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

Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

drive.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 97 posts

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#81

Post by ForHackernews »

blaser-waffle wrote: post #80
TuringNYC wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since they mention "junior bankers", i'd say most of it is: - re-formatting presentations decks - re-formatting booklets - checking numbers - being available The first two to three episodes of HBO's Industry ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_(TV_series) ) reflects this well, and darkly. It is also fairly accurate w/r/t what my banker friends experienced.

Spot on. According to family who worked in finance: the reformatting has to do with any errors. If there is one small error, somewhere, then how do you know there aren't more? These banks are making million or billion dollar transactions, so a small rounding error can cost fantastic amounts of money. So start from square one and do it over, and make sure it's right. Additionally, they need a lot of collateral. Append…

Really surprised they can't automate that shit. It sounds like they need linters for their documents.

I certainly would trust a well-tested piece of software to get the numbers right sooner than I'd trust a gaggle of overpaid sleep-deprived 22 year-old Princeton grads.

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#82

Post by coffeefirst »

albertshin wrote: post #76
dempseye wrote: post #35

1. They are all lying. They are not working productively for 95 hours a week. At most they are *present* for 95 hours a week. It is not humanly possible to maintain mental focus for that long. Everyone who says it is telling macho lies. It might be possible to get close to it for a week or two with stimulant drugs, but eventually you will have to pay the piper. 2. It is no secret that Goldman expects self-destructive…

I agree in the literal way, but if you're kept captive for 95 hours regardless, does the distinction of work vs being present really matter? I doubt they're able to schedule anything meaningful for personal growth/enjoyment (e.g. dinner with friends?). The end outcome is that it hurts the employee. The survey was for 13 people, but it still saddens me to see that they unanimously agreed on having negative relationshi…

Right. Plus people vastly underestimate the long term health impact from that kind of lifestyle.

The other thing is if you're a client, this should terrify you. Nobody working those kinds of hours can maintain anything resembling a clear head with good judgement.

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#83

Post by dempseye »

albertshin wrote: post #76
dempseye wrote: post #35

1. They are all lying. They are not working productively for 95 hours a week. At most they are *present* for 95 hours a week. It is not humanly possible to maintain mental focus for that long. Everyone who says it is telling macho lies. It might be possible to get close to it for a week or two with stimulant drugs, but eventually you will have to pay the piper. 2. It is no secret that Goldman expects self-destructive…

I agree in the literal way, but if you're kept captive for 95 hours regardless, does the distinction of work vs being present really matter? I doubt they're able to schedule anything meaningful for personal growth/enjoyment (e.g. dinner with friends?). The end outcome is that it hurts the employee. The survey was for 13 people, but it still saddens me to see that they unanimously agreed on having negative relationshi…

They are not being kept captive. They are freely contracting to be in this situation. They presumably did well in university and are highly employable.

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#84

Post by TuringNYC »

ForHackernews wrote: post #81
blaser-waffle wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spot on. According to family who worked in finance: the reformatting has to do with any errors. If there is one small error, somewhere, then how do you know there aren't more? These banks are making million or billion dollar transactions, so a small rounding error can cost fantastic amounts of money. So start from square one and do it over, and make sure it's right. Additionally, they need a lot of collateral. Append…

Really surprised they can't automate that shit. It sounds like they need linters for their documents. I certainly would trust a well-tested piece of software to get the numbers right sooner than I'd trust a gaggle of overpaid sleep-deprived 22 year-old Princeton grads.

Each company's analysis is a DAG of sorts with assumptions, each assumption based on other assumptions, and all of those based on tables of estimates and projections.

That makes it all somewhat unique, at least beyond the industry level. Further, it is not like there are numerous IPOs, its not really done enough times to automate.

Finally, there is a hazing and rite-of-passage component to all this. And it is paid very well, with even better prospects after the job, so people accept it.

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#85

Post by minikites »

valuearb wrote: post #79
ArchitectAnon wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany has this. They’re not a poor country.

And their best finance people go to the US to make more money.

Oh no, whatever will we do without finance people who work to make imaginary numbers go up on a spreadsheet? Our whole economy would collapse!

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#86

Post by minikites »

valuearb wrote: post #25
minikites wrote: post #18

I'm not sure what the best enforcement mechanism would be, but this should be addressed through national legislation. Perhaps mandatory overtime and/or some kind of business-level tax for anyone working more than 40 hours a week? Nobody should be "exempt" from earning overtime.

These people chose a job that offered a career path to become super wealthy. These hours are the price for their shot at massive riches.

So it should be accounted for directly instead of laundering it through "exempt" status.

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#87

Post by valuearb »

minikites wrote: post #85
valuearb wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And their best finance people go to the US to make more money.

Oh no, whatever will we do without finance people who work to make imaginary numbers go up on a spreadsheet? Our whole economy would collapse!

What would we do without nerds to type commands into an editor?

When you don’t understand what another persons value really entails, it’s easy to make fun of. Warren Buffett is in finance, has never used a spreadsheet, and built a business that employs over 400,000 people.

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#88

Post by valuearb »

minikites wrote: post #86
valuearb wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These people chose a job that offered a career path to become super wealthy. These hours are the price for their shot at massive riches.

So it should be accounted for directly instead of laundering it through "exempt" status.

So you would prefer them to work only 40 hours per week, and pay Goldman Sachs the difference in value they are accruing?

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#89

Post by minikites »

valuearb wrote: post #88
minikites wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it should be accounted for directly instead of laundering it through "exempt" status.

So you would prefer them to work only 40 hours per week, and pay Goldman Sachs the difference in value they are accruing?

No, I'm saying that if they work more than 40 hours in a week, they get overtime pay at a higher rate than their usual pay instead of working 90 hours and getting paid for 40. Maybe an extra tax on Goldman's end so they're discouraged from scheduling people in this way.

Re: Goldman Sachs Working Conditions Survey

#90

Post by minikites »

valuearb wrote: post #87
minikites wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh no, whatever will we do without finance people who work to make imaginary numbers go up on a spreadsheet? Our whole economy would collapse!

What would we do without nerds to type commands into an editor? When you don’t understand what another persons value really entails, it’s easy to make fun of. Warren Buffett is in finance, has never used a spreadsheet, and built a business that employs over 400,000 people.

Look at the charts here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization

Their entire job is to inflate the price of existing assets. There is no other productive purpose, this money is not being re-lent for people to start businesses and it is not serving any other practical purpose, it's literally "number go up".

>The securities that were so instrumental in triggering the financial crisis of 2007-2008, asset-backed securities, including collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) were practically non-existent in 1978. By 2007, they comprised $4.5 trillion in assets, equivalent to 32% of U.S. GDP.

That's 4.5 trillion dollars in imaginary money that isn't serving any purpose. Even Warren Buffet agrees:

>Warren Buffett (who famously disparaged CDOs and other derivatives as "financial weapons of mass destruction, carrying dangers that, while now latent, are potentially lethal"

Post reply on HN