago

coldtea 3y ago
>They describe themselves as "overemployed" — and remarkably, they seem to be getting away with it. As long as they perform the tasks of their jobs, why shouldn't they be "getting away with it"? It's seems as if the "free market" exists only for the companies and bosses.
- bratao 3y ago
  For software development, quantifying output or defining a finite set of tasks is almost impossible. Unlike traditional industries where tasks can be standardized and expected output can be clearly defined, software development is a different beast altogether. Speaking from personal experience, my task list is filled with an infinite number of features to implement and bugs to fix. It's a dynamic landscape that changes with every new technology, user feedback, or market demand. It's not something that can be completed within a set timeframe, rather it's a continuous process of improvement and adaptation.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    >For software development, quantifying output or defining a finite set of tasks is almost impossible For paid work, it's mandatory. Companies do planning, sprints, tasks, prioritization and so on. Else it's not software development, is an infinite pile of random tasks.
    - bratao 3y ago
      I'm curious as to how this would work in practice. For instance, if an individual is able to complete their sprint while juggling two other full-time jobs, does this imply they should have taken on more tasks? This approach seems to only be effective if one team member significantly outperforms the rest. If a company's sprint is easily manageable, does this suggest that the team size should be reduced, potentially leading to layoffs?
      - coldtea 3y ago
        >This approach seems to only be effective if one team member significantly outperforms the rest. If a company's sprint is easily manageable, does this suggest that the team size should be reduced, potentially leading to layoffs? Or, god forbid, that it reached an optimal work/life balance for team members, while still hitting specific company targets, and should be left as is.
        bratao 3y ago
        I fully agree that the work load should reach an optimal work/life balance. But how this is possible if someone is taking two extra full time jobs on top of it?
        coldtea 3y ago
        That's their decision - to sacrifice their work/life balance to do another job, as opposed to it being a single company's/manager's decision.
      - cxr 3y ago
        > if an individual is able to complete their sprint while juggling two other full-time jobs, does this imply they should have taken on more tasks? To answer your question: no, it doesn't imply[1] that. Your comments suggest you have a mental model of markets where workers should be rewarded (compensated) by the employer for their toil instead of producing value. That's bad business. It's especially bad business when the reaction is a campaign to realign the organization with an a priori interest in making sure it employs only toilers. > If a company's sprint is easily manageable, does this suggest that the team size should be reduced, potentially leading to layoffs? "Should" from the perspective of whom? You're running on a platform of wealth concentration for business owners. Predatory value extraction. Parasitism instead of symbiosis. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37472726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37472726> Ignoring that, if management has so little idea what workers' output should look like that they resort to basing their assessments on how much it seems to hurt to the worker, then the business should consider focusing on management when deciding who to let go. 1. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entailment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entailment>
- dgrin91 3y ago
  NDAs/ data protection for one. I'm not against people having multiple jobs, but some jobs have access to confidential/proprietary data that employers have a legitimate interest in protecting.
  - worksonmine 3y ago
    Working 2 jobs ≠ leaking confidential data between them.
  - 535188B17C93743 3y ago
    As long as there's no conflict of interest between the companies, what's the issue? How is this any different from someone taking a job at all of those companies sequentially?
  - ghaff 3y ago
    Unless it's expressly forbidden by a contract, I don't think most people have any issue with minor clear non-conflict-of-interest consulting/freelance work. It's really hard to see how that works with full-time jobs at competing companies.
  - api 3y ago
    Use a different laptop for each job? Seriously though... this is ridiculous but it's 100% the fault of the employer for over-hiring and bad management.
- erhserhdfd 3y ago
  > As long as they perform the tasks of their jobs, why shouldn't they be "getting away with it"? Curious how you would measure whether they are "performing the tasks for their jobs". I think most folks would say that measuring SE output is very difficult to do and as such, most managers give their team the benefit of the doubt that they are working at a reasonable but sustainable pace. I am not sure that I personally would want to work at a place that places huge emphasis on measuring my output, even if that would free me up for potential OE. It seems like this thinking leads to a commoditization of software engineering work and promotes a very transactional relationship with an employer.
  - pydry 3y ago
    I think the causality is probably reversed. Commoditization and development of a transactional relationship with the employee leads to overemployment. Ive noticed that the places where people do tend to be the ones where 5x productivity is rewarded with 1x the pay and a pat on the back, which is more common than the more rational 5x pay for 5x productivity. If that is the case then the rational economic agent (a developer) operating in a free market will find an outlet for that productivity that produces material gains in line with their increased productivity.
  - reactordev 3y ago
    Not the author but I suspect something like this: Assign engineer 4 stories due this sprint. After a few days, 1 story is done. After a few more 2 more are done. Before the end of the sprint, the last story is done. All 4 stories are demonstrable. All 4 stories pass peer review. Engineer is even around for brainstorm sessions and ceremonies. Some places go a lot further than this but this is my personal bar as a manager. That you're in standup, that you're doing the work, and that the work doesn't require rework and is accepted by the team.
    - erhserhdfd 3y ago
