311–320 of 695 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Software engineering is one of the ways of playing life in "easy mode" Is it though? People in software seem to be constantly talking about burnout/mental health issues. Like we need some explanation as to why software has such high pay, flexibility, limited education requirements, and yet not everyone in the world is doing it. High pay is usually a sign the job is compensating for being shitty in other ways.
> High pay is usually a sign the job is compensating for being shitty in other ways. Or that it requires a set of skills that not everybody has, or that there is a competitive market where employees can select jobs based on pay. Those are two other reasons. Indeed, I have to question the premise that high pay and shitty jobs go together. I can think of plenty of shitty, low-paid jobs.
Sure, but its skills easy enough that teenagers self-teaching is considered common. Its much easier than most "professional" jobs, like doctor.
Software engineering is one of the ways of playing life in "easy mode" (I moved from academia over a decade ago, and I know the difference). This blog post tries to paint it differently - and it feels like it lacks perspective compared to virtually any other occupation. > We’re living in a world where billion dollar tech companies expect us to live and breathe code, demanding 80 hour weeks under the guise of "passion…
It's a lot harder to even get interviews now--I'm one of several people in my social circle that are having difficulty even getting interviews with referrals.
Projecting forward, things looks worse than the present and far worse than the past.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let’s take the NYT Tech Guild. They negotiated a new contract following a strike last November. Here are some of the things they won: > Enhanced job security with ‘just cause’ protections > Guaranteed wage increases for the first time of up to 8.25% (plus additional base rate discretionary compensation) that prioritize the largest wage increases for the lowest paid members over the life of the contract > Additional c…
As a fairly progressive news outlet attracting staff with certain sensibilties in the NYC area and selling views to people who are the same, the NYTimes board of directors has a vested PR interest in tolerating unions with the large amounts money they have to pay for the privilege. I'm not convinced the company is better served by unionized employees over the rest of the tech scene, which has to innovate to stay solv…
From what I understand, the basic purpose of a union is to give its members more collective negotiating power with the employer. Its purpose isn't to better serve the company, necessarily, but to give the employees a more effective means of having their needs met – if employees feel these needs aren't being met, negotiating and making an agreement collectively could be a more effective route. Its job is to change the power dynamic between employees and companies, in favor of the employees. If this is the case, and the NYTimes tech staff who are union members like the outcome unionizing has had, then how is it a bad solution? What would be a better alternative of meeting the employees' needs?
I recognize my understanding is probably incomplete; I write this comment not to defend this position on unions, but to learn why it may be wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you like to remove all of the benefits unions have given you?
Working nights and weekends got me a close to ten figure exit at a now publicly traded fintech. So yeah, I don't mind. Rather than retiring on that money, I'm back at it again, and I'm working even harder. I know what mediocrity and complacency is. I've worked surrounded by it, and I'll do anything to avoid it. I don't want that bullshit where coworkers strive to do the minimum and everybody plays hot potato to see w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I made $450k TC in my last job. In Atlanta. I don't think we need unions to be treated well. Unions will kickstart the offshoring of our career. Just like every other place unions exist without a talent monopoly (manufacturing, automotive, and most recently film crews). Google is going to hire in developing markets and stop hiring domestically. Everyone else will follow. The talent in India is incredible these days.…
Both of these things can't be true at once†: 1. Tech workers are currently treated as well as (or better than) we would be without unions. 2. Unions would cause companies to offshore jobs to developing markets with similar talent. If unions don't increase worker compensation, why would they cause companies to offshore jobs? Conversely, if companies could acquire comparable talent in emerging markets for less money, w…
1. Tech workers are currently treated well - good hours, good salary, great benefits, etc... (until they are fired / position is eliminated).
2. If unions appear which make firing people hard, companies would stop hiring in US, and switch to India or temp contractors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I made $450k TC in my last job. In Atlanta. I don't think we need unions to be treated well. Unions will kickstart the offshoring of our career. Just like every other place unions exist without a talent monopoly (manufacturing, automotive, and most recently film crews). Google is going to hire in developing markets and stop hiring domestically. Everyone else will follow. The talent in India is incredible these days.…
> Unions will kickstart the offshoring of our career People are offshoring right now, and increasingly so. A union is arguably one of the only tools left to prevent offshoring, short of government intervention.
"sorry, no more open positions in the US... but don't worry, you are getting some helpers from India!"
Software engineering is one of the ways of playing life in "easy mode" (I moved from academia over a decade ago, and I know the difference). This blog post tries to paint it differently - and it feels like it lacks perspective compared to virtually any other occupation. > We’re living in a world where billion dollar tech companies expect us to live and breathe code, demanding 80 hour weeks under the guise of "passion…
All workers can and should unite to protect themselves from the capitalist class. Tech professionals should not feel guilty merely because they are less oppressed than the other workers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I made $450k TC in my last job. In Atlanta. I don't think we need unions to be treated well. Unions will kickstart the offshoring of our career. Just like every other place unions exist without a talent monopoly (manufacturing, automotive, and most recently film crews). Google is going to hire in developing markets and stop hiring domestically. Everyone else will follow. The talent in India is incredible these days.…
Both of these things can't be true at once†: 1. Tech workers are currently treated as well as (or better than) we would be without unions. 2. Unions would cause companies to offshore jobs to developing markets with similar talent. If unions don't increase worker compensation, why would they cause companies to offshore jobs? Conversely, if companies could acquire comparable talent in emerging markets for less money, w…
Because unions are a headache for management to deal with and that headache is much worse than compensation, which is a budget-line item, and doesn't personally impact anyone in management.
The AWU, for e.g, has political goals that represent what a small minority of Alphabet employees want but end up being a pain in a for anyone to deal with.
Software engineering is one of the ways of playing life in "easy mode" (I moved from academia over a decade ago, and I know the difference). This blog post tries to paint it differently - and it feels like it lacks perspective compared to virtually any other occupation. > We’re living in a world where billion dollar tech companies expect us to live and breathe code, demanding 80 hour weeks under the guise of "passion…
> Software engineering is one of the ways of playing life in "easy mode" Is it though? People in software seem to be constantly talking about burnout/mental health issues. Like we need some explanation as to why software has such high pay, flexibility, limited education requirements, and yet not everyone in the world is doing it. High pay is usually a sign the job is compensating for being shitty in other ways.
Not everyone in the world is doing it - because not everyone can do it and not everyone is motivated to get to the point where they can do it, even if they could.