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

Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 305 posts

Re: Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

#211

Post by NationalPark »

throwawaygal7 wrote: post #134
NationalPark wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> becomes a monumental task Even ignoring the fact that fertility treatments exist... 1 in 4 healthy women in their 20s and 30s will get pregnant in any single menstrual cycle. (The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, 2018) 1 in 10 healthy women in their 40s will get pregnant in any single menstrual cycle. (The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, 2018) hardly monumental

Nobody is saying it's impossible, on average - but people aren't aggregate statistics. Some women are already going to be unable to get pregnant by 35, more by forty. Many more will struggle, but might be able to get pregnant. I believe the study you cited is biased by excluding some of these as 'unhealthy' - essentially it is limiting the population to just women who still can get pregnant at these ages. Once more,…

Well that is a much softer point than the one I was responding to which called the age related fertility decline “monumental” in support of the implied conclusion that it is somehow imperative for otherwise healthy women to have children by their 30s.

Regarding your anecdote I do not see its relevance to a discussion of population statistics. People can be infertile because they were paralyzed in a car accident but that doesn’t mean the original claim wasn’t overstated and now walked back.

Regardless, I think narrowing in this specifically on reproductive biology of women in the context of who you date and how you think about relationships is a recipe for failure. Not only does it have somewhat creepy bio-essentialist connotations, but socioeconomic factors and healthcare access also have huge impacts on the health and success of any given pregnancy and childhood/life.

In short, "I have to date right now because I'm 30 and my hypothetical childbearing vessels are becoming less optimal" is an unhealthy and probably incorrect attitude.

Re: Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

#212

Post by slumdev »

ramesh31 wrote: post #69
silicon2401 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very subjective statement. The pandemic has been bar none the best period of my life. Increased physical and social distance from other people, no need to emote in public thanks to masks, no need to commute, greater accommodation for non-social options like self-checkouts. My physical and mental health have skyrocketed, and as a result I feel like I've been on vacation for a year and half, despite only taki…

I've never been so envious of happily married people in my life. Being single throughout this ordeal has broken me mentally, particularly at an age (31) where I'm staring down the last couple years of being able to meet someone my age. And the prospects coming out of it are grim. For people with a happy home life, this may have been a good time. But for the isolated, work from home, single people with no long term so…

If it's really stressing you out, consider dating people younger than you are.

A five year gap is nothing by the time you're in your thirties.

Re: Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

#213

Post by skeeter2020 »

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #159
tolbish wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if it would be substantially more effective to prevent burnout by having shorter work days or work weeks.

I think it would be but I also would like forced time off as well. As well as forced socializing with team mates. And a sabbatical every 5 years or so. But if I can find a job with full health benefits that lets me work three days a week, I'm going for it. Heck, that is the best argument in favor of universal healthcare. It would help unemployment, because way more people would be working part time.

You are part of a very small, very skilled minority that voluntariliy wants to work part time and lack of health care is all that's stopping you. In Canada where we have universal health care, the vast majority of people working part time are in low skill jobs because that's all they can schedule with another primary focus, or that's all they can get but really want FT.

Re: Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

#214

Post by theptip »

afarrell wrote: post #169
theptip wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to note, you can regularly ask your employees how they feel, and with enough employees get a significant measurement. So maybe they can measure the “woolly” morale impact of this. Tools like Lattice make it easy to do a “pulse” survey for this purpose. Also the great thing about doing this twice a year is you get two experiments so you can start to be confident it’s not just “Christmas makes employees 10% happie…

That assumes that your employees: 1. Know how they feel 2. Can translate that into numbers accurately.

It's a good question, which has been extensively studied over the last few decades in the medical context. The industry phrase would be "Patient Reported Outcomes" if you'd like to explore further.

After many papers and lots of clinical trials, it's widely accepted in the scientific community that the answers to both of your questions are "yes". E.g. see this FDA paper[1].

Of course, it's possible to design your questionnaire badly and there's an art to this, so it's right to be skeptical/cautious about putting this into practice. But you seem to be getting at a more fundamental epistemic question about whether the approach is possible even in principle, which has been thoroughly investigated.

