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

Jack Ma Again Endorses Extreme Overtime as Furor Rages On

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 264 posts

Re: Jack Ma Again Endorses Extreme Overtime as Furor Rages On

#241

Post by BurningFrog »

learc83 wrote: post #238
BurningFrog wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ali Baba is the Amazon of China. It is enormously profitable. I assume that in return for working so hard, the employees are paid quite well, or else they would find better jobs. I guess the unsupported claim that they're "ill-compensated" out of the blue was what annoyed me.

It looks like the average senior software engineer salary at Alibaba is around $30k. That's well above the average annual salary in China, but it's about average for a software developer, and no one is going going to become a millionaire working for those wages. Also long hours are normal in China. If your choice is to work for one of 50 companies that all have insane schedules, it's hardly informed consent.

This Fortune article speculates in much higher numbers for their stock compensation: http://fortune.com/2016/02/05/alibaba-stock-pay-disturbing/

If long hours is the industry standard, to me that is exactly informed consent. I mean, no one will be surprised by the standard workplace arrangement.

Re: Jack Ma Again Endorses Extreme Overtime as Furor Rages On

#242

Post by ackbar03 »

theseadroid wrote: post #174
ackbar03 wrote: post #92

The prevalence of 996 shows why China is able to start so many strong tech companies. Discontent reflects the rising awareness for standard of living and ethical or not also sort of implies rising labor costs in future.

Strong copycats yes. Strong innovation tech companies? I dont think so.

You need to take another look at the landscape bro... This was true a few years ago but less the case now

Re: Jack Ma Again Endorses Extreme Overtime as Furor Rages On

#243

Post by learc83 »

BurningFrog wrote: post #241
learc83 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like the average senior software engineer salary at Alibaba is around $30k. That's well above the average annual salary in China, but it's about average for a software developer, and no one is going going to become a millionaire working for those wages. Also long hours are normal in China. If your choice is to work for one of 50 companies that all have insane schedules, it's hardly informed consent.

This Fortune article speculates in much higher numbers for their stock compensation: http://fortune.com/2016/02/05/alibaba-stock-pay-disturbing/ If long hours is the industry standard, to me that is exactly informed consent. I mean, no one will be surprised by the standard workplace arrangement.

There's no way Alibaba is giving away 15% of their revenue in stock grants, so I'd take that with a huge grain of salt. Regardless the vast majority of their employees aren't going to become millionaires working there.

>If long hours is the industry standard, to me that is exactly informed consent. I mean, no one will be surprised by the standard workplace arrangement.

That's not what informed consent means--informed consent has to be voluntary or it's not consent. If 72 hour weeks are standard and your choice is long hours or being unemployed, it's not informed consent.

The logical conclusion to this argument is that there is literally no limit on how bad you make your working conditions so long as everyone else is doing it. A century ago it was common to pay employees in company scrip and to not pay them enough to live so that they ended up permanently indebted to the company. It was the standard work environment in many places so by your argument all the employees freely consented to it.

Re: Jack Ma Again Endorses Extreme Overtime as Furor Rages On

#245

Post by raducu »

matz1 wrote: post #179
raducu wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But does it matter if you work continuously 9-9? If I stay on premise 9-9 I still regard that as work -- that still is my time that I'm selling to the company. Can you raise a child if you are away 9-9? You wake up at 7AM, return home at 10PM, how is that even considered a life worth living? That's just insane if you ask me.

It's not for everyone.

While I agree that it's not for everyone and people should have a right to decide how they spend their time, I think it's detrimental even for those who claim it is good for themselves.

If you actually ask, "Who is this for then?" -- I think you'll be hard pressed not to answer "For the young, socially less inclined(men)", just like drugs are for certain demographics or polygamy is for certain demographics, teenage marriage can work for certain people and so on (sorry if my examples are too extreme).

And by accepting such horrendous work hours you are pressuring people who actually want a better work-life balance, that's why I think it's better for society in the long run to forbid such (predatory) practices.

Re: Jack Ma Again Endorses Extreme Overtime as Furor Rages On

#246

Post by rishav_sharan »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #234
rayiner wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not Chinese, but the sentiment is pan-Asian. You can’t build an industrial superpower from a country of rice farmers by working 40 hours a week. (Nor did the rice farmers work 40 days a week before industrialization!) Certainly, the US didn’t do it. (See: “Protestant work ethic.”) The 40-hour work week is something we adopted after our ascendency. It’s a luxury for the already rich. It’s possibly a luxury for tho…

>> Do you think never having to work 996 in your life is an honour to boast about? > It’s a luxury for the already rich. This sounds like you think it is an honor to boast about.

It sounded more like its a necessirty in some developing economies.

Re: Jack Ma Again Endorses Extreme Overtime as Furor Rages On

#247

Post by marcus_holmes »

skrebbel wrote: post #78
marcus_holmes wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journalists making a story more controversial by tailoring which bits of a speech to quote? How incredibly unusual. Oh wait, no. The other thing. The thing about never trusting anything you read, especially if it was written by someone who has something to gain by manipulating your emotions.

What does a badly paid Bloomberg reporter have to gain by making me feel like Jack Ma is a mean person?

I ran a newspaper for a while, so this is how the business model goes:

reporters write stories. Those stories are judged on "traction" - how much interaction and general "buzz" they get. The more views, comments, shares, likes, etc, that a story gets, the better the journalist has done their job. Truth doesn't come into it. The best stories are the most controversial ones, because people share them more.

the paper gets paid for adverts and subscriptions. Adverts are viewed when people read stories. The stories that get the most views are controversial ones that people share.

All stories are passed through an editorial process. That process does things like correct typos and grammar mistakes, but it also edits for "punchiness" and potential engagement. It's very common for a "boring" story to get edited (or the journalist told to re-edit) to make it more interesting, more controversial, more engaging.

So by taking a fairly banal story of Jack Ma saying some obvious things, and editing it so that it appears that he's saying some outrageous things, the journalist gets the buzz they need, and the newspaper gets a bunch of "free" advert views when people share the story on social media.

No-one's lying - Jack Ma did say those things. The journalists involved can maintain a straight face while saying they're just reporting the truth. Meanwhile, everyone gets paid and they get another day in a very, very threatened industry. Jack Ma's pissed off, of course, but he's a billionaire, he can cope.

Re: Jack Ma Again Endorses Extreme Overtime as Furor Rages On

#249

Post by matz1 »

koonsolo wrote: post #240
matz1 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is it enable you to work more (for those who want it). > The 7-8 hour person will create better products with fewer bugs the 12 hour person with sufficient breaks can't do that ? whats the reasoning ?

The 12 hour person might actually be a 3 hour person. It's just fooling yourself that you "work" 12 hours a day. Maybe I'll put my bed in the office, that way I can "work" the full 8 hours ;).

Sure, if you prefer that, whatever works for you.

Re: Jack Ma Again Endorses Extreme Overtime as Furor Rages On

#250

Post by matz1 »

raducu wrote: post #245
matz1 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not for everyone.

While I agree that it's not for everyone and people should have a right to decide how they spend their time, I think it's detrimental even for those who claim it is good for themselves. If you actually ask, "Who is this for then?" -- I think you'll be hard pressed not to answer "For the young, socially less inclined(men)", just like drugs are for certain demographics or polygamy is for certain demographics, teenage m…

Just because it's detrimental or suck for you doesn't mean it also the case for other. Likewise for drugs and polygamy.

That's just reality of life.

And if you outlawing the practice, its sucks for those people who want to prefer those you think "horrendous" work hour.

Post reply on HN