I misread this as "On loyalty to your emperor". As it turn out I ain't got that either.
On loyalty to your employer (2018)
261–270 of 466 posts
Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like to use a fuzzy definition (though, all definitions are fuzzy—what's a chair? Good luck...) based on whether it's common for someone with the means to do so, to pay others to do it for them, by choice and not due to disability or something like that. Taking a shit? Not work. Cleaning the toilet? Work. Eating dinner? Not work. Cooking dinner? Work. Playing badminton on your lawn? Not work. Mowing the lawn? Work.…
How do you define "retirement"?
When you have enough money that you no longer do work for more?
Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep in mind that the benefits of loyalty vary with the size of the organization and the number peers your name gets lost among in the org chart. The larger the company, and the more they're ballooned out with abstract drones chomping on abstract work items, the more loyalty becomes a means for abuse. Turnover is rampant and their processes are built to optimally accommodate it. They're egregores, not people, and the…
There is a special form of small company that's even worse. It's the kind where "we're a family". Those are worse than anything a big company bureaucracy / bean-counting could ever be.
The small and successful company (~100 people) my brother-in-law works at is currently self-destructing, specifically because the CEO is that exact kind of family-loyalty "father figure" wannabe.
Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)
#264I got it pretty early in my career that loyalty for a company is concept to make you work harder without asking anything in return. And the moment the company shifts focus and you are out of it, then suddenly you understand that this loyalty wasn't kind of a credits account which you've been saving all this time. It's simply nothing. You are on your own and can fuck off. So there's simply no place for loyalty in empl…
Not even specific to the tech industry (not that you were saying it was).
My ex- was working towards becoming a veterinarian. During a gap in schooling, she looked at some jobs as a tech or assistant.
She found a good fit, and got to the point of having an offer. But she was having a crisis of conscience. The ad, and interviewers, had talked about how they wanted people who would be invested and committed in the practice. Not in and out in a few months. But she knew that in 9-10 months she would be doing more schooling. Could she take the job in good conscience, knowing that?
Absolutely she could. I said this to her:
Okay, so they're asking for someone who'll be there for years, is committed to them.
Say you start work, and in three months there's a recession, or just a downturn in their business. Is their response more likely to be:
1) "Business is hard, times are tough, but you are committed to us and we are committed to you, so no layoffs, no firings, no pay decreases. Let's get through this together."
or will it be
2) "Business is hard, times are tough, so today will be your last day at XYZ Vet Hospital, thank you for your service."
Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
All loyalty is a risk. Even loyalty to your spouse is a risk. Just like how all love and human trust is a risk. To feel human you have to take these emotional risks. You shouldn’t bet your life that a mega-corp has absolute and utter loyalty to you. You shouldn’t bet your entire life that your spouse has absolute loyalty to you (we have divorce, pre-nups, and post-nups for a reason). But it strikes me as a pretty sou…
This soullessness wasn't always the case. Prior to the cost-cutting minmaxing of Jack Welch's industries -influential tenure as CEO of General Electric, corporate America wasn't quite so brazen about layoffs, because they weren't viewed as a way to maximize shareholder returns- and shareholder value wasn't viewed as the only priority for corporate leaders. (He also introduced what would later become stack ranking at…
But also there were actual benefits to loyalty that don’t exist anymore. Labor union participation was huge in the post WWII, pre-Welch time frame. They used that leverage to negotiate benefits, many of which rewarded loyalty. Pension plans vs 401ks, significant pay raises based on seniority, clear paths to promotion, job security prioritizing senior workers, etc. Those things permeated through job markets and companies without unions as well, given the labor force competition. People were loyal because they had real tangible compensation and benefits for it.
I think another shift around Welch was that companies used to focus more on long term value, which would result in stock price increases in the long term, even if not in any given short term. That if a company was healthy and valuable, one of the many benefits would be rising stocks. The shift to focus on short term stock increases as almost the only goal, means companies will pull the copper piping out the walls and destroy the house if it means a juicy bump in the Q3 earnings call.
Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)
#266I got it pretty early in my career that loyalty for a company is concept to make you work harder without asking anything in return. And the moment the company shifts focus and you are out of it, then suddenly you understand that this loyalty wasn't kind of a credits account which you've been saving all this time. It's simply nothing. You are on your own and can fuck off. So there's simply no place for loyalty in empl…
Keep in mind that the benefits of loyalty vary with the size of the organization and the number peers your name gets lost among in the org chart. The larger the company, and the more they're ballooned out with abstract drones chomping on abstract work items, the more loyalty becomes a means for abuse. Turnover is rampant and their processes are built to optimally accommodate it. They're egregores, not people, and the…
tbh that feels completely backwards. In large orgs, you are a number and transparently so. People come and go, processes are set up that assume attrition.
In a smaller shop, there's less flex overall for departures and more incentive to abuse the personal relationships built.
You are right that loyalty changes depending on org chart, but it's how senior you are. Senior execs have more vested in the company, both in their career and stock options.
Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)
#267I got it pretty early in my career that loyalty for a company is concept to make you work harder without asking anything in return. And the moment the company shifts focus and you are out of it, then suddenly you understand that this loyalty wasn't kind of a credits account which you've been saving all this time. It's simply nothing. You are on your own and can fuck off. So there's simply no place for loyalty in empl…
Keep in mind that the benefits of loyalty vary with the size of the organization and the number peers your name gets lost among in the org chart. The larger the company, and the more they're ballooned out with abstract drones chomping on abstract work items, the more loyalty becomes a means for abuse. Turnover is rampant and their processes are built to optimally accommodate it. They're egregores, not people, and the…
My parents told me to be loyal to people, not companies.
People get me a job when I look for one.
Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)
#268You should be loyal to your craft, not to your employer. You might have a job as a developer at some company that could get terminated at any time. Your skills and reputation remain irrespectively.
What about the loyal loom operators?
Transfer skills are important too.
I saw quite some Flash devs struggle after the iPhone release. Still, there were some that were good Devs that transitioned into other technologies.
Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's right, they do not deserve loyalty. All of these things hijack our loyalty to people in the name of some higher-order goal. Sports team and TV show loyalty is there to get us to consume more. Loyalty to a country gets us to be reliable cogs in someone else's grand project. Loyalty to a philosophy gets us to be a cult leader's acolyte. Skip the substitute and go for the real thing: loyalty to people. You can st…
Your examples are bizarre (sports teams are a matter of petty entertainment, not proper objects of loyalty). Philosophy isn't an object of loyalty either. However, you should acquaint yourself with the principle of subsidiarity. Loyalty, duty, and love radiate outward from those who are owed the most diminishing to those who are owed the least (spouses, then children, then parents, etc., all the way through extended…
They didn’t come up with the sports team example, it comes from the comment they are responding to.
Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep in mind that the benefits of loyalty vary with the size of the organization and the number peers your name gets lost among in the org chart. The larger the company, and the more they're ballooned out with abstract drones chomping on abstract work items, the more loyalty becomes a means for abuse. Turnover is rampant and their processes are built to optimally accommodate it. They're egregores, not people, and the…
There is a special form of small company that's even worse. It's the kind where "we're a family". Those are worse than anything a big company bureaucracy / bean-counting could ever be.
That depends. A lot of them are. A lot of them have owners that actually treat you like family.
Differentiating between the two based on signals during hiring is almost impossible, though.