Live data from Hacker News

Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

david.newgas.net

221–230 of 457 posts

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#221
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

when i worked for an australian bank, one co-worker in a nearby team had been working on the the banks systems as a sysadmin for over a decade. the bank would go through cycles of "we need to reduce our headcount and outsource everything" and then 4 years later "we need to reduce spend on contractors and retain more knowledge and expertise in house". he'd survived multiple waves of it, switching back and forth betwee…

Managers love the idea that contractors can be fired more easily than employees. Except that this flexibility comes at a cost; people insist on being paid more to have an insecure job. The uncertainty never goes away. You can pay someone else to suffer it, but it will always cost more than dealing with it yourself. And that can be ok. Just don't fool yourself into thinking you're getting a bargain.

> Managers love the idea that contractors can be fired more easily than employees. Except that this flexibility comes at a cost;

I noticed this early, and spent the first half of my career leaning into it. If you negotiate every gig as a contract, you get to double (or more) your salary. And the only thing you're trading away is job security which, if you pay attention, you'll notice doesn't actually exist for your salaried counterparts either.

To nitpick, you also have to pay for your own health insurance. So subtract $200/month from that extra $15,000/month for the sort of catastrophic coverage plan that a 27 year old needs.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#222

As a junior software engineer, I worked at a large UK bank. Senior management routinely seem baffled that they could announce redundancies or hiring freezes, yet technology costs would continue to rise. One pattern I saw repeatedly was a contractor being let go, only to return via a large outsourcing provider. The provider must have added a substantial markup despite supplying the same engineer back to the same team,…

It's very possible that this occurred during the IR35 shake-up - HMRC moved the liability for unpaid income tax (in a situation where a contractor was determined to be a de-facto employee) from limited company contractors themselves onto the client (the bank, in this case).

Banks had a very low risk appetite and so had to let these people go. What was going on in a lot of places was that vital staff who had to be dumped were intermediated by outsourcing providers. These companies either then paid the staff a very high salary and sold them in as temp labour, or took on the risk themselves and hired them as contractors for the same purpose.

This all made sense, but for a lot of contractors at the time, it felt like the apocalypse. The net effect was that HMRC exchanged flexibility in the labour market for immediate tax take. This may not have been a sensible decision.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#223
post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have y'all hit the "can genai do his job?" phase yet... Early on I used to try to explain that things don't work as advertised. There are a lot of advantages but you need a human reviewing and directing. These days I don't even bother. Call it being desensitized to the bullshit, but I'm waiting for some fancy AI agent to take out stuff in a way that no one can do anything. Past that I don't see a way for C suite to w…

Just got my morning coffee and read "genai" like some elusive Japanese person's name. So, can Genai san do his job?

> So, can Genai san do his job?

If not, will become Genai Sans job.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#224
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were salary and not benefitting from it, there's literally no chance you would have gone to jail. This was the equivalent of panicking about running a yellow light in terms of overreaction. The only thing you had to do was write an email, cc your personal email, and tell your boss you think the punches are messed up and that they reflect more than you worked. Your boss would tell you not to worry about it and…

Your faith in the criminal justice system amuses me.

Abuses happen. But they are the exception, not the rule. There's no need to be so cynical and mocking about it.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#225
post #219

I have a serious question for everyone who reading through comments: If you get a great paying position in a business that is clearly managed by too ambitious people and will never succeed, given that you are legally not a part of the potential fraud ring that you can't prove, just an engineer closing issues and merging patches, would you reject it?

I don't think I could give an honest reply in the abstract setting without actually being in that situation. But a significant factor would likely also be the actual work and whether it is something I find particularly interesting/exciting to work on.

Then again, if it is doomed to fail from the start, it is unlikely that I would really enjoy working on it.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#226
post #219

I have a serious question for everyone who reading through comments: If you get a great paying position in a business that is clearly managed by too ambitious people and will never succeed, given that you are legally not a part of the potential fraud ring that you can't prove, just an engineer closing issues and merging patches, would you reject it?

Why? If it isn't illegal, nor amoral, just a moonshot then its basically typical SV startup reaching for stars.

Sure, 99.9% of startups may not get there but we saw in the past some wild unexpected successes. Plus things may change along the path as markets evolve and if they pivot successfully into new areas they may win the first mover situation, even if original mission won't ever be accomplished.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#227
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Spend the budget or next time people will ask why you need all that money when you didn't spend it last time. I've always heard of this nugget of wisdom but never really understood it. By punishing those who underspend (by making the next application harder), wouldn't you incentivise inflated research costs, or worse, fraud. Seems like a quick path to a positive feedback loop towards the degradation of trust in aca…

It makes zero sense to me either, yet it is an omnipresent influence in who gets tasked to what in my work. At my level, I do not know anyone who endorses it, they merely react to it.

That's the paradox that causes the problem, perhaps paradox is not the correct term, conflicting view points?.

From above(the manager of the program) the job is to budget the funds thriftily and fairly, each project getting the amount it needs.

From below(the team working on the project) this feels like you are punished if you are able to save money and rewarded when you waste money.

I suspect this is probably the major problem with having a more command orientated economy. While it should be fairer(free market economies are notoriously unfair). The inversion in incentive hurts performance.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked for a large US bank that has a 10% biannual attrition target at all levels across the company. Twice a year they PIP 10-15% of staff, most of whom take a substantial buyout. Institutional knowledge is constantly being lost and experienced staff are being replaced with fresh cohorts of new grads, who then get replaced themselves right as they start becoming useful. I knew multiple people there who made more i…

Does the approach apply to senior management?

Senior leaders in large companies I've worked at always had a fairly high turnover just because they all tend to be hyper competitive and engaged in their own Game of Thrones type competitions - which someone has to lose.

Re: Did my old job only exist because of fraud?

#230
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen that in a large management consultancy company. Part of their risk management procedures (both for the company and in terms of some EU law) meant they couldn't keep contractors for longer than x years. They'd have to convert to employee or separate for 12 months. Bit that doesn't really work in knowledge systems. Even with the best documentation people will build up knowledge that no one has, and their depa…

> Even with the best documentation people will build up knowledge that no one has I think that's the part management teams are missing. They assume that employees are just human resources and they can replace a senior engineer with a 100% equivalent one when needed.

    >  They assume that employees are just human resources and they can replace a senior engineer with a 100% equivalent one when needed.
they don't assume that, they make it happen by doing this regularly.
Post reply on HN