Slashdot Mirror
12/7 and Overtime on a Salary?
over-timeout! asks: A company I work for (in the U.S.A.) had submitted a statement of work to a client, who waited for a month before signing the work order. The work order explicitly stated a timeline which would start from the time the order is signed. However, the client is insisting on the project being completed by a fixed date, as discussed with our company's management, instead of the deadline that starts from the signing of the work order. Although our company representatives tried to push back on the date, the client refused. Because the client is among our company's biggest customers, our company's management caved in and agreed to their deadlines. Management has told us meeting deadlines means that for the next month to six weeks all of the developers involved will have to work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. The contractors involved are going to get compensated by being paid by the hour. But us salaried employees are going to get nothing in return for trading in what's left of our life so someone else in the company above us can make money. Obviously this isn't fair, but what are the alternatives in this down economy, where jobs are hard to find?" A related articles on this subject discusses suing for overtime, and California residents should find this companion article pertinent, as well. What can you do when management agrees to a timeline and a workload that may make your job, as a programmer, difficult-to-impossible?
The company will find out the hard way that working 12 hrs a day, 7 days a week writing code is a sure way to get poor quality code and make a project cost more and take longer than decent working hours.
12 hrs/7 days in a thought-intensive job is fatiguing (I know, I've been there and done that). After about a 50 hour week, you start hitting diminishing returns. After about 60 hours, in my experience, you start getting negative returns (the project actually starts regressing) because more bugs than good code is put in.
Is there a proper software process in the firm? I think not if they agreed to those sort of terms.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
If only you lived in the EU!
:p
There is no god
Depends on what state the original poster is in, but most states have labor laws strictly limit what can be expected of a salary employee... if this isn't an illegal thing to expect from an employee, it should be.
is enquire what the bonus structure is going to be like if you get the project done on time. Asking for things like extra vacation time or serious profit participation would be very appropriate.
Is the company entitled to expect you to make this sacrifice? No. But then again, you're not entitled to expect that they will continue to employ you.
Negotiate. If you resort to lawsuit, the only people who will make money are lawyers.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Well .. you have several options:
- Do the work like a good worker bee
- Do the work, but piss and moan to
/. about it
- Do the work, but piss and moan to you supervisor about it
- Start doing the work while looking for a new job
- Quit immidately
Summing it upThe question to ask yourself is: "How much do I like my current job and position? ... and ... Is it worth the lack of a life?"
Just $0.00232 (after taxes)
Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
Listen- I hear you. "principles" of software engineering; you know, making estimates of work based upon metrics of past performance, and the idea of fully clarified requirements specification before starting a project? Yeah, its all BS. Doesn't happen where I work, and I work an enormous Software Engineering projects and my customers are the FAA and NATS (UK's equivalent). They throw tantrums, and they act like children. But they pay the bills.
So 6 weeks? Is it limited to that? Because that's do-able. You work real hard, the end date comes and goes, and then its over- time to have a party.
Can you hold this over your managers head for compensation during the next performance review? It is worth a shot to mention it to him/her in clear language- I am a team player. I am busting hump. I want this reflected in my performance evaluations.
Also, are there any perks? Lunches provided on Sunday? Foosball table? Free movie tickets?
Maybe this should be suggested to management- 12/7 does NOT improve morale, and with tight deadlines thats when you need morale the most.
IF its only 6 weeks, this can be sustained. When it grows to 6 months, to a year plus, that is NOT sustainable. You break down. You wear out. Productivity goes down the tubes. And you break out into stress-related rashes. Its not a pretty sight.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
R-E-N-T
It's easy to say "oh, well just quit, then" when they situation is purely hypothetical to you. Unfortunately, not many of us are in a position where we can just tell our boss to get fucked, as much as we'd like to.
In the last year my department has been whittled down from eight employees to me and another guy. It sucks ass, but I've got to pay the bills.
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
There's always such a lot of non-programming, "administrative" work (read mails, write status updates, all the boring stuff), that working 60 instead of 40 hours can easily double your output, because the extra 20 hours tend to go into productive work entirely. BTDT, and for a limited time (like 6 months to a year, before people start quitting) it does actually work.
Let's see. Twelve times seven is Eighty-Four.
Employees are generally useless after 60 hours. After 80 hours, I can only recommend bringing a videocamera and selling it to "America's Funniest Home Videos."
Negotiate with your boss for A: two weeks of paid vacation starting as soon as the ludicrous crunch time is over, and B: two extra weeks of paid vacation to be taken sometime in the future. If that doesn't work, look for another job. It's unprofessional to demand such hours with no reward, and it is unprofessional to give in to such demands.
