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

Breaking Up with On-Call

reflector.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 202 posts

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#71

Post by WhyIsItAlwaysHN »

ekimekim wrote: post #65
dakiol wrote: post #62

For me the worst thing about being on-call is not the actual work outside business hours (it’s usually not much), but the potential work: if something happens I need to jump into my laptop within X minutes (changes from company to company, but it’s usually within 10 minutes). This means: I cannot go for a run, I cannot go to the movies, I cannot go for a dinner with family, I cannot even go shopping (shopping mall is…

When I'm in charge of an on-call rotation I always try to make it very clear that this is not the expectation. In my preferred model of on-call, you have a primary, then after 5min an escalation to secondary, then after 5min an escalation to something drastic (sometimes "everyone", sometimes a manager). The expectation is that most of the time you should be able to respond within 5 minutes, but if you can't then that…

So it takes 10 min until you've gone to the drastic solution? With this time-frame it would be risky to go the bathroom, not go to a movie. Also even the backup sounds like a primary in this scenario.

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#72

Post by apeescape »

stackskipton wrote: post #4

I have no idea what article was trying to convey since on call was poorly defined I also couldn’t take it seriously when article opened with this. > Startups cannot afford engineers to baby sit software, big tech does. Say what? As ops person, I’ve seen multiple startups where devs are drowning in operational issues because software was written enough for feature MVP, ship with poor testing then constantly poke at wi…

Well, did those startups succeed? If not, I think it means the author was spot on in saying startups can't _afford_ that.

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#73

Post by hbsbsbsndk »

cdnthrownawy39 wrote: post #48
coolgoose wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like normal support work not sure why that's affecting morale. It's normal in any kind of system to also cover issues. Yes, at some point you might want to have a customer support / customer success later to at least triage them, but that makes more sense as you get bigger not when you are small. I actually like having discussions on support days with customer. Yes, sometimes they're more annoying but it's dir…

My on call experience required that I had to be able to respond within 10 ten minutes of the call, with 24/7/365 coverage. But if I couldn't get the issue resolved remotely it meant that I'd have to be in the office lab to recreate and reproduce the problem. It effectively restricted my movements personal movements to stay within commute distance of my office, and that includes all my vacation time as well. That was…

> Obviously people out there that can handle this lifestyle, but I couldn't

No I don't think anyone could. What you're describing is an insane policy of abusing employees. Most on-call is done on a rotation, not permanently.

All of my previous roles involved on-call and it was 1 week per quarter.

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#74

Post by hbsbsbsndk »

whstl wrote: post #56
cdnthrownawy39 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My on call experience required that I had to be able to respond within 10 ten minutes of the call, with 24/7/365 coverage. But if I couldn't get the issue resolved remotely it meant that I'd have to be in the office lab to recreate and reproduce the problem. It effectively restricted my movements personal movements to stay within commute distance of my office, and that includes all my vacation time as well. That was…

Yeah, I worked in a couple companies that had the same requirements. It also meant having to wake up on command in case the phone beeped, being unable to drink in my free time, being limited in which activities I could go to. It was hell. I know people are gonna hit back with "you're doing it wrong", but in this case it's the company doing it wrong, but nobody on HN will go there and tell them.

You should name and shame companies that have this policy. Who the fuck is making people be on-call 365 days a year?

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#75

Post by rwmj »

zild3d wrote: post #69
rwmj wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why people used to be paid time-and-a-half or even double-time for being on call. Ask your union to demand that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-and-a-half

So for say a weekly on-call rotation you would be paid all 24 hours x 7 days at double rate? (- ~40) Also most tech companies don't have unions...

I don't believe it's physically possible for anyone to be available at 10 minutes notice for 168 hours straight. And if it's possible, it would be deeply unhealthy. But if they did achieve this, then yes they should be paid some very large amount of money. But that doesn't just happen -- pay isn't fair, it's about power. So a union can help to negotiate this, or ideally, better working conditions.

> Also most tech companies don't have unions...

In Europe, there are plenty of unions that cover tech people. I'm a member of Prospect (https://prospect.org.uk/).

