Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

tribunemag.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 232 posts

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#201

Post by ProZsolt »

Viliam1234 wrote: post #181
jodrellblank wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terence McKenna used to remind people that tea and coffee benefit an employer more than an employee - it's not a break to rest, it's an employer encouraged chemical stimulant to make you work harder. As an employee, you're hyped to work harder - which isn't necessarily a benefit to you at all. That companies have then reframed it as an "employee perk" is a very slick PR move.

If the company puts too much emphasis on the free coffee they provide, it's a red flag. It means you will need it.

My previous company put emphasis on the free coffee, but it was a pretty chill place to work at.

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#202

Post by PeterisP »

geofft wrote: post #109
shoto_io wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came here to say exactly that. There is pressure everywhere. CEOs are scared of boards. Boards are scared of shareholders. It's just not that visible because there is no tool like "OfficeVibe" showing this transparently. Sure, they get paid well. So you could argue that they have to take the pressure.

Stop having boards and shareholders then. Or, at least tell them, our growth target this year is 2%, our growth max is 10%, if we grow more than that I'm concerned about the pressure on my employees and my goal is to have a great and sustainable place to work and not to fill the universe with paperclips, and I'm going to start laying off sales and marketing if we're taking on more commitments than we can handle. We'r…

I don't understand what the target audience of your suggestion is - it's certainly not something CEOs, managers or employees can do.

I mean, there's a strict hierarchy there of who answers to whom and who gets to choose who to work with.

If the CEO tells the board "our growth target this year is 2%, our growth max is 10%, if we grow more than that I'm concerned about the pressure on my employees and my goal is to have a great and sustainable place to work and not to fill the universe with paperclips" then the board is likely to answer "it seems that our goals are not aligned, you'll be replaced with someone who does not share your concerns". If the board tells something like that to shareholders, then there's going to be a shareholders' meeting to replace the board.

"We're not letting you into the board if you disagree with it" - who's "we"? CEO's certainly can't say that unless they happen to be majority shareholders since e.g. founding the company; CEOs don't get to veto who comes on board, the board gets to choose who will be appointed CEO.

"you'd better price this assumption into the stock if you want to hold stock." - those who bought the stock get to set the rules including changing most company bylaws, so it's a legitimate tactic to buy stock in a company that's focused on being a great workplace instead of growth (i.e. the stock is likely to be cheap due "pricing in that assumption"), then destroy that assumption and replace the management to focus on growth, and sell the (now more expensive) stock. And it's very likely to happen since there are organizations whose whole business is to identify such opportunities and execute on them.

You don't have to grow forever just because you're a company, you're required to try to grow forever because the company shareholders want to. Companies can register as a public benefit corporation iff shareholders choose to do so, it's certainly not a way for someone to stop having shareholders.

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#203

Post by reader_mode »

iamacyborg wrote: post #44
reader_mode wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think developer salaries outpaced inflation by a decent margin.

In SV, sure, but I don't think that holds true in other parts of the world, even in major cities like London.

So I just did a quick google on London and I don't know if I'm missing something but it seems like senior software developer salary is less than the avarage salary (senior developer 77,500, avarage is 86,400). On glass door I see 50-70k GBP for senior developers.

This sounds horrible, but I have a feeling London/Wester Europe is unique in this regard, I can make that kind of money remoting from Croatia.

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#204

Post by mronetwo »

krzrak wrote: post #18
mronetwo wrote: post #2

There is an interesting discussion here about responsibility. An employee is obviously responsible for his own well being but it seems that companies aren't putting in much work. A good example is working from home: now it's the employees responsibility to find a good environment for working. The company now has several responsibilities less... I couldn't care less for that chair or desk that the company offers. Work…

> I couldn't care less for that chair or desk that the company offers. Work environment isn't about where I put my butt and my computer. Lucky you :) Seems you didn't work on uncomfortable chair or on the kitchen table with kids running and screaming around. For me such basic stuff is very high on the list of priorities regarding work environment.

Well what I'm trying to say is: there is more to it. Chair and desk is just a tip of the iceberg. Could phrase it in a better way.

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#205

Post by pdimitar »

belval wrote: post #185
telmo wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but the typical CEO/COO does not have to worry about their family becoming homeless if they lose their job. Let us not be disingenuous about the stakes here.