It would also help morale if the managers who made this mistake also stayed 12/7, though I don't know if it will help your position of you pointed that out to them.
The ______ Agenda
At least in Pennsylvania, IT workers are considered "exempt from overtime. Thus, you have three options:
1) Threaten to quit and hope they don't call your bluff. If they call your bluff, you'll like like an idiot of you don't quit. See #2.
2) Just quit "in-force" and watch them panic. With any luck (and hoping your other team members do the same), they'll do what they can to retain you. Make sure you have something else lined up or you won't be able to collect unemployment.
3) Suck it up and look really hard for a new job and pray the fire you for poor performance (that way, you get out of any non-competes and can collect unemployement).
Well, there's a fourth option, that's to quit and join the consulting firm your company has hired. Of course, that may not work either as they may have a non-compete/non-hiring agreement with your company.
If you choose #3, be sure to do the absolute minimal amount of work, call in sick a lot. Complain of illnessess like carpal tunnel syndrome, headaches, dizziness, back pain. And, be sure to visit doctors to get these "illnessess" on record. Then, when they let you go, you nail them for creating an unhealthy work environment and take them to the cleaners.
Baring that...a measure of last recourse...be sure to mutter to yourself and yell "grenade" or some other war time saying whenever your boss walks in. And, cover yourself with water so it looks like your sweating profusely and having some sort of stress attack. It helps, of course, to have some real legitimate combat experience to pull this one off effectively. Alternatively, you can come to work wearing trench coats and talk alot about your cache of weapons you've been collecting with your other, less stable, coworkers (who also wear trench coats). Make sure your supervisors overhear you. When they let you go, sue for creating a hostile work environment as, I assume, you don't truly have a cache of weapons.
In the past six years, I've owned two small (~8 developer) software development shops. In both shops I've played the role of the "technical" partner, who leads the development team for the software projects we create. I've bitten off more than I (and my team) can chew on multiple occassions in the interest of delivering a big-dollar project for a big-name client, and as a result spent absolutely every waking moment possible trying to complete projects. I've really tried to push my limits as hard as I can, and in my situation, I WAS DIRECTLY REWARDED for my work.
Let me offer these idiots (the people requesting a 12/7 schedule) a piece of advice: 84 hours per week is f---ing insane. You wind up with diminishing returns after about 50-60 hours/week. While 84 (or more) hours is very possible for a week or two, such a schedule will QUICKLY become ineffective immediately thereafter. You might be at work for 84 hours, but your mind won't. Whoever is running this company doesn't know that, which means they don't know how to run a company, which therefore means that the company (or your department) isn't likely to be successful, which you should take as an indicator of its expected lifespan. Get out now.
What has *science* done?!? -- Dr. Weird (ATHF)
"hard to quit when you have mouths to feed, etc."? It's downright irresponsible in this economy. I'm all for the entrepreneurial spirit and I am certainly for the rights of the worker but to quit an IT job right now...without another job already lined up...is likely to spell 6+ months on unemployment and a lower paying job at the end.
I realize you are not saying the parent poster should quit but it just strikes me as funny that so many posters to slashdot yell "Quit!" as if jobs are growing on a 1990's-esque tree somewhere.
I think the better approach is to first ask yourself whether or not the employer has a history of doing this kind of thing. Do they treat you well when times are good and call on you to step up when times are bad?
Case in point: I recently led a small team developing a web application. The completion date was set by the customer even before we were able to analyze the requirements and once I had a chance to look at the requirements I told my managers that it would be really difficult to meet the date without working alot of overtime for an extended period of time. Management replied that their hands were tied (they were) and that we had to hit the mark i.e. I walked in this geek's shoes.
I had no choice. I wasn't going to walk out of my job on the off-chance that I might find another job. I'm salaried. I knew I was getting screwed, etc.
What happened: every step of the way, my management team was there fighting to get the schedule extended, attempting to reduce the requirements, etc. In the end, the schedule was extended by about a month and a half and a particularly troublesome requirement was dropped. Now that the job is done things have slackened off some, my team is looked upon favorably, nobody gives us hassles if we are not busy 100% of the time or come in under 40 hours for the week because they know that when push comes to shove we will get the job done and leave the attitudes, etc. for the project's post-mortem review.
So...if you are employed, like your job overall and management generally treats you well overall, etc. you might want to consider just biting the bullet for a the time it takes and go from there. The pendulum has swung from one extreme (the employee's market of the 1990's) to the other (employer's market of today) but it will eventually swing back towards center and, when it does, management will have, as Ricky Ricardo would say, "some 'splainin' to do". The fact that you stuck it out when times were hard can be leveraged into either a fat raise, new position or another job at a company that appreciates you more.