      Yeah I see your point. A few thoughts: 1. This assumes that that a someone can/will usually accurately scope 4 stories, with proper requirements, and clear peer review standards. In practice, this can be hard to do and inconsistent. 2. If someone falls behind on their assigned story quota, how would a manager know whether that is because the story didn't meet the criteria in item 1, or because the person isn't putting in sufficient effort because of OE or other commitments? How I typically see this play out is most people assume that its not related to effort and try to work with the employee to push back deadlines and better refine the story.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  If it were that simple, I don't think people would have a problem. Pulling this stuff off usually requires a tremendous amount of lying and deceit.
  - schmookeeg 3y ago
    Other than "lying by omission", which depends on how you define your disclosure obligations to a client or employer -- this has not been my experience at all.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      My experience is the opposite. It involves telling your peers and managers that tasks take far longer than they do, that you have no bandwidth to spare for more work, and pushing tasks on sympathetic peers while claiming to be overworked. I'm sure people exist with that don't ask don't tell situation, but I don't think it's the norm
      - ghaff 3y ago
        Maybe there are circumstances where someone really doesn't have much work, doesn't have many meetings, doesn't have any real professional visibility outside the company etc., but it's really hard for me to imagine that being either sustainable or not caught out sooner rather than later.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- jghn 3y ago
  I would agree as long as it doesn't violate anything they signed with the employers. Most companies I've worked for had me sign things that would prevent me from working on the side.
- lytefm 3y ago
  > As long as they perform the tasks of their jobs, why shouldn't they be "getting away with it"? I'd say it depends a lot on the legal framework of employment contracts. I don't know how it is in the US, but in Germany you sign a contract with your employer stating „I will work X hours a week for you“. It's not about the output. If you work less than X hours, you commit fraud and breach the contract. Your employer can then fire you for an „important cause” and typical legal protections don't apply. If your employer forces you to work more than X hours without compensating you appropriately, he breaches the contract and you can sue him for that. So obviously, there have been a lot of legal cases like „Does changing your clothes count as working hours“, „Does driving to a client count as working hours“, „How do working hours need to be tracked“,...
  - uturingmachine 3y ago
    In the US there are few scenarios where there is an employment contract. The vast majority of employment is "at will"; an employee can quit (or be terminated) at any time for any reason, so long as it is not expressly forbidden by law (e.g. firing someone for race, sexual orientation, age, etc). In particular, at-will employees are not guilty of breach of contract for working multiple jobs - there is no contract
    - ghaff 3y ago
      However, there is typically a code of business conduct and other things along that line that an employee agrees to even if there isn't an explicit "contract" as there often is in Europe for example.
    - lytefm 3y ago
      Yeah if it's more like "you work for me; I pay you as long as the results are good but will fire you at will" it's much easier to pull this off while maintaining a clear conscience.
  - otteromkram 3y ago
    This sounds horrible. I'd rather sign up for a salary and time blocks during the day to be available for meetings, but my contribution is measured in output, not hours I logged. If I take 40+ hours to do my work, that's on me.
- buu700 3y ago
  By the same logic, why shouldn't lawyers and other high-skill hourly workers add a 3x multiplier to their reported hours? After all, as long as they do the work, their clients won't know the difference. Unless you're actively informing your employer that you're blocked or not being assigned enough work, there's an implication that your output is the product of full-time hours. You could probably get away with it for a time, since it's hard to validate that and there's a default expectation of good faith. Either way, it's essentially (if not actually) fraud. You can't negotiate a certain price for a certain expected value based on your resume and interview performance, and then intentionally deliver a fraction of that value. If you think an employer would be happy with that, then why not try and negotiate the same compensation for a part-time role? Or work as a contractor with a fixed price for each task, and then beat every time estimate to earn a higher effective hourly rate? Or simply provide notice partway into the engagement that you feel you've been delivering more value than your current level of compensation would justify, and therefore will be reducing your time commitment? You're free to sell your services in whatever way you'd like on the free market. The problem is when you enter into an agreement to sell them in a particular way, and then fail to deliver on that while deceiving the other party into believing otherwise.
  - cxr 3y ago
    > why shouldn't lawyers and other high-skill hourly workers add a 3x multiplier to their reported hours Uh, they can. You're talking about price-setting; if you bill by the hour and charge X USD, then feel free to set your price at 3X USD instead. That's how agreements work. Unless by 3x multiplier you mean, "tell them I charge X USD per hour and then when the time comes even though I only worked 13 hours in a given week I'll claim to have worked 39", in which case that's, you know, fraud. > You can't negotiate a certain price for a certain expected value based on your resume and interview performance, and then intentionally deliver a fraction of that value. Non-sequitur. Either that, or you're not really talking about value, but you're still using that word anyway.
    - buu700 3y ago
      Unless by 3x multiplier you mean, "tell them I charge X USD per hour and then when the time comes even though I only worked 13 hours in a given week I'll claim to have worked 39", in which case that's, you know, fraud. Yes, that's literally what I said. If you think you're entitled to a higher rate, charge a higher rate. Don't lie about the amount of work you did.
Dowwie 3y ago
Probably not the best story to share right now as thousands of qualified software engineers struggle to find just one job.
- gedy 3y ago
  Yes it also shows the trouble with these companies' pipeline - it's easy to game (by some), but does not really find the best employees.
  - alexsereno 3y ago
