|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:Full contribution to 401k crew what what. Any interview I go to I make it clear up front that my kid's health issues come first. If daycare or my wife calls, I'm out the door. Your emergency no longer matters. So far I have not run into any issues. I did interview with a manager that described his job as "our customers come first, my team comes second and my family comes third". I turned down their offer.
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:Full contribution to 401k crew what what. Someone just linked this article the other day. Seems relevant. https://hbr.org/2015/04/why-some-men-pretend-to-work-80-hour-weeks
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
Daylen Drazzi posted:By putting money into a retirement account in your 20s each dollar invested will earn you $16 in interest over 40 years. By waiting until you are in your 30s that one dollar will earn you $8 in interest over 30 years. Start in your 40s and you're only looking at $4 in interest over 20 years. Do yourself a favor and sock away as much as you can while you're young, and never touch that money until you're ready to retire. Also the fact that the government is going to collect 20-45% of that money anyway if you don't invest it. Tax sheltered savings accounts are the best. e: The long and short of it that most of our tax code is designed to benefit the upper middle class and the rich (and not in a goons posting psydude fucked around with this message at 02:39 on May 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Docjowles posted:Someone just linked this article the other day. Seems relevant. https://hbr.org/2015/04/why-some-men-pretend-to-work-80-hour-weeks On another note, Harvard Business Review is a very impressive publication. The article quality has been great and incredibly consistent. This is a huge gamble, but could you use a training seminar as a tax deduction? If you went to a week-long CCNA/MCSA/RHCSA bootcamp for $5k? Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 03:23 on May 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 03:12
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:Full contribution to 401k crew what what. Sometimes I'll be at the office late working on something, talking through stuff with others, or whatever else because I enjoy it. But, more often, I leave between 5 and 6 to go to one of several rehearsals during the week or other commitments. That's what you're losing out on by having kids - the option to do things outside of work. A single person can work 60 hours, or they can work a reasonable amount and also do things after work. It's totally their choice, and it's that choice you gave up by having a family. You should feel no obligation to work late, and you should not feel bad about not being able to due to a family. It's possible that you would instead choose to do non-work related stuff with the extra time if you didn't have a family. But you do.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:On another note, Harvard Business Review is a very impressive publication. The article quality has been great and incredibly consistent. Only if your work requires it to do your job and doesn't reimburse you. Or if you own your own business and it's professional development related to that business. I looked up those kind of things when I got my laptop for BYOD, and I was able to deduct the percentage I actually use it for work vs. how much I use it for personal usage (came out to about 30%). Work said they would validate by stating I need a computer for the job and employees have the option to purchase their own device. Proteus Jones fucked around with this message at 06:22 on May 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
One good thing about being a contractor is that nobody expects you to stay after hours unless something is on fire. If you do, you get it back in comp time. I'm kind of partial to being an IT mercenary, honestly.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
Sacred Cow posted:Any interview I go to I make it clear up front that my kid's health issues come first. If daycare or my wife calls, I'm out the door. Your emergency no longer matters. So far I have not run into any issues. I've never left in the middle of an interview, but I would have in that case.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 12:25
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:Full contribution to 401k crew what what. quote:Serious Hardware / Software Crap › Working in IT 3.0: Family can wait, servers/storage/network can not
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 12:57
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:Stupid freakin family always hurting my career and poo poo. But yeah no, you know what I mean. IT more than any job short of like "character on The West Wing" seems like a job which is given to after hours projects. Staying late with a last minute idea to re architect your environment, write some Powershell, P2V some servers, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
there is no way that'a a seriouspost from stripe
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
GOOCHY posted:One good thing about being a contractor is that nobody expects you to stay after hours unless something is on fire. If you do, you get it back in comp time. There was an odd satisfaction derived from every occasion where my shithead federal coworker was begging me to stay and help him unfuck a problem he created, and me going "lol nope"
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:there is no way that'a a seriouspost from stripe
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
psydude posted:There was an odd satisfaction derived from every occasion where my shithead federal coworker was begging me to stay and help him unfuck a problem he created, and me going "lol nope" "So you're going to approve overtime, right?" Easiest way in the world to go home on time when you're doing federal contracting.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
My rear end is out the door at 5:00 every drat day. I'm already there for 9 hours and happy to work then, and nobody is ever going to say " you stayed till 5:10 here's a raise."
