4 ms·

They make you do 3 weeks of work in the span of 1 week. Getting the work done is a hard criteria, so even if you only end up getting 2.5 weeks of work done, the

They make you do 3 weeks of work in the span of 1 week. Getting the work done is a hard criteria, so even if you only end up getting 2.5 weeks of work done, the company is still WAY ahead, and you've just spent your vacation time and the company spent a tiny amount of money. It would be one thing if they were testing you with work they've already done (build a module from scratch similar to what we did), but I have a feeling they're taking mostly completed stuff from the failures and using it in production. This is pretty much zero risk to the employer because at worse, they're just spending cash as if they were hiring a (more expensive) contractor I think they're interested in actually hiring people, but it's a nice side effect that they get some low-cost work done (the article doesn't mention the pay, but I doubt they are compensating you what you make at your current position + intangibles for taking your vacation to work there). Another metric to look at would be whether this company is actually investing in their employees (paid training, conferences, new productivity tools, etc.). The trial period, supposed workload, and the hard criteria that you MUST complete the work is a huge red flag. I guess it's a bit of cash in pocket for the unemployed though.

toomuchtodo 12y ago
Slightly offtopic: If you can abuse the working populace with this (due to economic conditions), its time for a basic income.
- Afforess 12y ago
  Those two ideas are not even closely related.
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    Perhaps I made a leap, as its a long discussion that could be had. Would an employer be able to squeeze 3 weeks of work out of a potential candidate on their vacation unless the employee had no other choice? That to me is not how a labor market should function in a first-world country. edit: /u/dismal2 said it much better
  - dismal2 12y ago
    they are in the sense that with the way things are going, more and more risk, uncertainty, and costs are offloaded from employers to labor without ever giving anything in return
- FLUX-YOU 12y ago
  Slightly drunk offtopic: I'd rather just nuke my passport and head to some other less-insane country than try to fight for basic income in this country. Fans of basic income have some very optimistic hopes.
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    Social security is a essentially an age-tested basic income. With enough software, robotics, and clean energy, its easily done (from a technical perspective). Keywords for more research: "post scarcity", "historical productivity to wages"
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      > Social security is a essentially an age-tested basic income. No, its not. Benefit eligibility is driven primarily by previous contributions (either yours or, if you are relying on survivors benefits, someone else's), with various qualifying events. Its not (even leaving out the "age test") anything like BI, except in the extremely distant way any way that the government gives you money is "like" BI.
      - toomuchtodo 12y ago
        Can you exhaust your social security? Is it an account? Or is it an entitlement that you have to qualify for (credits over a number of years) and then can continue to draw until death?
        dragonwriter 12y ago
        > Can you exhaust your social security? No, no more than you can exhaust a purchased annuity. Which is also not like an age-tested BI. > Or is it an entitlement that you have to qualify for (credits over a number of years) and then can continue to draw until death? Right, so, exactly not like BI, which is equal and unconditional (even excluding consideration of the influence of age, since its specifically based on the amount of contributions, adjusted by the the wage index from the time they were earned, and then adjusted by the CPI from the time benefits started being drawn. In a sense, its more of a retrospective reverse-means-tested benefit program, which makes it about as far from BI as you can be and still be a government benefit program at all.

toomuchtodo 12y ago

Slightly offtopic: If you can abuse the working populace with this (due to economic conditions), its time for a basic income.

Afforess 12y ago
Those two ideas are not even closely related.
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  Perhaps I made a leap, as its a long discussion that could be had. Would an employer be able to squeeze 3 weeks of work out of a potential candidate on their vacation unless the employee had no other choice? That to me is not how a labor market should function in a first-world country. edit: /u/dismal2 said it much better
- dismal2 12y ago
  they are in the sense that with the way things are going, more and more risk, uncertainty, and costs are offloaded from employers to labor without ever giving anything in return
FLUX-YOU 12y ago
Slightly drunk offtopic: I'd rather just nuke my passport and head to some other less-insane country than try to fight for basic income in this country. Fans of basic income have some very optimistic hopes.
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  Social security is a essentially an age-tested basic income. With enough software, robotics, and clean energy, its easily done (from a technical perspective). Keywords for more research: "post scarcity", "historical productivity to wages"
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > Social security is a essentially an age-tested basic income. No, its not. Benefit eligibility is driven primarily by previous contributions (either yours or, if you are relying on survivors benefits, someone else's), with various qualifying events. Its not (even leaving out the "age test") anything like BI, except in the extremely distant way any way that the government gives you money is "like" BI.
    - toomuchtodo 12y ago
      Can you exhaust your social security? Is it an account? Or is it an entitlement that you have to qualify for (credits over a number of years) and then can continue to draw until death?
      - dragonwriter 12y ago
        > Can you exhaust your social security? No, no more than you can exhaust a purchased annuity. Which is also not like an age-tested BI. > Or is it an entitlement that you have to qualify for (credits over a number of years) and then can continue to draw until death? Right, so, exactly not like BI, which is equal and unconditional (even excluding consideration of the influence of age, since its specifically based on the amount of contributions, adjusted by the the wage index from the time they were earned, and then adjusted by the CPI from the time benefits started being drawn. In a sense, its more of a retrospective reverse-means-tested benefit program, which makes it about as far from BI as you can be and still be a government benefit program at all.