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#76

Post by rwmj »

liveoneggs wrote: post #67
rwmj wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why people used to be paid time-and-a-half or even double-time for being on call. Ask your union to demand that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-and-a-half

For nurses on-call is a tiny amount - $3/hr and then you get 1.5x if you actually get called in

Pay is all about power. Nurses individually have little power (as they are replaceable), which is why unionising is good for them as the union gives them collective power.

Software engineers are an interesting case; some have a great deal of domain-specific knowledge, giving them leverage over their employers. Many less so, and so a union could help. AI might change this equation too.

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#77

Post by smitelli »

ekimekim wrote: post #65
dakiol wrote: post #62

For me the worst thing about being on-call is not the actual work outside business hours (it’s usually not much), but the potential work: if something happens I need to jump into my laptop within X minutes (changes from company to company, but it’s usually within 10 minutes). This means: I cannot go for a run, I cannot go to the movies, I cannot go for a dinner with family, I cannot even go shopping (shopping mall is…

When I'm in charge of an on-call rotation I always try to make it very clear that this is not the expectation. In my preferred model of on-call, you have a primary, then after 5min an escalation to secondary, then after 5min an escalation to something drastic (sometimes "everyone", sometimes a manager). The expectation is that most of the time you should be able to respond within 5 minutes, but if you can't then that…

Having the primary/secondary rotation is arguably worse. In that model, from the perspective of any one participant, now they're on-call for two weeks each time around instead of one.

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#78

Post by smitelli »

rwmj wrote: post #64
dakiol wrote: post #62

For me the worst thing about being on-call is not the actual work outside business hours (it’s usually not much), but the potential work: if something happens I need to jump into my laptop within X minutes (changes from company to company, but it’s usually within 10 minutes). This means: I cannot go for a run, I cannot go to the movies, I cannot go for a dinner with family, I cannot even go shopping (shopping mall is…

This is why people used to be paid time-and-a-half or even double-time for being on call. Ask your union to demand that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-and-a-half

Fun fact: In the US the concept of time-and-a-half (also minimum wage, and not hiring child labor) was created by the Fair Labor Standards Act. Most tech employees are classified as "exempt" -- the FLSA and its protections doesn't apply to them.

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#79

Post by ekimekim »

WhyIsItAlwaysHN wrote: post #71
ekimekim wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I'm in charge of an on-call rotation I always try to make it very clear that this is not the expectation. In my preferred model of on-call, you have a primary, then after 5min an escalation to secondary, then after 5min an escalation to something drastic (sometimes "everyone", sometimes a manager). The expectation is that most of the time you should be able to respond within 5 minutes, but if you can't then that…

So it takes 10 min until you've gone to the drastic solution? With this time-frame it would be risky to go the bathroom, not go to a movie. Also even the backup sounds like a primary in this scenario.

Sure, but the assumption here is that primary and backup (edit: probably, ie. they're not coordinating this) aren't going to the bathroom at the same time. It's also based on the idea that alerts are extremely rare to begin with. If you're expecting at least one page every rotation, that's way, way too often. Step one is to get alerts under control, step two is a sane on-call rotation.

Re: Breaking Up with On-Call

#80

Post by notnaut »

ekimekim wrote: post #65
dakiol wrote: post #62

For me the worst thing about being on-call is not the actual work outside business hours (it’s usually not much), but the potential work: if something happens I need to jump into my laptop within X minutes (changes from company to company, but it’s usually within 10 minutes). This means: I cannot go for a run, I cannot go to the movies, I cannot go for a dinner with family, I cannot even go shopping (shopping mall is…

When I'm in charge of an on-call rotation I always try to make it very clear that this is not the expectation. In my preferred model of on-call, you have a primary, then after 5min an escalation to secondary, then after 5min an escalation to something drastic (sometimes "everyone", sometimes a manager). The expectation is that most of the time you should be able to respond within 5 minutes, but if you can't then that…

I don’t see how this changes the problem where there is an expected guarantee of a rapid response except that now two people are expected to be available and would now need to directly coordinate in order to ensure one person’s going for a swim doesn’t interfere with the other’s WoW raid.
Post reply on HN