6 ms·

> Just give me some JIRA ticket and let me read books while I get my job done in 1-2 hours a day. Aren't we all (normal and decent people) doing this already?

• switchbak 3y ago
  No. Many of us are working hard, trying to get real work done. And spending 20-40 mins a day checking Hacker News :) Seriously though, don’t you feel bad by not pulling your weight? Someone has to get your work done.
  • autoexecbat 3y ago
    > Someone has to get your work done. That's often the problem, in that it doesn't truly matter if the work got done
    • icedchai 3y ago
      There's a ton of "fake work" in corporate america. This is basically busy work that isn't used by any real customer, external or internal. That work doesn't need to be done, but shows up because someone committed to it for political reasons (or because they were clueless.) Someone needs a box checked, but didn't check if the box needed to be there in the first place.
      • autoexecbat 3y ago
        It doesn't even need to be fake/busy work. It might just not be quite what's needed by the business or customer and see little/no use.
        • icedchai 3y ago
          True, though often that sort of work "feels" different from the more traditional fake work. It's at least built with the intent / belief that a customer will actually use it.
      • therealdrag0 3y ago
        And a lot of people can question these decisions and make and impact if they cared enough. I get tired of people, especially those with “senior” in their title complaining “they’re doing it wrong”, instead of participating in the planning and feedback and escalation process.
        • icedchai 3y ago
          Do you ask them to participate? Many companies don't, because they don't want anyone but yes-men that will agree to the plans around.
  • kjkjadksj 3y ago
    Its not your work unless you own the company
    • Seb-C 3y ago
      "your work" means "your responsibility" or "your part of the deal" here, not "you get legal ownership of the project". The premise of a working contract being that you have to work in exchange for a salary...
    • WalterBright 3y ago
      Your work is what you agreed to in exchange for your salary.
      • switchbak 2y ago
        Exactly. We're adults making fair exchanges for compensation (assuming you've entered into a fair agreement). There's so many angsty takes in this thread, I'm actually pretty shocked. Working "hard" is an investment in yourself. You don't always have to be soley running on the SCRUM treadmill - you can learn other things that are valuable to the business. Ideally you'll also be smart and chose wisely for things that set you up better career-wise too. But the idea that one would treat their employer as some kind of chump that deserves the minimal possible output they can extract from you? That sounds like a great way to pigeonhole yourself into a lacklustre and short career. Not to mention a really unfulfilling life. You spend so much time at work, why not try to find work you enjoy for an employer that isn't crap? I get that many jobs are soulless - but we're still in the drivers seat and we typically have a lot of choices (especially these days).
    • linhns 3y ago
      Then there will be no company
  • the_cat_kittles 3y ago
    this mindset only makes sense when the mission of the company is noble and appreciated by the greater community. otherwise you are a fool for having this attitude
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  • ammasant 3y ago
    You falsely assume the only 'work' to be done is that immediately aligned with sprint velocity rather than all that done to make someone a valuable contributor in the first place (what your employer is actually paying for). The person who spends ~2 hours a day 'working' and the rest of their day on research, self-education, or more theoretical domains will become exponentially more valuable over time compared the most endurant hamster wheel runner as a function of qualitatively superior capabilities. Smart engineers realize this growth curve and alter their trajectory, benefitting both themselves and their employer long-term.
  • marssaxman 3y ago
    > Someone has to get your work done. What makes it "my work"? That is for management to decide, is it not?
  • K0balt 3y ago
    You get the work done that the position requires. If you can do that in a couple of hours, I see no incentive whatsoever for most employees to increase productivity beyond the requirement for the position plus maybe some minor stuff that won’t be enough to encourage additional responsibilities. If they want more than that, employers should pay significantly more than their competitors for those services, or significant stock bonuses tied to departmental efficiency, or some other add-on compensation that incentivises increased productivity.
    • therealdrag0 3y ago
      A lot of promotion and salary increases comes from demonstrating your growing and operating towards the next level. Doing the minimum isn’t doing yourself any favors if you have any aspirations at all. That’s fine for those who knowingly make that decision, but there are consequences.
      • gunsle 3y ago
        This simply isn’t the case in the vast majority of companies, and honestly just seems kind of naive. Corporate America is a game of politics. Yeah working hard always looks good, but the guy who gets the promotion is the guy your boss plays golf with, not the guy who works 60 hours a week out of some idealistic obligation.
        • therealdrag0 3y ago
          I’m skeptical of the “vast amount”. But first I’m not suggesting 60 hours I have never worked a 60 in my life. But a solid 30-45 goes a long way, which shouldn’t be radical but some people here are advocating for 5-10 hour weeks… There maybe a certain type of job (“middle management”?) where “golf” gives you an edge, but for companies with engineering tracks to the top, you need to demonstrate performance and be able to deliver and show impact. Some of that takes “politics” but you also can’t play politics in 5-10 hours either.
      • K0balt 3y ago
        I should have added that my perspective is one of a founder, not an employee. It is just my observation of behaviour, not a moral position.
