How do you tell managers that having good developers is a privilege?

> I believe that as a programmer, it's your duty to spend some time doing stuff your manager didn't know he needed to ask you to do, rather than running personal errands.

--------------

I believe in dealing in good faith with people who deal with me in good faith. But it has nothing special to do with being a programmer; it's something I'd do in any job, and it is reciprocal. There's an implied agreement that they're going to try to treat me decently and there's an implied agreement that I'll do the same for them. If either of us breach that, I strongly desire the other party to defect.

I handed in my notice recently. My situation was somewhat similar to the one of the poster: project really not that interesting, unglamorous company, so-so salary, but casual atmosphere and not much to do, and I got to keep a lot of energy available to study and pursue my own coding projects. Then there was a change in management and pressure went up tenfolds, so I resigned.

First, I recognise now that it's potentially a bad idea to keep a job just because it does allow you to coast. There's a depressing quality in such choice; work representing the most part of our day, underperforming by choice, by remaining in an undemanding job, can even lower our self-esteem. I didn't do me much good, in any case.

Secondly, I am leaving because the market allows me to do it, because I know I am likely to find something better in a reasonable time. I could have handled the pressure, I could have remained and try to make that place a better place, but it's simply not in my best interest and it did more sense to just quit.

The position of the poster baffles me a bit: he recognises that conditions have changed and instead of adapting or refusing the new state of things, he dumps his responsibility to his own happiness to someone else: his manager. Indeed having good developers, in the current state of the market, is a privilege. In five years or ten years it might not be the case. Why making a case of us vs them? Isn't simpler to just take advantage of the bull dev market and leave?

It's naive, but widespread, from the part of managers to believe that by increasing the pressure they will get more bang for their buck. Let's them learn the hard way, until we can afford it. To moan and not budge is almost suspicious - maybe the poster is not so sure of himself after all? - and counterproductive for every party involved.

It appears you've learned the lesson, having developers that write working software results in a more profitable company than having developers who remain in their seats for 8 hours a day.

The key is to make the company culture fit those who write working software.

>But when you come to HN, 10-to-1 the comments are all about punishing the manager by leaving

It's not about punishing the manager, it's about getting the best job you can.

The problem, I think, was how the original question was phrased. It made it sound like a moral problem "You don't deserve good developers" which is a not very professional way of looking at it.

It's not your job to teach your boss how to do his or her job, and for cultural reasons, usually attempts to do so are met with hostility. The closest I have come without causing problems is buying my boss books. And even that... well, it was presumptuous, and it didn't change the boss' behavior, but it also didn't seem to blow back on me.

The question would have gone better if it were framed as an economic issue, a "what's best for me" issue, rather than as a "how can I change my boss" issue.

"I am getting paid less here than I think I could get paid elsewhere. That was okay before, because I am willing to take a pay cut to be treated a certain way, but management has changed now. What do I do?"

The problem here is that what the employee wants (and was sacrificing money to get) was a certain management style. If you want more money, you can negotiate that with your boss. If you want a new management style? you probably aren't going to be able to negotiate that. You could negotiate specific consequences of that management style, say, flex-time, but the root of it is still there. You probably aren't going to change your boss' management style.

In that case? A rational actor would leave the company. I mean, they would do so as gracefully as possible, of course, but you aren't going to change your boss' management style.

I never do exit interviews because I don't want any burned bridges. Smile and wave on the way out and go on to the next place.