"Your story seems to demonstrate the needs for techs to unionize. (...) I think if you act collectivel and keep the community informed you wil have a lot of support and could be the beginning of something."
Acting collectively sounds good. If you all agree something needs to be done, send a spokesperson or two to talk to management about this issue. Make it clear that the current deal (working 12/7 without compensation) is unacceptable, and make it clear that you speak on behalf of the entire department or project team.
I'd stay away from proper unions, though. Unions, like almost every other established organisation, primarily concern themselves with perpetuating its own interests... and those may not necessarily coincide with those of the membership or workers in general! For example: a few times unions here have called a strike even after managements conceded to every one of their demands. The reason? Membership was dropping, and a bunch of angry workers picketing in front of a blocked factory gate would look really good on the evening news, they figured.
Our own firm has had some recent dealings with unions recently, none of it very pretty. We've had some layoffs, and unions were pushing for us to implement a 'last in, first out' rule. Managent didn't want that, and especially the employees didn't want that (they'd prefer the deadwood getting fired instead, on a merit basis). But, for, some reason, this rule is a big deal for unions. I'm happy to say they didn't have much influence, as they represent less than 5% of our workforce (mostly educated IT consultants).
Some last thoughts: Be rational about this! Don't start off by banging your fist on the table, but strongly suggest that the proposed work schedule is unreasonable, especially without any compensation. If they keep refusing to remedy the situation flat out, it's fist-banging time... but only if you all are prepared to take it to the next level, up to and including quitting. Because in the end, that is the only leverage you really have.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Ask the boss to cancel the contract, and to restart the negotiation.
They need to look at any penalities that will incur for not delivering on time, or delivering a poor quality product that would incur a lawsuit for delivering a poor quality product, and the loss of bussiness from this and other companies when you get a reputation for delivering poor quality products.
There is no way you will make the deadline, so be sure that they know the potiential for them to LOSE MONEY is greater than the possibility of EARNING A PROFIT on the contract.
The timeline unrealistic. Any bonus for being on time will not be awarded.
Expectation of quality from overworked employees is unrealistic. They will be spending money on fixing this thing, even if they don't get thier ass sued for a poor quality product.
Large potiential to lose any reputation you have for delivering on the above two.
The long work hours is one of the catches of technology work. For that matter, it is one of the catches of most creative work. There is a great deal involved in getting a programmer to the point where they are totally primed for work. When they are, the extra twenty or so hours in the work week is magic.
Of course, trying to keep employees primed at 60-80 weeks leads to burn out. The IT work load generally is cyclical as well. There is a killer deadline, people have to be give their all to meet the deadline...then there is a shallow period.
In the ideal world, companies would realize this and allow IT workers much more time off with pay during slow times.
Unions are just a plain bad idea for technical skilled people, especially the most skilled people. We're not just turning screwdrivers.
I've been an individual contributor, a manager, and a team leader all within the same company, usually going where the need was greatest or my skills matched. About half of my managers were engineers (and some were good managers) and they too changed roles from time to time. Unions assume that it's management vs. the employees. In addition to being part of either group, I was also a part owner of the company (through stock options). When I got laid-off, I knew it was the only option for the company at the time. Yeah, I thought bad decisions had been made before that point (and obviously, I thought laying me off was a bad idea, but those are the breaks, I wasn't going to cry about it).
In addition to all that, I'd rather be free to negotiate my own salary, schedule, etc. Being part of a union would not help.
Anyway, please keep your unions to yourself. I like being independent and being judged and paid according to my own work. If I can avoid it, I'll never join a union. It's one of the worst things that could happen to my long-term career and compensation prospects.
There is NOTHING wrong with a 9-5 attitude. Life is short; we work because we have to contribute to society and get compensated as a result. If you agree to work 40 hours a week, and your employer insists on making you work more, without additional pay, you are being SCREWED.
I make it a point to always leave at 5PM when I can. If there's some emergency or important project that requires me to stay late, I do so, but I make up for it by leaving early at some point in the future.
I suppose this is an advantage of working for the state (state university), but you have to remember that if you let work control you, you can never be truly happy (unless you're a workaholic but that's something else)
Work 9-5. If your employer abuses you, put up with it until you can find another job, then leave. There's no reason to put yourself through hell.
Actually, they usually just lay off the people who make the most money.
Companies go through tough times, and sometimes extra work needs to be put in. But you need to be compensated for your time.
