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

At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 194 posts

Re: At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

#171

Post by agumonkey »

pizza234 wrote: post #100
agumonkey wrote: post #53

Oh this is fascinating to me. Since I joined the workforce back 5 years ago (non IT and IT) I've witnessed so much bs on every side. Everything he describes I've seen. People spend more time tricking the game than I'd ever thought possible. That said I'm shocked devs are playing too since they have a comfy life. I guess it just taps into the same primitive reptilian brain reflexes.

> That said I'm shocked devs are playing too since they have a comfy life. I guess it just taps into the same primitive reptilian brain reflexes. An interesting firsthand view on the dynamics of the motivations comes from HN post from some times ago ( https://frantic.im/leaving-facebook ). Some excerpts: > The salary is high. Facebook aims to pay top 5% compensation in the market (we’ll get back to that). This makes…

I kinda get it. I'm an ex poor, still frugal person, but I got a spot in a comfy company. My colleague is also a new hire and got 50% more salary. I don't need more money, but since I sense I'm more skilled than him, I have this itch that I should play the game a bit to maximize money. It's less about competing or getting rich, and more about shielding myself from an absurd system when a lot of dogs get all the money by putting you under the bus.. so I'd rather stop bleeding like an idiot :)

Re: At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

#172

Post by ido »

spiffytech wrote: post #105
bombcar wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s pretty useful if you’re an up and coming growth company paying higher than average comp as it ensures you’re continually snatching new employees from other companies.

The consensus I've seen is that it's useful for a year or two while you clear out the people who really need to go, but after that it creates perverse incentives and constant fear among employees, doing more harm than good.

A better solution is to "just" be more thoughtful & honest about who (if any) needs to be fired (it sucks to fire people so a lot of managers put it off but really shouldn't, sometimes). I don't think there's a systematic/technocratic solution to a human/social problem like that, at least not one that doesn't have other massive downsides (like stack ranking).

Your hiring process should be good enough that firing is rare but nobody is perfect and if/when the situation arises (either due to a bad hiring decision or the situation changing) it's better to resolve it earlier rather than later.

Re: At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

#173

Post by ido »

lol_what wrote: post #104
razh wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, he posted a similar set of tweets back in 2018: https://www.pcgamer.com/ex-valve-employee-describes-ruthless...

keep in mind that he is literally the only one who talks about the company that way from everyone whose ever worked there (many, many have left for various reasons since). I also can't help but not overlook that he's an UFO nut. can't trust info from someone who can warp reality in a way to see only what fits his own preconceived notions even if they fly in the face of basic facts.

I've heard/read such reports about valve from various other people, including friends I trust saying so privately. He is an outlier in how vehement his criticism is but is hardly the only one that throws that criticism at Valve (keep in mind workers face massive disincentives to do so publicly).

Re: At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

#174

Post by chii »

YokoZar wrote: post #135
rhexs wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

American companies always have bored lawyers on staff, and lawsuits are just day-to-day activities for them. Suing costs the company virtually nothing, while defending against that suit as a private party can be ruinously expensive. The company can almost always afford better PR than you can, and relying or hoping your case going viral and the company backing off due to negative PR isn't going to help you sleep at ni…

Retaliating against employees for discussing their working conditions is in fact enormously legally risky for a company. Doubly-so when doing it via SLAPP lawsuits. Why on earth would Valve take the risk?

> Why on earth would Valve take the risk?

yes, exactly. Esp. if he is the only one talking about it this way publicly. If it's truly awful, employees will vote with their wallets and quit.

And if valve wins the law suit, what reward would they have gained, other than stopping him from saying what he has already said (which cannot be taken back). There might be punitive damages to be paid, but it's not like the corporation is going to make money from doing so.

And in fact, making a law suit would legitimize the claims!

Re: At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

#175

Post by chii »

21723 wrote: post #111
civilized wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They take three years to do the three months of junior-level work.

The ones who do 3 months of actual work get fired because their overperformance scares the boss. But less than 2 weeks of actual work and you're an underperformer. The sweet spot is probably the geometric mean of the two.

> their overperformance scares the boss

i just don't understand this at all - why would someone who is working for you be a threat? They cannot take your job - it's not like them being a good programmer would somehow make them a good dev manager or "boss".

Re: At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

#176

Post by moron4hire »

daenz wrote: post #159
filoleg wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but there is a difference between "he is an asshole, which means that he blows everything out of proportion, and I don't believe him with this story" and "there are plenty of situations that actually happened where he seems to always blow the situation out of proportion and exaggerate to unjustifiably paint people in terrible light, and therefore I believe he is an asshole". The former would be an ad hominem rea…

>...therefore I believe he is an asshole Is an attack directed against the person rather than their position, and is therefore ad hominem

The mistake you're making is missing that the whole issue is one of character. He has not presented any irrefutable or falsifiable facts (indeed, he speaks in thinly veiled code, so we can't be completely sure who he's talking about, even though it's really a pretty good bet). He's speaking on the character of the people he worked with. His own character is therefore completely on the table for criticism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Valid_types_of_ad_h...

> Ad hominem arguments are relevant where the person being criticised is advancing arguments from authority, or testimony based on personal experience, rather than proposing a formal syllogism.

Re: At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

#177

Post by m12k »

secondcoming wrote: post #62
m12k wrote: post #8

A tech company in Bellevue Washington with a "shadowy and illusory "peer review" system" - this is Valve we're talking about, right? (fits his Twitter bio)

I thought it might have been why the Windows UI is such a mess.

Yeah, I've heard similar complaints about dysfunctionality regarding Microsoft's "stack ranking" system that they had under Balmer, where the best engineers would actively avoid working in the same teams, to avoid being ranked in the same stack. But afaik they didn't have that nebulous peer review system - I've only heard about that at Valve.

Re: At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

#178

Post by naikrovek »

lol_what wrote: post #104
razh wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, he posted a similar set of tweets back in 2018: https://www.pcgamer.com/ex-valve-employee-describes-ruthless...

keep in mind that he is literally the only one who talks about the company that way from everyone whose ever worked there (many, many have left for various reasons since). I also can't help but not overlook that he's an UFO nut. can't trust info from someone who can warp reality in a way to see only what fits his own preconceived notions even if they fly in the face of basic facts.

> he is literally the only one who talks about the company that way from everyone whose ever worked there

false. wrong, wrong, wrong.

he's the only one you know about, is all. he's not even the only one that has spoken publicly about it.

Re: At one company I worked at only one thing mattered: the yearly bonus

#179

Post by bombcar »

ido wrote: post #172
spiffytech wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The consensus I've seen is that it's useful for a year or two while you clear out the people who really need to go, but after that it creates perverse incentives and constant fear among employees, doing more harm than good.

A better solution is to "just" be more thoughtful & honest about who (if any) needs to be fired (it sucks to fire people so a lot of managers put it off but really shouldn't, sometimes). I don't think there's a systematic/technocratic solution to a human/social problem like that, at least not one that doesn't have other massive downsides (like stack ranking). Your hiring process should be good enough that firing is r…

Many companies should offer a quit/buyout alongside the performance plan - most employees who are on the fired path know they’re on it and pretending they’re not doesn’t help anyone really.
Post reply on HN