    IDK, I also think a lot of engineers are actually just not good - but the overhiring that happened over the past few years really brought down the overall quality at MANGA. Now you have a bunch of "MANGA level" engineers / other employees who are all mid tier and feel "underemployed" at whatever job they have now. That does play into your easy to game comment. I say that because I'm aggressively not a good engineer. When I joined FAANG years ago I couldn't get hired as an engineer. I joined the company working in Operations and both myself and that side of the house benefited from me being able to script out automation or describe to internal Eng exactly what needed to be built. I chose to not role as an engineer to work at FAANG. While there, I watched the quality of hiring erode drastically over the years. With that, came a lot of super mid employees including on the business side who were frankly extremely entitled and felt like they had justified that they were actually great hires because they worked at MANGA. That shift was really quite annoying to be around, since it became a game of B players hiring C players hiring D players. Leetcode is fucking awful though, I'm confident that if you could solve "hiring incredible engineers" you'd have a great business venture. Also, I don't want to say that the hiring market isn't tougher than before right now, but maybe that it is a good thing that will push qualified engineers to companies that can't pay MANGA salaries and where they'll be very valued.
ldjkfkdsjnv 3y ago
This is the easiest way to financial freedom. Better risk reward than starting a company.
- alexsereno 3y ago
  Well that's a different argument but you're totally right. The most "boring" ways to financial freedom are living cheaply and making as much steady income as possible, investing in other revenue generating ventures (like literally things like a washateria, then buy a strip mall, etc.) Starting "a business" for the $$$ as your primary motivator is going to take your focus off of product.
  - ldjkfkdsjnv 3y ago
    It takes a long time to start a business thats actually valuable. If you can make 500-700k a year by being over employed, that investment money will really pile up.
goalieca 3y ago
My main issue with double dipping is that people with free time should be mentoring or tackling debt and other such things rather than waiting to be told what to do.
- brandall10 3y ago
  Well... they're certainly tackling debt.
- Maken 3y ago
  That sounds like a manager problem, to be fair.
  - throwoutway 3y ago
    Ha, HN is amazing. the other day there was a thread about people not wanting to be micromanaged by managers on here and another about how managers need to carefully choose the words for "you need to do X" so as not to offend The alternative is that workers should own their own work versus waiting to be told what to do, which is what is being proposed here. But apparently you think that's a management issue. I'm now realizing nobody really knows what they want their manager to do
    - ghaff 3y ago
      "I don't want to be micromanaged but, if I can get off with having two jobs, it's my manager's fault because they're an idiot who doesn't keep a close enough eye on me."
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - cxr 3y ago
      You encountered Maken saying that?
DoingIsLearning 3y ago
This reporting will just lead to more draconian measures around remote work. The only purpose of larping fantasies like this is to create outrage and boost view counts on these online newspapers. The best thing you can do is really not to click on that link. If we are allowed whataboutism why is there no write up piece on board members seat collectors and C-level execs?
- programmertote 3y ago
  Yeah, unfortunately. I work one job and am happy with what I make, and the workload is sufficient for me to fill the entire day's worth of time. But I am only happy because the job is remote. I am worried that if news like this (not even sure how much percentage of the employed folks are OE; could very well be 1%) would give excuses to the employers to stop offering remote options. Like you said, I will not click on such articles because the "journalist" will be encouraged to write more clickbait articles which jeopardizes millions of happy remote workers like myself.
  - otteromkram 3y ago
    I want to give you and OP a million upvotes. I guess I can appreciate the OE hustle, but that's just a super minority of remote workers and we all know that one bad apple ruins the bunch. Most of us just want to earn a decent living and do some good work, same as always. Beyond BI, check out news on LinkedIn. The latest i read was something like, "Is remote work more harmful to women getting ahead in the workplace?" There's clearly an agenda out there and we need to be vigilant on calling the BS out.
- cxr 3y ago
  > If we are allowed whataboutism why is there no write up piece on board members seat collectors and C-level execs? Because "There's some sleight of hand at play[...] in the employer/employee relationship (favoring the employer)." <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37472726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37472726>
datadrivenangel 3y ago
Far down in the article: "Many in the OE [over employment] community, in fact, have taken advantage of the trend by getting a full-time J1 [job 1] that provides them with health insurance and then taking J2s [job2] and J3s that are contractor positions, which often come with higher pay to compensate for the lack of benefits." So it sounds like some of this overemployment noise is just the classic moonlighting on the side.
- greesil 3y ago
  And if somehow your moonlighting position isn't a conflict of interest with your corporate liege lord then sure that's fine.
noughtme 3y ago
I know multiple software devs that play hockey 3 times a week during the work day. They could easily be working 2 full time jobs at the same time, but why would you, if you didn’t need to?
- pseudosudoer 3y ago
  I've considered a second job as well, but I'd have to skip out on my noon Jiu Jitsu classes and freedom to play Pickleball whenever I please. I'm paid well enough where the value my hobbies bring outweighs the extra income of a second job.
  - netsharc 3y ago
    To be trash-philosophical about it, sometimes we forget the aim of life isn't to get a particular number (the amount of money in our bank account) as high as it can be, like it's a video game score...
    - brandall10 3y ago
      A significant number of these folks appear to be FIRE focused though. It's an interesting idea, sacrifice your 20s to live the rest of your life work free.
sovietmudkipz 3y ago
So what does your resume say for the period of time you are over employed? Lets say you worked at Meta, IBM, and Tinder... What do you put on your resume when applying for other roles?
- globalise83 3y ago
  The one which is most likely to get you the job you want next :)
sertbdfgbnfgsd 3y ago
Can't companies know if you have income from elsewhere? After all, they have to know how much to withhold for taxes.
- asvitkine 3y ago
  The withheld amount may not match the amount you'll actually owe at the end of the year, since it gets recalculated at income tax time.
- ghaff 3y ago
  In the US, no. I tell the company the number of deductions on some IRS form which determines their deductions on a W2. There are some things like not having two different 401Ks at the same time but my company certainly doesn't know about the other sources of income I have (which are not from other employers).
lasermike026 3y ago
Salary, healthcare, lifestyle, savings, and retirement. The result of this equation is broken. Here are the problems.
eschneider 3y ago
Many years ago when I was working as a consulting engineer, I had two almost fulltime (30+ hours a week) clients going at the same time. In person. It was manageable because the sites were walking distance apart, but everyone got the hours that they were billed and everyone's work got done. Honestly, if you're fully remote and don't have any commute, that sort of thing is quite doable if that's how you want to spend your time.
voisin 3y ago
These articles are what cause managers to push for RTO.
- greatgib 3y ago
  It's businessinsider, so I easily guess that the story might be made up just for this purpose!
karaterobot 3y ago
> But I think the bosses of the world are threatened by OE for a deeper reason — one that goes beyond the numbers. There's something radical that happens to a worker's psychology when they have multiple jobs. If your company is putting a roof over your head, it's hard not to fall into a hustle-culture mentality at work, doing whatever it takes to satisfy your boss... But because the overemployed are no longer wholly dependent on any one employer, each job starts to look a little more disposable — which, if we're being honest, is precisely how many CEOs view their employees. Interesting take. Having multiple jobs makes each one disposable, leveling the ordinary, tilted relationship between companies and workers, in which the company treats employees as fungible and the employee has to take it. In that sense it seems more honest and equitable to me than the jobs I've had. For me, when I don't have enough work to fill a day, my reaction is not "gosh, I'd better find more work," it's "I'll go read a book, or work on a project". I'm financially secure, with no family to support. I can't imagine wanting to work more in exchange for more money, and if I get laid off I've got savings to cover it. I have no issue with what these people are doing, but I doubt I'd ever join them.
charles_f 3y ago
> The company was dumping him into the worst job market since the Great Depression. What? The period of the pandemic was when every software company was hiring like their lives depended on it
bluedino 3y ago
I knew a guy that had only one job, but he never actually did it. It would take 3-6 months to get fired and then he'd just get another job and peace out for a few months. I think he worked at one place for almost 8 months and then got laid off. After on-boarding he'd just lay low and maybe answer emails once a week. Beats "working" 3 or 4 jobs and spending over 40 hours a week doing so.
- otteromkram 3y ago
  If he never did the job, what did he say during subsequent interviews when asked about all the short stints?
  - z7 3y ago
    You're assuming that this person submits a truthful resume.
b5n 3y ago
I'm aghast! Everyone must RTO now! We're laying off 20%, and bonuses (if any) will now be paid in Amazon gift cards. We stand together in these difficult times. Sincerely, -CEO of V -Board member of W -Board member of Y -Director of dishonest charitable foundation Z *Reminder, I'll be out of the country 11/17 - 1/15, taking the entirety of our extended family to Bali. Love, peace, and prosperity to all!
Palmik 3y ago
Companies try to optimize profit for their shareholders, which includes paying as little as the workers will bear (or less, as in some cases people need to work to survive). Similarly, I think people have the right to optimize their time and income. Of course, it can be made illegal through your employment contract. So just like big corporations, you need to include the possibility of a lawsuit and a fine into your expected outcome calculations. Having been both an IC and a manager at one of the FAANGs, it's not unimaginable to me that there will be people who can pull off two jobs and still get more done than average. Personally, I'm not sure whether it's an optimal strategy. You might be better off getting promoted really fast, if you feel you have the opportunity. But I won't judge.
tzs 3y ago
For workers who are producing copyrightable output if there is any overlap between the types of things they are doing for simultaneous employers there could be questions about who owns the copyrights. E.g., if you wrote very similar web code for both Meta and Tinder and one of them noticed and sued the other for copyright infringement things could get awkward.
tennisflyi 3y ago
I can’t even get one. Lmao
yetanother12345 3y ago
> three full time jobs... The math does not add up. One full time job is 8 hours per day (added: often more, as this is in IT). 3 x 8 = 24. There are no more than 24 hours in a day. This leaves no time for rest, eating, etc...
jacknews 3y ago
"In exchange for a salary, they promised not to work for anyone else." Is that legal? It's certainly not 'the market' at work, or working well, but simply corporations monopolizing peoples productive hours, even those not actually part of the job, with an 'exclusive contract'. 'Employment' is a bit of a racket IMHO, so any way of getting out from under the thumb should be encouraged.
profmumbles 3y ago
Come on people - "loyalty" to "the company? what doesthat get you? A lousy raise that got wiped out by inflation. Unmet promises of a promotion. Layoffs at the first sign of turmoil, with no warning. "loyalty" is a two-way street. Once I worked for a "huge company", where I had gotten 4 patents, increased revenue, added value, started & led a new global team, taught the hard stuff to more junior members, great reviews, blah blah blah. Then I got laid off. Found another job pretty quick. couple months later the "huge company" realized they screwed up and tried to "rehire" several of us back. To a man, we all said: "Why should I even want to work for a place that fired me?" So don't talk to me about "Loyalty". BTW, doing your day job from 9-5, then doing outside "contract work", "consulting work" or independant stuff like running a PC storefront or Web design has been going on forever ... nothing new here, move along, move along...

