Ask HN: How to handle a workaholic colleague?

>> I am been rated above average in the current appraisal system...But after advent of this colleague, I see everything declining...as "irresponsible"

I see this as a huge red flag. It is clearly evident that you may not be marked above average for the next appraisal. Obviously being marked as irresponsible shows that the upper level is expecting you to work like a donkey!!!

I would just start preparing for my next move.

>> Changing job would be resetting all the good will and trust that I have built here.

To this, I can say from experience, that our job is to look for the next better job. While this is a bit sarcastic maybe, but really, as we know, that companies won't think of that goodwill when the next round of letting go people comes along. And going by your description, your goodwill is because of your quality of work, so if you plan/prepare/put the efforts for the next move while you are in this job, you will really be better off.

>> I don't really want to portray my peer as bad(He is mostly nice on the face),

Most likely and I think you imply politely that he is not nice really and he understands the game being played and is playing it. You don't want to play that game, which is fair enough, but you will lose as a consequence.

So overall, just my opinion, is that now this job is no longer the right fit and moving on seems the most sensible thing to do.

In my opinion, you need to understand the difference between hard work and smart work. Software development is like an art. A person may spend 18 hours a day to create something that just works while another may spend just 8 creative hours to create a masterpiece. There are many disadvantages of being a hard worker / workaholic:

* The expectation of your manager will get elevated and if one fails to be consistent in working for long hours, it's a negative.

* One does not have much room to accommodate something else at times of need. Think of an outage, you have already worked for 18 hours and fail to deliver at that crucial time.

* It's very difficult to innovate in an insomniac state.

Remember, doing hard work is easier that smart work. It requires much more learning and thinking. But, if you are able to do it, you will be able to contribute much more.

Appraisal based on relative performance: This sounds logical. If a person contributes better to the company's goal, he/she should be appreciated for that. Think yourself being that person it should make sense.

Note: I am not taking the political aspects of your office into consideration. If your manager loves late night availability, long emails at weird hours, it is his weakness. Probably, you can be smart and automate sending 'corporate bullshit' emails at night ;)

Or just find yourself a right workplace.

I work a lot. I'm working right now (took a break to read HN). I just enjoy getting things done and it's paid off well for me. I've learned though that my ability to work many hours and my drive to do so doesn't mean I should enforce that on others, so I don't let my teammates know when I work outside of normal hours. I don't send emails at night or weekends. I don't send code reviews on nights and weekends. I try to stay invisible outside of normal work hours to avoid creating an environment where people feel like they must work as much as I do. I realize that also means it might look like I produce a lot more code during my 40~ hours, but I think that's better than the team receiving non-stop emails and code reviews from me.

I figured I'd work hard while I have any bit of youth and energy left and relax later in life.

>Appraisal based on relative performance: This sounds logical.

I don't think it does. People should be rewarded based on the absolute value they bring to the company, not on their relative ranking.

For example, relative ranking means that you always want to work with the worst possible teams (so you are relatively the best) not the best. It also means that politics becomes more important than ability.