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:"So you're going to approve overtime, right?" Yuuup. I'd get in trouble if I put in more than 40 hours in a week.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Bigass Moth posted:My rear end is out the door at 5:00 every drat day. I'm already there for 9 hours and happy to work then, and nobody is ever going to say " you stayed till 5:10 here's a raise." This is how I feel too, but my coworkers have no problem coming in early and staying after. One second shift guy comes in an hour early to eat lunch before his shift officially starts, but he's always working during it too.... I feel like things like that are going to make me look bad by comparison. Management acts like we need to monitor work email on our phones 24/7 too, in case an "emergency" happens. 24/7/365 support without paying to truly staff for it is the vibe I get, definitely not digging the culture of this place so far.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:Does anyone else feel like marriage and family hurts your career more in IT than in other professions? Three, four times a week I see people staying at the office late, working on this and that. And each time I'm like, welp I guess I won't be getting that experience. I mean, not really, but I'd definitely feel that way in other circumstances. Get married and have a family once you're in a relatively senior position where you're not on call and you look at those people staying in the office until 9 and think "god, I'm glad I make good money and I'm not fishing for a promotion or thrown into a project that I'm really underexperienced for", and... I guess this is how people end up in management. I still have nights/weeks where I'm really into a problem and I futz around with it at night. I never feel like I need to because I'm not under that kind of crunch. Either my marriage or my career would have suffered badly if I weren't a manwhore
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:On another note, Harvard Business Review is a very impressive publication. The article quality has been great and incredibly consistent. adorai posted:It's IT, there is no reason most work needs to be done in the office. I work a lot of extra hours, but often after 9pm when the rest of my family is asleep. Bigass Moth posted:My rear end is out the door at 5:00 every drat day. I'm already there for 9 hours and happy to work then, and nobody is ever going to say " you stayed till 5:10 here's a raise." Vulture Culture fucked around with this message at 23:42 on May 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
I'm pretty lazy, so I make a point to never work more than I have to.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
psydude posted:I'm pretty lazy, so I make a point to never work more than I have to. Yeah
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
psydude posted:I'm pretty lazy, so I make a point to never work more than I have to. Exactly this. Work intelligently, automate everything, turn off all devices at 5pm.(and cut out at 4 if possible) People who work 80/week are either too dumb to do their jobs properly or suckers.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
I can't remember the last time I worked a forty hour week.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Nearly 99.95% of people that have told me they work 60h/80h weeks are flat out lying with one my past supervisors the biggest offenders. He constantly moaned how much work he did to guilt-trip everyone into putting more hours but as network admins we knew his afternoons mostly consisted of him streaming ESPN Golf.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Working 60-80 hours a week is stupid as gently caress, social life/family/friends comes first and if you don't have a healthy balance you're doing something wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
I am at my second job where 60-80 hour weeks were needed to get the network into shape. It's just too stressful working in a dysfunctional environment.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I am at my second job where 60-80 hour weeks were needed to get the network into shape. It's just too stressful working in a dysfunctional environment. Yes, but it sounds like the goal here is to no longer have to work that much once the network is back in working order. I'm pretty fortunate to have the most flexible boss probably in history. His philosophy is that I can work whenever and wherever I want so long as I'm available for client and project meetings, can be reached during normal business hours, and get everything done on time.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Has anyone worked at an employer with stack ranking? How did you survive? Assuming you did...
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Nearly 99.95% of people that have told me they work 60h/80h weeks are flat out lying with one my past supervisors the biggest offenders. He constantly moaned how much work he did to guilt-trip everyone into putting more hours but as network admins we knew his afternoons mostly consisted of him streaming ESPN Golf. Yeah, I always wonder if those people are actually working all those hours or if they're just trying to win the "who is the most busy" pissing contest.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Nearly 99.95% of people that have told me they work 60h/80h weeks are flat out lying with one my past supervisors the biggest offenders. He constantly moaned how much work he did to guilt-trip everyone into putting more hours but as network admins we knew his afternoons mostly consisted of him streaming ESPN Golf. There's working 60/80 hours a week, and then there's being at work or online 60/80 hours a week.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
psydude posted:Yes, but it sounds like the goal here is to no longer have to work that much once the network is back in working order. Yeah, there is a big difference when there is a light at the end of the tunnel. I think that was one of the big reasons I didn't like MSP / consulting work. There's always enough work for extra hours, but its wrapping up that job and then on to the next. No chance to see the fruit of your labors.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Nearly 99.95% of people that have told me they work 60h/80h weeks are flat out lying with one my past supervisors the biggest offenders. He constantly moaned how much work he did to guilt-trip everyone into putting more hours but as network admins we knew his afternoons mostly consisted of him streaming ESPN Golf. This is the same as people who schedule endless meetings and phone calls every day and then complain they can't get any work done duhhhhhhh