Employees targeted by workplace wellbeing efforts are employees that need to be retained, almost always because of limited availability (see software). Let's no kid ourselves into thinking that in 2021 a software engineer will go homeless if they lose their job.

That, my friend, is called a privilege and a filter bubble.

I envy you how you have no idea how many devs are almost literal slaves. Not me, but I know plenty.

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#206

Post by pdimitar »

ganzuul wrote: post #153
shoto_io wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it is! I wouldn't even know how to measure the responsibility of a shareholder. What if I own just 1 stock of Apple? Am I then liable? I don't get it

Sure you are liable because you can sell at any time. You voted with your money to approve all that Apple has done. You don't approve a measure of it; that would be absurd. If you missed a shareholder meeting where they discussed doing something terrible, you are liable. As a shareholder you have the ultimate responsibility for the company because no one is there to tell you otherwise. You don't abolish yourself of y…

Not sure where your assumptions about HN are coming from but there's plenty of us around here who don't know the dynamics of being a shareholder simply because we are almost always at the bottom of the food chain.

Or do you think HN is an exclusive forum for actual business owners and shareholders?

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#207

Post by geofft »

PeterisP wrote: post #202
geofft wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop having boards and shareholders then. Or, at least tell them, our growth target this year is 2%, our growth max is 10%, if we grow more than that I'm concerned about the pressure on my employees and my goal is to have a great and sustainable place to work and not to fill the universe with paperclips, and I'm going to start laying off sales and marketing if we're taking on more commitments than we can handle. We'r…

I don't understand what the target audience of your suggestion is - it's certainly not something CEOs, managers or employees can do. I mean, there's a strict hierarchy there of who answers to whom and who gets to choose who to work with. If the CEO tells the board "our growth target this year is 2%, our growth max is 10%, if we grow more than that I'm concerned about the pressure on my employees and my goal is to hav…

The target audience of my suggestion is founders who don't yet have board members or CEOs who currently have like-minded board members, and who don't currently have public ownership.

You're right, once you've given up ownership to the public, it's a little too late for the current legal entity. But it's not too late to quit your job and start a new workplace.

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#208

Post by belval »

pdimitar wrote: post #205
belval wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Employees targeted by workplace wellbeing efforts are employees that need to be retained, almost always because of limited availability (see software). Let's no kid ourselves into thinking that in 2021 a software engineer will go homeless if they lose their job.

That, my friend, is called a privilege and a filter bubble. I envy you how you have no idea how many devs are almost literal slaves. Not me, but I know plenty.

That statement does not make sense, if the devs you are referring to have no work mobility why are their employers even doing "workplace wellbeing"?

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#209

Post by pdimitar »

belval wrote: post #208
pdimitar wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That, my friend, is called a privilege and a filter bubble. I envy you how you have no idea how many devs are almost literal slaves. Not me, but I know plenty.

That statement does not make sense, if the devs you are referring to have no work mobility why are their employers even doing "workplace wellbeing"?

To deflect responsibility and employee resentment to other people. They don't care whether their almost-slaves are happy at the workplace but they want to maintain the status quo because even for them, losing devs and retraining new ones is costly.

Re: Workplace Wellbeing Is a Scam?

#210

Post by PeterisP »

geofft wrote: post #207
PeterisP wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what the target audience of your suggestion is - it's certainly not something CEOs, managers or employees can do. I mean, there's a strict hierarchy there of who answers to whom and who gets to choose who to work with. If the CEO tells the board "our growth target this year is 2%, our growth max is 10%, if we grow more than that I'm concerned about the pressure on my employees and my goal is to hav…

The target audience of my suggestion is founders who don't yet have board members or CEOs who currently have like-minded board members, and who don't currently have public ownership. You're right, once you've given up ownership to the public, it's a little too late for the current legal entity. But it's not too late to quit your job and start a new workplace.

Okay, that makes sense. However, that's plausible only if the founders can afford to start a new workplace from their savings alone without ever attracting external investment. A fully bootstrapped company can keep full control, but any significant investment will require the company to cede that control and have a "standard" board structure that can ensure that the interests of the owners are taken into acocunt.
Post reply on HN