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

On Being Indispensable

sofuckingagile.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 296 posts

Re: On Being Indispensable

#211

Post by Jtsummers »

matwood wrote: post #209
Jtsummers wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 13 days off (2 weeks and 3 days, you don't spend it on weekends) is just the first 3 years. For years 3-15 you get 4 weeks (20 days) per year. After that you get 26 days/year. They also get 13 days of sick leave per year with no max accrual. Regular leave maxes at 30 days accrued, you have to have 30 days or less at the end of the calendar year, anything beyond that is lost (use it or lose it). And now they get 1…

Using the federal gov. as an example of the lack of vacation was pretty funny when they tend to have very generous standard days off, and move up accrual rates pretty quickly.

Indeed. Federal employee benefits are actually pretty good, it's the pay that's not so great.

Re: On Being Indispensable

#212

Post by dangus »

I almost see this as a hiring screening problem.

Companies need to stop hiring people that put work off on other people, and should have parts of their interview process that screen out people who are "leeches" who don't want to take initiative.

Re: On Being Indispensable

#213

Post by justin_oaks »

jatins wrote: post #21

The neediness of Sales folks is relatable. I worked at a company where Sales thought "@channel" was a person they should ping as often as possible. And no amount of documentation solves this because documentation is useless if it can't present itself at the time of need. Because rest assured, no once (including me) can find anything using the horrible Confluence search.

> I worked at a company where Sales thought "@channel" was a person they should ping as often as possible

I find some people just don't know (or care about) the right way to use Slack. They need to be taught "Hey, don't bother 100 people in this channel for your niche question." Some are oblivious, some don't care about other people. Either way someone needs to pull them aside and say "stop it".

Having management that allows that to continue indicates an unhealthy organization.

Re: On Being Indispensable

#214

Post by pklausler »

hinkley wrote: post #10

In the spirit of the old saying, "the two happiest days of a boat owner's life are the day they buy a boat, and the day they sell it." The best advice I got starting out was, "be indispensable." The best advice I got four years later was, "don't be indispensable." In a growing company, the indispensable people may find themselves being left holding the bag while new initiatives are undertaken. I very quickly learned…

> you can ride off into the sunset with a clear conscience

You can always do that.

Re: On Being Indispensable

#215

Post by chdoyle »

jlund-molfese wrote: post #200
rmah wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US financial industry has almost the exact same contiguous time off requirement for the same reasons.

Can you provide a source or examples? Asking out of ignorance—I've worked in insurance and currently work for a US-based financial services company, but haven't heard of this practice before.

It happens at most major investment banks, although to my knowledge the mandatory "two weeker" is generally limited to employees who manage risk like traders. It forces another person on the trading desk to be responsible for their carried positions which should help identify any mismarking or other types of fraud.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390444914904577615...

Re: On Being Indispensable

#216

Post by plutonorm »

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #122
plutonorm wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be an instant resignation as a matter of principle for me.

Principles are a luxury not afforded the poor masses.

Obviously you find another job first. That will take a few weeks in this market.

Re: On Being Indispensable

#217

Post by gowld »

iamacyborg wrote: post #107
mtsr wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a nihilistic view. Not every aspect that’s part of your job needs to be included in your variable compensation in order to be done, does it?

They’re employed to do a specific job, if they’re not rewarded for bringing the company more money, why should they care?

The specific job includes customer service. It's what they are being paid for. Employees who do the job poorly are at greater risk for replacement by replacement hires. This is why many companies ask customers to rate individual service providers.

Re: On Being Indispensable

#218

Post by hn_version_0023 »

jaywalk wrote: post #189
galangalalgol wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is brilliant! In the US it isn't that unusual to find companies that don't even offer 2 weeks vacation in total though.

Come on. Outside of the lowest-level hourly positions, you're not going to find any US company that doesn't offer at least two weeks vacation.

You might get 10 business days of PTO, to be used as vacation, sick time, parental leave, etc.

The thing is there are no laws enforcing any time off in the US.

So what you get isn’t standardized or available across the board. Generally I haven’t found any that offer less than two weeks, but… I have absolutely worked places that give you the time off but penalize you socially or otherwise if you dare to take it.

Re: On Being Indispensable

#219

Post by gowld »

sdoering wrote: post #42
hinkley wrote: post #10

In the spirit of the old saying, "the two happiest days of a boat owner's life are the day they buy a boat, and the day they sell it." The best advice I got starting out was, "be indispensable." The best advice I got four years later was, "don't be indispensable." In a growing company, the indispensable people may find themselves being left holding the bag while new initiatives are undertaken. I very quickly learned…

I think one of the problems from "being indispensable" is the direction it takes. Being indispensable in regards to people "being left holding the bag while new initiatives are undertaken" means they are/were indispensable in regards to specific tasks/processes/skills or knowledge. Personally I feel being indispensable can also be seen as being able to be thrown at (nearly) any problem and finding a solution. Catchin…

TL;DR: Be indispensable for the role you want to be in. This may change over time.

Re: On Being Indispensable

#220

Post by gowld »

ip26 wrote: post #28
ivraatiems wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your goal, though? I'd like my company to not absolutely 100% need my constant presence, and I don't want to be in the author's position where he is not doing what he could be most valuable doing. But I do want my company to think "wow, that ivraatiems, we're sure lucky to have him." I would want them to think twice about firing me or laying me off if layoffs were happening. I definitely would not like to have…

Presumably the goal is to be nominally replaceable, but just so all-around awesome they’d be sore to lose you. Easy, right?

Be the best at two things, and train someone to do the less rewarding thing while you learn a new thing.
Post reply on HN