  • petepete 3y ago
    20-40 mins an hour here chief.
  • OkayPhysicist 3y ago
    You're applying emotion to the cold calculus of economics. I'm supplying an acceptable amount of labor to my boss (evident by the fact that my boss hasn't fired/complained to me) in exchange for an acceptable amount of money (evident by the fact that I haven't quit). We're all on salary. Unless whatever I'm working on is going to boost my options enough to make it worth my while (it won't), there's no reason to break my back.
    • gunsle 3y ago
      Exactly. If my boss is happy with my output, and work is still getting done on time, why does it matter how many hours I actually work? I don’t get paid more for going above and beyond. The only reward for busting your ass in corporate America is more work. It’s a depressing reality but it’s the truth. Why should I bust my ass, just to get an extra percentage point on my yearly raise? I can work 30 hours a week and get 4%, or 60 hours and get 5%. The math just doesn’t make sense unless you’re working for a company you either founded, have significant equity in, or there’s some kind of profit sharing mechanism that actually results in a substantial amount of money.
• Seb-C 3y ago
  As someone who cares about his work, has strong professional ethics and wisely chooses his employers to not end-up in such environments, no I don't. The worst places for me are precisely those where you can get by with 1~2h of work a day because no one cares and the company's culture does not value the time and skills of his workers.
  • rybosworld 3y ago
    > wisely chooses his employers to not end-up in such environments This is a pretty common attitude. That is, "I'm able to pick better workplaces than you are". It implies you have control over the other people that work at the company. And unless you're the CEO, you don't. You cannot with any certainty tell what a work environment is like in the interview stage. You can job hop a half dozen times until you find a good fit. And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. But framing it as: "I pick better work environments than you" is an attitude I'd really like to see disappear. It ignores just how much of a role luck plays.
    • beeboobaa3 3y ago
      You seem to be projecting a lot of insecurities. Some people prefer not to work in such an environment, and that is okay. Those people just switch jobs until they're satisfied, there is no "controlling other people" or whatever nonsense you dreamed up.
      • rybosworld 3y ago
        > You seem to be projecting a lot of insecurities. Interesting counter argument. > Those people just switch jobs until they're satisfied, there is no "controlling other people" This is exactly what I said in my comment, if you take the time to read it.
        • beeboobaa3 3y ago
          Yes, how did you go from > wisely chooses his employers to not end-up in such environments to > implies you have control over the other people that work at the company instead of just assuming they'll just leave?
• creesch 3y ago
  Ignoring the amount of time spend working for a moment. I would be miserable if all I got to do during that time was work on Jira tickets others created.
  • leetrout 3y ago
    > I would be miserable if all I got to do during that time was work on Jira tickets others created. I've seen a few places turn into "feature factories" where this is the day-to-day.
• mlhpdx 3y ago
  No, definitely not.
• WalterBright 3y ago
  > Aren't we all (normal and decent people) doing this already? I've known many such in my career. They weren't fooling anybody. Everybody knew who they were. When they'd get laid off or were passed over for a raise they were always baffled and outraged.
  • AlexandrB 3y ago
    Uh huh. The more common case is they get promotion and raises like everyone else while sometimes producing -ve value. Even if there's a comeuppance one day, this can go on for years before there are any consequences.
  • ryandrake 3y ago
    I think this highly depends on the manager. Some know (Manager A), and either work to correct it, or get their ducks in a row to fire them. Plenty of managers, though, (Manager B) have no idea what a reasonable amount of work output is, and can be easily convinced that what took 1-2 hours to do constituted an entire 40 hour week. You get some developer who's good at "managing upward" and they'll bullshit/charm and walk all over that manager. Often these managers are themselves "managing upward" to their directors, and so on up the chain, resulting in an entire reporting line successfully doing nothing. It doesn't matter that the slacker's peers know exactly what is going on. They're too busy doing their own work, and if they complain about it to Manager B, they won't be believed.
    • WalterBright 3y ago
      I've been a manager and an employee and I've talked to many managers. They know who the slackers are, but there can be reasons why they take no action. When an opportunity arises to get rid of them, they do.
      • icedchai 3y ago
        Yes. I've been specifically told that they are unable or unwilling to do anything about the slackers, but "understand the situation."
• heurist 3y ago
  I've never felt secure enough to check out like this, even when my position was effectively locked in. I always want to improve and attain something bigger, so I look for problems beyond my scope when the work isn't coming to me. I feel comfort thinking I know how to take an idea through the full execution cycle due to my practice in seeking and solving problems. But it is hard for me to relax and let go.
• twojobsoneboss 3y ago
  If you’re in a team lead or staff (most places) kind of position you can’t…
• therealdrag0 3y ago
  No. I feel ownership and collaboration over what my team does. We prioritize, design, review, and build together (not endorsing a methodology, just a culture). It has been this way since I was a junior engineer. I want to understand and solve problems. I want to learn and build bigger and better tithings. Punching in premade tickets for 2 hours a day sounds like you’re already dead.