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

On loyalty to your employer (2018)

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 466 posts

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#381

Post by belthesar »

usrusr wrote: post #348
mohaine wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small companies really magnify the extreems. Good ones are really great but bad ones are extra bad. Sadly, they are also nimble enough to switch between them, at least in one direction.

Not only the extremes, also the speed: good employers can turn into bad employers (has the opposite ever happened? I'd love to learn of an example!), but big companies at least have some inertia while it happens. There's probably even some "Sun" still left, all those years after the Oracle takeover. Compare this to what happened at Komoot.

I have seen the opposite happen, but I'm fairly confident that few people that felt the pendulum swing from good to bad stick around long enough to feel the upward swing.

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#382

Post by sarks_nz »

gorbachev wrote: post #257
swatcoder wrote: post #177

Earlier 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.

Yep. They forget there are all sorts of "families" and some are very dysfunctional.

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#383

Post by carlosjobim »

Frieren wrote: post #141
lr4444lr wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The loss of work for its centering, routine, mental challenges, socialization across the generations, and sense of accomplishment is harmful to mental and even physical health. Sure, a construction worker can't be climbing the rafters at 80 years old, but this idea that we just transition to leisure and getting together with friends at a certain point is both fairly novel and of dubious value.

> Sure, a construction worker can't be climbing the rafters at 80 years old, but this idea that we just transition to leisure and getting together with friends at a certain point is both fairly novel and of dubious value. Peopled died and killed for the right to a pension. And many more are still fighting for it around the world. To disregard that so costly-gain right so lightly seems quite a privileged position. A c…

How exactly could those people get the right to a pension from the unborn? A scam is a scam, but all Ponzi schemes blow up in the end.

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#384

Post by freitasm »

My second job, in the late 80s and early 90s was with a mainframe company. Not the Big Blue, but the red one.

I mentioned to my uncle, a MD. He was happy for me because I had "found a job for life".

This was his world view. Being a self-employed, practice-owner MD he had a job for life. He thought this was the same in other careers.

I worked that job 18 years, in two countries. Then I left and have had three jobs since then. Changed careers. But I never thought being loyal gave me any credit with the employers.

One of them dropped me like a lead balloon as soon as the acquiring company found someone in another office to kiss someone's behind.

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#385

Post by eschneider »

I've worked for some genuinely great companies (and some not so great) over the course of my career and companies change, just like people. A great company you joined, might not be so great in 3-5 years and there's rarely much one can do about that. If it's no longer a good fit, it's not disloyal or unethical to move on.

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#386

Post by jayd16 »

rckt wrote: post #103

I 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…

Its better to think of your reputation than some kind of loyalty score you can cash in. Some people in the org care about your rep and some don't and that's all there is.

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#387

Post by jayd16 »

xingped wrote: post #130
Scene_Cast2 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Employer? No. But I've seen some very smart coworkers value and reward deep, specialized knowledge that is built through working in the same area (of not just tech but also business application) for many years.

Doesn't really matter how much your coworkers value you when your employer suddenly decides tomorrow that they've decided to change focus for the 5th time this month and it's your department getting cut this time.

After a layoff is when your reputation matters most, no?

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#388

Post by palata »

Spot on. There is no loyalty, it's a partnership.

You wouldn't pay 20% to Netflix to watch your shows, would you? But it doesn't mean you're a bad customer. And when Netflix raises the prices or includes ads, they won't say "oh, you've been paying us for 5 years, we won't do it to you".

If extra time is not compensated, don't do extra time. Even for startups: startups are ponzi schemes for the founders. Like for any job, you should consider what they offer now, not what they promise. Because startups generally don't meet those promises (that's the whole point of a startup).

But if the company respects you, you can respect it in return. It means meeting the expectations. If one party doesn't, the other party is free to end the contract.

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#389

Post by thunky »

hylaride wrote: post #366
thunky wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's camaraderie Ok, but it's not loyalty. At least I hope not... Those like-minded peers you've had owed you no nothing. You had a fair, respectful, professional relationship with them that was self sustaining and therefore did not demand allegience in either direction. If a better opportunity came along for them I would hope that you would want them to take it despite your history and the camaraderie you've estab…

> If a better opportunity came along for them I would hope that you would want them to take it despite your history and the camaraderie you've established with them. And same for you. To me, it was not about people leaving you behind, but calling you up when opportunities arise (though I didn't feel that way when it first happened at the beginning of my career). Camaraderie doesn't mean you owe people or are owed any…

I think we're agreeing. I just don't think loyalty (necessarily) implies mutual trust and support.

I've been accused of being disloyal simply for being honest and not agreeing with someone else's stance. So in my gut, loyalty implies abondoning your principals or compromising yourself in some way in order to gain or keep favor with someone else.

I suppose others may think of loyalty as a positive trait. But in the context of of a profressional relationship, I can't see any reason we should want loyalty to play a role.

Re: On loyalty to your employer (2018)

#390

Post by [deleted] »

sarks_nz wrote: post #382
gorbachev wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yep. They forget there are all sorts of "families" and some are very dysfunctional.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN