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

Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 85 posts

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#61

Post by bb88 »

xyst wrote: post #42

I’ll never be loyal to a company. That’s something that’s earned, not given. When I see companies layoff 5% of their workforce every year “just because it pumps the stock”, that’s an immediate signal that this company is not worth it in the long term. They won’t bother with long term goals and sustainability, so why should I?

Managing labor is basically an NP-hard problem: Hiring / Interpersonal Skills / Effective management of people / Effective reward and retention programs / Career Development.

The 5% layoff is a tacit admission that they can't fix their management issues.

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#62

Post by Gud »

twobitshifter wrote: post #56
orwin wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We ought to stop blaming the "MBA mentality". I dislike them as much as any IC, but they aren't the issue. The issue is how wealth is distributed. Just after WW2, in my country, if a salaried woodworker in a chop added 1000$ of value on average each month after all other costs were paid (sales, stock, distribution), he took home 600, gave 100 to the government and 300 to his shop owner/shareholders. Nowadays, his add…

who is behind the shift to owner and shareholder?

It’s a natural progression where technology has improved production increases. However since the workers of the world have a very limited share of the ownership of the means of production, they don’t get anything from this increase in production output.

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#63

Post by leereeves »

m463 wrote: post #32
ink_13 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One hack I've seen is to be the interviewer, not the interviewee

Of course I understand prime number trees... Look, I'm the interviewer, quit turning the tables!

Love the joke, but what is a prime number tree?

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#64

Post by m463 »

leereeves wrote: post #63
m463 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course I understand prime number trees... Look, I'm the interviewer, quit turning the tables!

Love the joke, but what is a prime number tree?

"what is a prime number tree?"

"send in the next applicant!"

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#65

Post by leereeves »

m463 wrote: post #64
leereeves wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Love the joke, but what is a prime number tree?

"what is a prime number tree?" "send in the next applicant!"

Applicant? I don't recall applying for anything.

How did I get here?

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#66

Post by leereeves »

Gud wrote: post #62
twobitshifter wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

who is behind the shift to owner and shareholder?

It’s a natural progression where technology has improved production increases. However since the workers of the world have a very limited share of the ownership of the means of production, they don’t get anything from this increase in production output.

Ok, but who is behind enshittification, planned obsolescence, corporate consolidation, private equity raiding, brand value extraction, etc...

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#67

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

zero-sharp wrote: post #26
ink_13 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One hack I've seen is to be the interviewer, not the interviewee

How is that a hack? I guess if you're moving between roles with similar/identical skill sets, great. But I've always had to spend time preparing. Being selective as an applicant doesn't mean you don't have to prepare.

I've interviewed many people, probably well over 100. One of the side effects is that I am very comfortable being interviewed and I'm usually completely relaxed because I know where the other person is coming from and what they're looking for.

It also helps that I haven't interviewed for a position where my programming skill was in question in a very long time.

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#68

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

Jtsummers wrote: post #38
schmookeeg wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was this like in the outskirts of Saskatchewan? :) I can't think of a way to meaningfully blacklist engineers in the age of remote work.

I said the area, but no, in CO. He was employed by a couple space-related companies, which is still a small field. In one job he was also hired via a national hiring agency, so he screwed himself out of any jobs through them again. The genius was not smart enough to get remote jobs. He may have had more success with remote jobs, but in the layoffs over the last couple years I doubt he would have survived, he was defi…

It's easy to get a bad rep in niche industries in a small area because we tend to know each other. I had a guy who was our worst hire ever list me as a reference. Unfortunately, the hiring manager at the next job he tried to get was a friend and former co-worker of mine.

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#69

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

RoyalHenOil wrote: post #35
afavour wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh. I really don’t think it takes that much to get into the swing of interviews. Developers sometimes suffer with them because our jobs make it easy to be introverted and avoid personal contact. As long as you’re regularly using your social “muscle” at work (which is always always a good career move no matter what) applying that same energy to an interview isn’t such a huge lift.

The problem is that it is a competition. If socializing is difficult for you, you can still get better at it with plenty of practice, but you are up against other applicants who had the same amount of practice as you and got more out of that practice (because they are naturally better at it). Telling everyone across the board to just practice more does not actually solve the problem. The problem is solved only by hav…

Role skills mean that the interviewer checks a box. Social skills mean that the interviewer thinks he'll like working with you.

Which one do you think has more impact?

Re: Loyalty at work no longer pays – and it's employers who are to blame

#70

Post by ruszki »

Havoc wrote: post #55
orwin wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We ought to stop blaming the "MBA mentality". I dislike them as much as any IC, but they aren't the issue. The issue is how wealth is distributed. Just after WW2, in my country, if a salaried woodworker in a chop added 1000$ of value on average each month after all other costs were paid (sales, stock, distribution), he took home 600, gave 100 to the government and 300 to his shop owner/shareholders. Nowadays, his add…

This is hn. Everything bad about modern capitalism is apparently the fault of mba people. (No I didn’t do a mba)

I worked for several small projects and startups. All of them became shitter for employees when MBA people took over.
Post reply on HN