4 ms·

Here's an idea: Compensate any on-call work received during off hours at 10X the normal hourly rate. E.g., if my salary is $150K per year, then my hourly pay

Here's an idea: Compensate any on-call work received during off hours at 10X the normal hourly rate. E.g., if my salary is $150K per year, then my hourly pay rate is about $75 per hour, so compensate my on call work at a rate of $750 per hour. Thus if I get a call at 10pm, log in to my laptop and work for 30 minutes to resolve the issue to a satisfactory level, then I pocket $375. That puts a financial incentive on companies to structure their on call protocols so that only the most important calls are handled. And I can envision variations on this theme. Different sorts of on-call disasters could offer bids for how much they're worth to fix based on some automated rubrick, and anyone on the ENG team could pick these up on a first-come, first-serve basis. Or various combinations of the above for a guaranteed backup person. But the companies should offer enough incentive to make it worthwhile. And this is in the companies' own best interest. To maintain a workforce that can think clearly during the normal work, to have a good reputation in the industry, to get good reviews on Glassdoor, etc.

mortar 2y ago
Good suggestion and I can see the benefit for honest people, but unfortunately it’s as equally a system for financial abuse for others - sometimes enough to prevent people fixing things during their regular hours just to benefit at other times. A good counter balance to this might be to offer even more compensation for no incidents, or otherwise well handled incidents that go on to squash types of that incident now and into the future.
- alwa 2y ago
  If I’m rewarded for no incidents, doesn’t that mean I’m punished for there being incidents?
  - mortar 2y ago
    Not necessarily, but agree that bad managers or organisations have a tedency to do this. I guess the ultimate goal is to keep everyone happy right? Everyone has different ideals, you can probably assume the business wants everything to work by spending as little as possible, employees want to be paid as much as possible while enjoying their job. Striking that balance is always a challenge.
spongebobstoes 2y ago
This makes it in the employee's interest to obfuscate and extend any remediation, to get paid more.
- ergl 2y ago
  Having overtime pay that is a multiple of regular hourly rate is mandatory is many countries in Europe. Are you saying that European software tends to be more obfuscated? (answer: it is not).
  - ninalanyon 2y ago
    Employees are also subject to the Working Time Directive in EU countries which sets limits to the amount of overtime that is permitted in a week and in a month. Unfortunately in most countries it's full of loop holes.
- CJefferson 2y ago
  That’s true for any hourly paid job. Employers can choose to fire those who don’t work efficiently enough. What they can’t do is not pay people for hours worked —and with tech it’s easy for them to tell how long you are logged in for, to avoid them underpaying you.
- saagarjha 2y ago
  It is also in my interest to skip spotting bugs during code review so I can look like a genius when I fix them when they cause issues in production. Of course I don't do that because this is incredibly stupid and I have better ways to spend my time.
  - spongebobstoes 2y ago
    10x pay is significant. Personally, I would remediate asap even with $1500/hour on the line. I do have ethical standards. But would I be as motivated to stop the root cause of the recurring issues that keeps giving me an extra $3k every shift? Well, I probably would, but my coworkers already need to be goaded into fixing root causes, and they're not getting paid extra! In general, I think conflicts of interest must be handled carefully, and ideally avoided. Paying 10x wages when incidents happen is a clear conflict of interest.
prawn 2y ago
Wouldn't that incentivise staff to take longer to fix issues? Once you've been interrupted, you might as well turn 30 minutes into 60 minutes, etc.
- dmckeon 2y ago
  Have a minimum of say, 60 minutes, and if that is exceeded, the issue gets escalated or deferred. If deferred, presumably to the next day shift, the cost is limited. If escalated, the second person must also defend the time spent. If management still doesn't trust their workers to be honest, then the company has other issues that tweaking on-call will not solve.
- cratermoon 2y ago
  The article mentions exactly that excuse: > If on-call engineers were to receive compensation for each incident they resolved, it would incentivize them to intentionally build systems that fail so they could increase their pay by increasing their on-call load.” My guy, that is sabotage and fraud. You are hypothesizing a scenario where your subordinates are committing actual crimes. If somebody is doing criminal acts at work, fire their ass! Not to mention that anybody who deliberately self-inflicts on-call load is a goddamn idiot and should be sacked just on that basis alone.
  - wat10000 2y ago
    Deliberately breaking the system is different from taking your sweet time fixing an issue.
    - saagarjha 2y ago
      If you are the person who consistently takes 10x longer than everyone else to fix issues, then someone has a conversation with you. It's not that hard.
    - cratermoon 2y ago
      It's a matter of degree. Sabotage doesn't always mean instant breakage. In "The Simple Sabotage Field Manual" we learn to slow down the organization by things like "Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible", "Work slowly. Think out ways to increase the number of movements necessary on your job.", and "Do your work poorly and blame it on bad tools, machinery, or equipment."
hinkley 2y ago
Some long haul truckers have a relatively workable pay scale. If it wasn’t for how far they expect you to drive in 24 hours, it might be considered good. The general shape of it at least makes sense. You get paid when you’re on the road. More if you’re driving than if you’re parked, and more if you drive for more than your 40 hours a week.