63 points by bratao 3y ago

>They describe themselves as "overemployed" — and remarkably, they seem to be getting away with it. As long as they perform the tasks of their jobs, why shouldn't they be "getting away with it"? It's seems as if the "free market" exists only for the companies and bosses.

bratao 3y ago
For software development, quantifying output or defining a finite set of tasks is almost impossible. Unlike traditional industries where tasks can be standardized and expected output can be clearly defined, software development is a different beast altogether. Speaking from personal experience, my task list is filled with an infinite number of features to implement and bugs to fix. It's a dynamic landscape that changes with every new technology, user feedback, or market demand. It's not something that can be completed within a set timeframe, rather it's a continuous process of improvement and adaptation.
- coldtea 3y ago
  >For software development, quantifying output or defining a finite set of tasks is almost impossible For paid work, it's mandatory. Companies do planning, sprints, tasks, prioritization and so on. Else it's not software development, is an infinite pile of random tasks.
  - bratao 3y ago
    I'm curious as to how this would work in practice. For instance, if an individual is able to complete their sprint while juggling two other full-time jobs, does this imply they should have taken on more tasks? This approach seems to only be effective if one team member significantly outperforms the rest. If a company's sprint is easily manageable, does this suggest that the team size should be reduced, potentially leading to layoffs?
    - coldtea 3y ago
      >This approach seems to only be effective if one team member significantly outperforms the rest. If a company's sprint is easily manageable, does this suggest that the team size should be reduced, potentially leading to layoffs? Or, god forbid, that it reached an optimal work/life balance for team members, while still hitting specific company targets, and should be left as is.
      - bratao 3y ago
        I fully agree that the work load should reach an optimal work/life balance. But how this is possible if someone is taking two extra full time jobs on top of it?
        coldtea 3y ago
        That's their decision - to sacrifice their work/life balance to do another job, as opposed to it being a single company's/manager's decision.
    - cxr 3y ago
      > if an individual is able to complete their sprint while juggling two other full-time jobs, does this imply they should have taken on more tasks? To answer your question: no, it doesn't imply[1] that. Your comments suggest you have a mental model of markets where workers should be rewarded (compensated) by the employer for their toil instead of producing value. That's bad business. It's especially bad business when the reaction is a campaign to realign the organization with an a priori interest in making sure it employs only toilers. > If a company's sprint is easily manageable, does this suggest that the team size should be reduced, potentially leading to layoffs? "Should" from the perspective of whom? You're running on a platform of wealth concentration for business owners. Predatory value extraction. Parasitism instead of symbiosis. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37472726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37472726> Ignoring that, if management has so little idea what workers' output should look like that they resort to basing their assessments on how much it seems to hurt to the worker, then the business should consider focusing on management when deciding who to let go. 1. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entailment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entailment>
dgrin91 3y ago
NDAs/ data protection for one. I'm not against people having multiple jobs, but some jobs have access to confidential/proprietary data that employers have a legitimate interest in protecting.
- worksonmine 3y ago
  Working 2 jobs ≠ leaking confidential data between them.
- 535188B17C93743 3y ago
  As long as there's no conflict of interest between the companies, what's the issue? How is this any different from someone taking a job at all of those companies sequentially?
- ghaff 3y ago
  Unless it's expressly forbidden by a contract, I don't think most people have any issue with minor clear non-conflict-of-interest consulting/freelance work. It's really hard to see how that works with full-time jobs at competing companies.
- api 3y ago
  Use a different laptop for each job? Seriously though... this is ridiculous but it's 100% the fault of the employer for over-hiring and bad management.
erhserhdfd 3y ago
> As long as they perform the tasks of their jobs, why shouldn't they be "getting away with it"? Curious how you would measure whether they are "performing the tasks for their jobs". I think most folks would say that measuring SE output is very difficult to do and as such, most managers give their team the benefit of the doubt that they are working at a reasonable but sustainable pace. I am not sure that I personally would want to work at a place that places huge emphasis on measuring my output, even if that would free me up for potential OE. It seems like this thinking leads to a commoditization of software engineering work and promotes a very transactional relationship with an employer.
- pydry 3y ago
  I think the causality is probably reversed. Commoditization and development of a transactional relationship with the employee leads to overemployment. Ive noticed that the places where people do tend to be the ones where 5x productivity is rewarded with 1x the pay and a pat on the back, which is more common than the more rational 5x pay for 5x productivity. If that is the case then the rational economic agent (a developer) operating in a free market will find an outlet for that productivity that produces material gains in line with their increased productivity.
- reactordev 3y ago
  Not the author but I suspect something like this: Assign engineer 4 stories due this sprint. After a few days, 1 story is done. After a few more 2 more are done. Before the end of the sprint, the last story is done. All 4 stories are demonstrable. All 4 stories pass peer review. Engineer is even around for brainstorm sessions and ceremonies. Some places go a lot further than this but this is my personal bar as a manager. That you're in standup, that you're doing the work, and that the work doesn't require rework and is accepted by the team.