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Has anyone worked at an employer with stack ranking? How did you survive? I did for almost a decade, though we didn't do stack ranking the entire time. I was a manager, and stack ranking and forced rating distributions were much of why I eventually quit.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Bigass Moth posted:This is the same as people who schedule endless meetings and phone calls every day and then complain they can't get any work done duhhhhhhh There's a special place in hell for people who schedule meetings after 2:00 PM on Fridays. Currently, there's a self-important rear end that's set up a weekly recurring meeting on Fridays at 4:00 PM. He's about to be on the wrong end of a coup by the rest of us.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 05:18
|
|
|
flosofl posted:There's a special place in hell for people who schedule meetings after 2:00 PM on Fridays.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Has anyone worked at an employer with stack ranking? How did you survive? Yep, 8 years at Dell. Stack Rank loving sucks because it creates negative incentives...like disconnecting difficult calls, so that another sucker gets stuck with it. Your position in the stack rank controlled several things, like the possibility of getting a raise (30% of the people could get raises), your schedule (so you have classes that you were committed into and paid for? gently caress YOU, not my problem) and even the chance of getting bonuses. I survived by focusing exactly on the metrics the company wanted. I was never in the top 10 but always kept myself in the top 20. I think its a really idiotic way of grading employees because you skew rewards towards a very narrow definition of good performance. A lot of very good employees got continuously shafted at review time just because their handle time was a bit too high or because their dispatch costs were too high.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
Kyth posted:I did for almost a decade, though we didn't do stack ranking the entire time. TerryLennox posted:Yep, 8 years at Dell. Stack Rank loving sucks because it creates negative incentives...like disconnecting difficult calls, so that another sucker gets stuck with it. Your position in the stack rank controlled several things, like the possibility of getting a raise (30% of the people could get raises), your schedule (so you have classes that you were committed into and paid for? gently caress YOU, not my problem) and even the chance of getting bonuses. drat. I wasn't aware Dell had stack ranking. The only ones that I've been told of are Microsoft, Amazon and Yahoo. I've been reading up on it earlier and while hard to swallow it's not necessarily all that bad and it could be beneficial for a company if they're trying to downsize or they feel there's untapped talent in the labor market. Although, I can't imagine continuously having this practice as you'd eventually cut into the high performers. Forced Ranking: Making Performance Management Work Stack Ranking: Why are Amazon, Facebook and Yahoo copying Microsoft's performance review system?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I've been reading up on it earlier and while hard to swallow it's not necessarily all that bad and it could be beneficial for a company if they're trying to downsize or they feel there's untapped talent in the labor market. Although, I can't imagine continuously having this practice as you'd eventually cut into the high performers. Intel did it too, a number of years ago(not sure if it's still in place). Had family working there; their system was basically: 4 people to a team, ratings of excellent, good, fair, poor. Manager must use each rating once. Raises, promotions, and stock options were tied directly to your rating. As in, if you got excellent, you got a bunch of stock options that quarter, if you got poor, you got far fewer. Do you see the problem? What happens if you have a team where every member knocks it out of the park one quarter? Well too loving bad, one of them is getting a "poor" because those are the rules. What if on the same quarter you have a team full of career slackers? Well, one of them gets an "excellent." Now those teams don't work in isolation, they're going to talk to each other, so now you have a top performer talking to a known slacker and getting really goddamn resentful that the compensations are essentially backwards (the employees know that the stock options and stuff are tied directly to these ratings, it's not a secret). Then there's the problem of how do you pick an excellent and a poor from a team of 4 fantastic employees? Well, if you're a manager, you probably give "excellent" to the one you like the most, or the one who is a little closer to your own political ideology, or the one who played golf with you a couple weeks ago. Maybe someone in the team accused another member of doing something against the best interests of the company; you couldn't confirm it but it's still in your mind. Even for a great manager who doesn't cultivate a sycophantic atmosphere, these things are still factors. You're right in that these systems sound like they could help a company cut their workforce. The problem as I see it is that they're going to result in the loss of many of a company's actual best people. The ones who are busy working and solving problems, rather than sucking up to middle management, the ones who are going to leave on their own if you treat them like poo poo. So yeah, if your goal if utter corporate mediocrity, by all means, I say give stack ranking a whirl. Or if you want to improve your company, figure out how to actually evaluate your skilled employees and let your lower-level managers make a case as to why they should, for instance, be allowed to keep and reward everyone on a given team even though the company is cutting its workforce by 20%.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
that sounds utterly retarded so i am completely unsurprised that companies would love it
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
I have no idea how any executive thinks that would be a viable rating scheme in a market that's actively competing for tech workers.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2015 20:32
|
|