mortar 2y ago

Good suggestion and I can see the benefit for honest people, but unfortunately it’s as equally a system for financial abuse for others - sometimes enough to prevent people fixing things during their regular hours just to benefit at other times. A good counter balance to this might be to offer even more compensation for no incidents, or otherwise well handled incidents that go on to squash types of that incident now and into the future.

alwa 2y ago
If I’m rewarded for no incidents, doesn’t that mean I’m punished for there being incidents?
- mortar 2y ago
  Not necessarily, but agree that bad managers or organisations have a tedency to do this. I guess the ultimate goal is to keep everyone happy right? Everyone has different ideals, you can probably assume the business wants everything to work by spending as little as possible, employees want to be paid as much as possible while enjoying their job. Striking that balance is always a challenge.

spongebobstoes 2y ago

This makes it in the employee's interest to obfuscate and extend any remediation, to get paid more.

ergl 2y ago
Having overtime pay that is a multiple of regular hourly rate is mandatory is many countries in Europe. Are you saying that European software tends to be more obfuscated? (answer: it is not).
- ninalanyon 2y ago
  Employees are also subject to the Working Time Directive in EU countries which sets limits to the amount of overtime that is permitted in a week and in a month. Unfortunately in most countries it's full of loop holes.
CJefferson 2y ago
That’s true for any hourly paid job. Employers can choose to fire those who don’t work efficiently enough. What they can’t do is not pay people for hours worked —and with tech it’s easy for them to tell how long you are logged in for, to avoid them underpaying you.
saagarjha 2y ago
It is also in my interest to skip spotting bugs during code review so I can look like a genius when I fix them when they cause issues in production. Of course I don't do that because this is incredibly stupid and I have better ways to spend my time.
- spongebobstoes 2y ago
  10x pay is significant. Personally, I would remediate asap even with $1500/hour on the line. I do have ethical standards. But would I be as motivated to stop the root cause of the recurring issues that keeps giving me an extra $3k every shift? Well, I probably would, but my coworkers already need to be goaded into fixing root causes, and they're not getting paid extra! In general, I think conflicts of interest must be handled carefully, and ideally avoided. Paying 10x wages when incidents happen is a clear conflict of interest.

prawn 2y ago

Wouldn't that incentivise staff to take longer to fix issues? Once you've been interrupted, you might as well turn 30 minutes into 60 minutes, etc.

dmckeon 2y ago
Have a minimum of say, 60 minutes, and if that is exceeded, the issue gets escalated or deferred. If deferred, presumably to the next day shift, the cost is limited. If escalated, the second person must also defend the time spent. If management still doesn't trust their workers to be honest, then the company has other issues that tweaking on-call will not solve.
cratermoon 2y ago
The article mentions exactly that excuse: > If on-call engineers were to receive compensation for each incident they resolved, it would incentivize them to intentionally build systems that fail so they could increase their pay by increasing their on-call load.” My guy, that is sabotage and fraud. You are hypothesizing a scenario where your subordinates are committing actual crimes. If somebody is doing criminal acts at work, fire their ass! Not to mention that anybody who deliberately self-inflicts on-call load is a goddamn idiot and should be sacked just on that basis alone.
- wat10000 2y ago
  Deliberately breaking the system is different from taking your sweet time fixing an issue.
  - saagarjha 2y ago
    If you are the person who consistently takes 10x longer than everyone else to fix issues, then someone has a conversation with you. It's not that hard.
  - cratermoon 2y ago
    It's a matter of degree. Sabotage doesn't always mean instant breakage. In "The Simple Sabotage Field Manual" we learn to slow down the organization by things like "Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible", "Work slowly. Think out ways to increase the number of movements necessary on your job.", and "Do your work poorly and blame it on bad tools, machinery, or equipment."

hinkley 2y ago

Some long haul truckers have a relatively workable pay scale. If it wasn’t for how far they expect you to drive in 24 hours, it might be considered good. The general shape of it at least makes sense. You get paid when you’re on the road. More if you’re driving than if you’re parked, and more if you drive for more than your 40 hours a week.