  - erhserhdfd 3y ago
    Yeah I see your point. A few thoughts: 1. This assumes that that a someone can/will usually accurately scope 4 stories, with proper requirements, and clear peer review standards. In practice, this can be hard to do and inconsistent. 2. If someone falls behind on their assigned story quota, how would a manager know whether that is because the story didn't meet the criteria in item 1, or because the person isn't putting in sufficient effort because of OE or other commitments? How I typically see this play out is most people assume that its not related to effort and try to work with the employee to push back deadlines and better refine the story.
s1artibartfast 3y ago
If it were that simple, I don't think people would have a problem. Pulling this stuff off usually requires a tremendous amount of lying and deceit.
- schmookeeg 3y ago
  Other than "lying by omission", which depends on how you define your disclosure obligations to a client or employer -- this has not been my experience at all.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    My experience is the opposite. It involves telling your peers and managers that tasks take far longer than they do, that you have no bandwidth to spare for more work, and pushing tasks on sympathetic peers while claiming to be overworked. I'm sure people exist with that don't ask don't tell situation, but I don't think it's the norm
    - ghaff 3y ago
      Maybe there are circumstances where someone really doesn't have much work, doesn't have many meetings, doesn't have any real professional visibility outside the company etc., but it's really hard for me to imagine that being either sustainable or not caught out sooner rather than later.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
jghn 3y ago
I would agree as long as it doesn't violate anything they signed with the employers. Most companies I've worked for had me sign things that would prevent me from working on the side.
lytefm 3y ago
> As long as they perform the tasks of their jobs, why shouldn't they be "getting away with it"? I'd say it depends a lot on the legal framework of employment contracts. I don't know how it is in the US, but in Germany you sign a contract with your employer stating „I will work X hours a week for you“. It's not about the output. If you work less than X hours, you commit fraud and breach the contract. Your employer can then fire you for an „important cause” and typical legal protections don't apply. If your employer forces you to work more than X hours without compensating you appropriately, he breaches the contract and you can sue him for that. So obviously, there have been a lot of legal cases like „Does changing your clothes count as working hours“, „Does driving to a client count as working hours“, „How do working hours need to be tracked“,...
- uturingmachine 3y ago
  In the US there are few scenarios where there is an employment contract. The vast majority of employment is "at will"; an employee can quit (or be terminated) at any time for any reason, so long as it is not expressly forbidden by law (e.g. firing someone for race, sexual orientation, age, etc). In particular, at-will employees are not guilty of breach of contract for working multiple jobs - there is no contract
  - ghaff 3y ago
    However, there is typically a code of business conduct and other things along that line that an employee agrees to even if there isn't an explicit "contract" as there often is in Europe for example.
  - lytefm 3y ago
    Yeah if it's more like "you work for me; I pay you as long as the results are good but will fire you at will" it's much easier to pull this off while maintaining a clear conscience.
- otteromkram 3y ago
  This sounds horrible. I'd rather sign up for a salary and time blocks during the day to be available for meetings, but my contribution is measured in output, not hours I logged. If I take 40+ hours to do my work, that's on me.
buu700 3y ago
By the same logic, why shouldn't lawyers and other high-skill hourly workers add a 3x multiplier to their reported hours? After all, as long as they do the work, their clients won't know the difference. Unless you're actively informing your employer that you're blocked or not being assigned enough work, there's an implication that your output is the product of full-time hours. You could probably get away with it for a time, since it's hard to validate that and there's a default expectation of good faith. Either way, it's essentially (if not actually) fraud. You can't negotiate a certain price for a certain expected value based on your resume and interview performance, and then intentionally deliver a fraction of that value. If you think an employer would be happy with that, then why not try and negotiate the same compensation for a part-time role? Or work as a contractor with a fixed price for each task, and then beat every time estimate to earn a higher effective hourly rate? Or simply provide notice partway into the engagement that you feel you've been delivering more value than your current level of compensation would justify, and therefore will be reducing your time commitment? You're free to sell your services in whatever way you'd like on the free market. The problem is when you enter into an agreement to sell them in a particular way, and then fail to deliver on that while deceiving the other party into believing otherwise.
- cxr 3y ago
  > why shouldn't lawyers and other high-skill hourly workers add a 3x multiplier to their reported hours Uh, they can. You're talking about price-setting; if you bill by the hour and charge X USD, then feel free to set your price at 3X USD instead. That's how agreements work. Unless by 3x multiplier you mean, "tell them I charge X USD per hour and then when the time comes even though I only worked 13 hours in a given week I'll claim to have worked 39", in which case that's, you know, fraud. > You can't negotiate a certain price for a certain expected value based on your resume and interview performance, and then intentionally deliver a fraction of that value. Non-sequitur. Either that, or you're not really talking about value, but you're still using that word anyway.
  - buu700 3y ago
    Unless by 3x multiplier you mean, "tell them I charge X USD per hour and then when the time comes even though I only worked 13 hours in a given week I'll claim to have worked 39", in which case that's, you know, fraud. Yes, that's literally what I said. If you think you're entitled to a higher rate, charge a higher rate. Don't lie about the amount of work you did.