[1]: https://www.fda.gov/media/77832/download

Re: Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

#215

Post by akiselev »

nickjj wrote: post #208
dharmab wrote: post #146

Adobe does two of these every year, one in winter around the holidays and one in July. From my perspective as an individual contributor, there are a few advantages: - With no feature/project work that week, there is zero pressure to check email or slack. - Teams are forced to build systems that are automated, resilient and documented enough that most of the staff won't need to be contacted during the shutdown week. -…

I'd be curious how much different it would be if you got the same 1 week off twice a year but it was for a company trip, as in the company would pay for everything to take all employees (and a +1) skiing or some other activity. This would be independent of personal time off and these 2 weeks off would still be paid. I've never been on such a thing but I wonder if it ends up being a real vacation or if everyone is sti…

That wouldn't be a real vacation, full stop.

Re: Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

#216

Post by NateEag »

thrower123 wrote: post #54
shmel wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep hearing this over and over. I get it, some people are fairly introverted, some really enjoy WFH. But what stopped you from distancing from people and using self-checkouts before the pandemic? If you hate people, fine, just go home straight after work, you aren't obligated to hang out with anyone. It is not like the government would fine you for coming home before 11pm, right?

It's a third of my life, half of my waking hours, that I'm forced to be in a box, dealing with people I wouldn't choose to breath the same air as, pretending to be interested in their small-talk.

If you're working this job and you started it in the office, you actually chose to breathe the same air as the coworkers you seem to so dislike. Saying otherwise is deceiving yourself.

No one is forcing you to pretend interest in small talk. If you're not interested in it, say so instead of pretending.

Are you afraid you'll lose your job over being antisocial or rude if you don't pretend to get along with your coworkers?

You might be happier if you look for a job you don't hate.

(Also if you stop seeing other people as beneath you, but that's a taller order)

Re: Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

#217

Post by [deleted] »

nickjj wrote: post #208
dharmab wrote: post #146

Adobe does two of these every year, one in winter around the holidays and one in July. From my perspective as an individual contributor, there are a few advantages: - With no feature/project work that week, there is zero pressure to check email or slack. - Teams are forced to build systems that are automated, resilient and documented enough that most of the staff won't need to be contacted during the shutdown week. -…

I'd be curious how much different it would be if you got the same 1 week off twice a year but it was for a company trip, as in the company would pay for everything to take all employees (and a +1) skiing or some other activity. This would be independent of personal time off and these 2 weeks off would still be paid. I've never been on such a thing but I wonder if it ends up being a real vacation or if everyone is sti…

[deleted]

Re: Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

#218

Post by alangibson »

xrstf wrote: post #201
alangibson wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should have specified countries I guess. Austria, Germany and Netherlands for sure. Others I'm told but have not directly experienced it.

Citation needed. Germans do not quit working for 2 weeks in the summer. Where did you get that from? What German companies shut down for 2 weeks in the summer of 2019?

There's even a word for it. Google Betriebsurlaub.

I get that from working with and for German, Austrian and Dutch companies in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands. It's nigh on impossible to get anything done in August around here.

This doesn't apply to things like resorts and restaurants, for obvious reasons, though if that's what you're thinking of.

Re: Bumble closes to give 'burnt-out' staff a week's break

#220

Post by rkk3 »

chrisseaton wrote: post #117
dijksterhuis wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? What? I'm about to turn 32 and I'm a bit confused about the whole "last couple of years of being able to meet someone". I know people who met and got married in their 40s... Edit: go easy on yourself pal. We've all got enough to deal with in the world without beating ourselves up over imaginary deadlines. Edit2: also, a lot of marriages are not happy. Imagine having to live in one of them during a pandemic. Usua…

I only know through friends, but dating in your 30s seems like an absolute nightmare - they all hate it and find it completely joyless and deeply cynical. Trying to fit someone new into an already fully-formed life at that point seems very hard. Also 35 is the point where medicine considers a pregnancy to be 'geriatric'. And some people are going through menopause by 40! You don't have an infinite amount of time in l…

> Also 35 is the point where medicine considers a pregnancy to be 'geriatric'.

Which is a dated term that isn't used frequently. Yes the risks for certain things increase after 35 but pregnancy after 35 or 40+ is healthy and common.

> some people are going through menopause by 40!

The average age of Menopause is 51, before 40 is considered "premature menopause".

https://www.webmd.com/menopause/guide/premature-menopause-sy...

Post reply on HN