Dowwie 3y ago

Probably not the best story to share right now as thousands of qualified software engineers struggle to find just one job.

gedy 3y ago
Yes it also shows the trouble with these companies' pipeline - it's easy to game (by some), but does not really find the best employees.
- alexsereno 3y ago
  IDK, I also think a lot of engineers are actually just not good - but the overhiring that happened over the past few years really brought down the overall quality at MANGA. Now you have a bunch of "MANGA level" engineers / other employees who are all mid tier and feel "underemployed" at whatever job they have now. That does play into your easy to game comment. I say that because I'm aggressively not a good engineer. When I joined FAANG years ago I couldn't get hired as an engineer. I joined the company working in Operations and both myself and that side of the house benefited from me being able to script out automation or describe to internal Eng exactly what needed to be built. I chose to not role as an engineer to work at FAANG. While there, I watched the quality of hiring erode drastically over the years. With that, came a lot of super mid employees including on the business side who were frankly extremely entitled and felt like they had justified that they were actually great hires because they worked at MANGA. That shift was really quite annoying to be around, since it became a game of B players hiring C players hiring D players. Leetcode is fucking awful though, I'm confident that if you could solve "hiring incredible engineers" you'd have a great business venture. Also, I don't want to say that the hiring market isn't tougher than before right now, but maybe that it is a good thing that will push qualified engineers to companies that can't pay MANGA salaries and where they'll be very valued.

ldjkfkdsjnv 3y ago

This is the easiest way to financial freedom. Better risk reward than starting a company.

alexsereno 3y ago
Well that's a different argument but you're totally right. The most "boring" ways to financial freedom are living cheaply and making as much steady income as possible, investing in other revenue generating ventures (like literally things like a washateria, then buy a strip mall, etc.) Starting "a business" for the $$$ as your primary motivator is going to take your focus off of product.
- ldjkfkdsjnv 3y ago
  It takes a long time to start a business thats actually valuable. If you can make 500-700k a year by being over employed, that investment money will really pile up.

goalieca 3y ago

My main issue with double dipping is that people with free time should be mentoring or tackling debt and other such things rather than waiting to be told what to do.

brandall10 3y ago
Well... they're certainly tackling debt.
Maken 3y ago
That sounds like a manager problem, to be fair.
- throwoutway 3y ago
  Ha, HN is amazing. the other day there was a thread about people not wanting to be micromanaged by managers on here and another about how managers need to carefully choose the words for "you need to do X" so as not to offend The alternative is that workers should own their own work versus waiting to be told what to do, which is what is being proposed here. But apparently you think that's a management issue. I'm now realizing nobody really knows what they want their manager to do
  - ghaff 3y ago
    "I don't want to be micromanaged but, if I can get off with having two jobs, it's my manager's fault because they're an idiot who doesn't keep a close enough eye on me."
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - cxr 3y ago
    You encountered Maken saying that?

DoingIsLearning 3y ago

This reporting will just lead to more draconian measures around remote work. The only purpose of larping fantasies like this is to create outrage and boost view counts on these online newspapers. The best thing you can do is really not to click on that link. If we are allowed whataboutism why is there no write up piece on board members seat collectors and C-level execs?

programmertote 3y ago
Yeah, unfortunately. I work one job and am happy with what I make, and the workload is sufficient for me to fill the entire day's worth of time. But I am only happy because the job is remote. I am worried that if news like this (not even sure how much percentage of the employed folks are OE; could very well be 1%) would give excuses to the employers to stop offering remote options. Like you said, I will not click on such articles because the "journalist" will be encouraged to write more clickbait articles which jeopardizes millions of happy remote workers like myself.
- otteromkram 3y ago
  I want to give you and OP a million upvotes. I guess I can appreciate the OE hustle, but that's just a super minority of remote workers and we all know that one bad apple ruins the bunch. Most of us just want to earn a decent living and do some good work, same as always. Beyond BI, check out news on LinkedIn. The latest i read was something like, "Is remote work more harmful to women getting ahead in the workplace?" There's clearly an agenda out there and we need to be vigilant on calling the BS out.
cxr 3y ago
> If we are allowed whataboutism why is there no write up piece on board members seat collectors and C-level execs? Because "There's some sleight of hand at play[...] in the employer/employee relationship (favoring the employer)." <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37472726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37472726>

datadrivenangel 3y ago

Far down in the article: "Many in the OE [over employment] community, in fact, have taken advantage of the trend by getting a full-time J1 [job 1] that provides them with health insurance and then taking J2s [job2] and J3s that are contractor positions, which often come with higher pay to compensate for the lack of benefits." So it sounds like some of this overemployment noise is just the classic moonlighting on the side.

greesil 3y ago
And if somehow your moonlighting position isn't a conflict of interest with your corporate liege lord then sure that's fine.

noughtme 3y ago

I know multiple software devs that play hockey 3 times a week during the work day. They could easily be working 2 full time jobs at the same time, but why would you, if you didn’t need to?

pseudosudoer 3y ago
I've considered a second job as well, but I'd have to skip out on my noon Jiu Jitsu classes and freedom to play Pickleball whenever I please. I'm paid well enough where the value my hobbies bring outweighs the extra income of a second job.
- netsharc 3y ago
  To be trash-philosophical about it, sometimes we forget the aim of life isn't to get a particular number (the amount of money in our bank account) as high as it can be, like it's a video game score...
  - brandall10 3y ago
    A significant number of these folks appear to be FIRE focused though. It's an interesting idea, sacrifice your 20s to live the rest of your life work free.

sovietmudkipz 3y ago

So what does your resume say for the period of time you are over employed? Lets say you worked at Meta, IBM, and Tinder... What do you put on your resume when applying for other roles?

globalise83 3y ago
The one which is most likely to get you the job you want next :)

sertbdfgbnfgsd 3y ago

Can't companies know if you have income from elsewhere? After all, they have to know how much to withhold for taxes.

asvitkine 3y ago
The withheld amount may not match the amount you'll actually owe at the end of the year, since it gets recalculated at income tax time.
ghaff 3y ago
In the US, no. I tell the company the number of deductions on some IRS form which determines their deductions on a W2. There are some things like not having two different 401Ks at the same time but my company certainly doesn't know about the other sources of income I have (which are not from other employers).

lasermike026 3y ago

Salary, healthcare, lifestyle, savings, and retirement. The result of this equation is broken. Here are the problems.

eschneider 3y ago

Many years ago when I was working as a consulting engineer, I had two almost fulltime (30+ hours a week) clients going at the same time. In person. It was manageable because the sites were walking distance apart, but everyone got the hours that they were billed and everyone's work got done. Honestly, if you're fully remote and don't have any commute, that sort of thing is quite doable if that's how you want to spend your time.

voisin 3y ago

These articles are what cause managers to push for RTO.

greatgib 3y ago
It's businessinsider, so I easily guess that the story might be made up just for this purpose!

karaterobot 3y ago

> But I think the bosses of the world are threatened by OE for a deeper reason — one that goes beyond the numbers. There's something radical that happens to a worker's psychology when they have multiple jobs. If your company is putting a roof over your head, it's hard not to fall into a hustle-culture mentality at work, doing whatever it takes to satisfy your boss... But because the overemployed are no longer wholly dependent on any one employer, each job starts to look a little more disposable — which, if we're being honest, is precisely how many CEOs view their employees. Interesting take. Having multiple jobs makes each one disposable, leveling the ordinary, tilted relationship between companies and workers, in which the company treats employees as fungible and the employee has to take it. In that sense it seems more honest and equitable to me than the jobs I've had. For me, when I don't have enough work to fill a day, my reaction is not "gosh, I'd better find more work," it's "I'll go read a book, or work on a project". I'm financially secure, with no family to support. I can't imagine wanting to work more in exchange for more money, and if I get laid off I've got savings to cover it. I have no issue with what these people are doing, but I doubt I'd ever join them.

charles_f 3y ago

> The company was dumping him into the worst job market since the Great Depression. What? The period of the pandemic was when every software company was hiring like their lives depended on it

bluedino 3y ago

I knew a guy that had only one job, but he never actually did it. It would take 3-6 months to get fired and then he'd just get another job and peace out for a few months. I think he worked at one place for almost 8 months and then got laid off. After on-boarding he'd just lay low and maybe answer emails once a week. Beats "working" 3 or 4 jobs and spending over 40 hours a week doing so.

otteromkram 3y ago
If he never did the job, what did he say during subsequent interviews when asked about all the short stints?
- z7 3y ago
  You're assuming that this person submits a truthful resume.

b5n 3y ago

I'm aghast! Everyone must RTO now! We're laying off 20%, and bonuses (if any) will now be paid in Amazon gift cards. We stand together in these difficult times. Sincerely, -CEO of V -Board member of W -Board member of Y -Director of dishonest charitable foundation Z *Reminder, I'll be out of the country 11/17 - 1/15, taking the entirety of our extended family to Bali. Love, peace, and prosperity to all!

Palmik 3y ago

Companies try to optimize profit for their shareholders, which includes paying as little as the workers will bear (or less, as in some cases people need to work to survive). Similarly, I think people have the right to optimize their time and income. Of course, it can be made illegal through your employment contract. So just like big corporations, you need to include the possibility of a lawsuit and a fine into your expected outcome calculations. Having been both an IC and a manager at one of the FAANGs, it's not unimaginable to me that there will be people who can pull off two jobs and still get more done than average. Personally, I'm not sure whether it's an optimal strategy. You might be better off getting promoted really fast, if you feel you have the opportunity. But I won't judge.

tzs 3y ago

For workers who are producing copyrightable output if there is any overlap between the types of things they are doing for simultaneous employers there could be questions about who owns the copyrights. E.g., if you wrote very similar web code for both Meta and Tinder and one of them noticed and sued the other for copyright infringement things could get awkward.

tennisflyi 3y ago

I can’t even get one. Lmao

yetanother12345 3y ago

> three full time jobs... The math does not add up. One full time job is 8 hours per day (added: often more, as this is in IT). 3 x 8 = 24. There are no more than 24 hours in a day. This leaves no time for rest, eating, etc...

jacknews 3y ago

"In exchange for a salary, they promised not to work for anyone else." Is that legal? It's certainly not 'the market' at work, or working well, but simply corporations monopolizing peoples productive hours, even those not actually part of the job, with an 'exclusive contract'. 'Employment' is a bit of a racket IMHO, so any way of getting out from under the thumb should be encouraged.

profmumbles 3y ago

Come on people - "loyalty" to "the company? what doesthat get you? A lousy raise that got wiped out by inflation. Unmet promises of a promotion. Layoffs at the first sign of turmoil, with no warning. "loyalty" is a two-way street. Once I worked for a "huge company", where I had gotten 4 patents, increased revenue, added value, started & led a new global team, taught the hard stuff to more junior members, great reviews, blah blah blah. Then I got laid off. Found another job pretty quick. couple months later the "huge company" realized they screwed up and tried to "rehire" several of us back. To a man, we all said: "Why should I even want to work for a place that fired me?" So don't talk to me about "Loyalty". BTW, doing your day job from 9-5, then doing outside "contract work", "consulting work" or independant stuff like running a PC storefront or Web design has been going on forever ... nothing new here, move along, move along...