I have been put in simular situations many times (though not as severe), and have never ever been refused compensation. Of course, I've had to negotiate compensation, often the management don't realise how much this will cost them. And when you do negotiate, do it up front, before starting the work. Oh, and make sure they know it is *not* negotiable. You need some sort of compensation.
Just remember, a normal day is 8 hours, so a normal week is 40 hours.
They want you to work 84 hours a week. Thats double. IE, in those 6 weeks you will be working an equiv of 12 weeks.
A few ideas:
* Get paid a bonus equivelent to 6 week wages.
* Get 6 weeks of paid leave.
* Some sort of combination.
* Be pepared to compromise a little...work 10 hour days, and get 12 days holidays (IE get back your weekend time, and work 2 free hours a day)
A few no-nos:
* a long weekend is not fair compensation.
* Providing you lunch on Sunday is not a "fair exhange" (How much are you worth?)
* Tickets to your favourite sporting match is not compensation.
I prefer the holiday option (time in luei), as I can spend time with family and friends.
Just remember...the managers are human too, and they do care. They are more likely to offer you the holiday option, as it doesn't cost them more. And they do understand that it is fair they compensate you for your time.
The thing to remember is to be firm. Don't offer or threaten to quit. Just tell them...yes, I will work the extra hours, but I expect to be fairly compensated for those hours. If they won't budge, work 8 hour days. They can't fire you for working what you were hired to do.
At the end of the day though, its your decision. Not the companies. If this is the life you choose to live, and you want to work for this company. Then do it.
That depends on your point of view. From another point of view, it's probably incompetent management trying to take advantage.
It doesn't matter that it's "only" 4-6 weeks. The employees will be straining to get through half that at 12/7 before they start doing more harm than good. If it's "only" a one-off and really necessary for the company, then management should have approached the employees and discussed the possibility with them before accepting the project and telling them what they "have to do".
This sounds like a simple failure of good management. The managers exist only to balance requirements with resources. If this project requires excessive work on the part of the staff, then management should have assigned more resources, or not taken on the project. They have no-one to blame but themselves if they treat salaried staff in a less favourable way than contractors, and those staff then feel aggrieved.
I agree with the other posters that you should look at the company and the nature of management overall before deciding how to act in a situation like this. But look with a very sceptical eye. Loyalty to a good employer is fair enough, but I've seen way too many people stick it out way too long because they assumed that "things will get better" or "the economy is just down", while others around them in a similar position were getting much better deals by actually going out and shopping around.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Then maybe the situation the story submitter has found himself in should be a valuable lesson to the rest of us. Just because you make X dollars doesn't mean you should spend X dollars. You desperately need to have yourself some sort of savings or reserve capital just in case you do find yourself in a poor work situation. Then you can be your own master instead of being totally anchored down by your existing job.
I said it before and I will say it again. If you don't have the latitude in your life to quit your job, you are at the mercy of your employer.
Not just you. When you work for free, you're allowing an employer to lay off your colleagues, or not hire people they need.
They should decide whether or not it is viable to complete the project to the client's specifications with the resources available. ("Viable" needn't mean "profitable"; they could decide to run the project at an acceptable loss in order to keep the client sweet.)
If the project is viable, they should assign sufficient resources and have the project done. If the project is not viable, they should explain this politely to the client, and decline the business.
No smart client is going to withhold future business because you declined an infeasible project. If they do, you have failed to manage your clients' expectations effectively, which is another common but avoidable failure of management. And besides, you are in business to make a profit, not to keep happy potential clients who do not make you a profit.
Sure, and the employees have every right to say no if unreasonable demands are made of them, particularly in the sort of unpleasant way that this seems to be done (telling not asking, no up-front offers of compensation, treat staff differently to contractors, etc).
I'd work out what resources would be needed. If necessary, this could include asking whether people would be prepared to do more than their usual amount of work to increase that, given mutually acceptable compensation. Then I'd work out if the project was viable. If it was, I'd take it. If not, I wouldn't.
This is not a new problem, nor even an uncommon one. Yet companies with bad management seem to run into it all the time, while companies with good management strangely seem to avoid it, even when working in a similar industry and with similar or identical clients. Go figure.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Dude... you need to chill out. No one has a right to make anyone work for more than the amount of time that was agreed upon. If the job doesn't get finished within the 8 hour (or 7.5 hour in my case) work day, then the company either needs to hire new staff or needs to seriously reconsider the value of the project. This over extension of "nose to the grind stone" has got to stop. There is nothing "macho" about working 12 hours a day when you don't have a life outside of work to enjoy the fruits of your labor.
I have every right to say, "it's 5:00PM. I'm going home now". And I do. Every day. At least I work for a sane and humane employer. Granted I don't make a six figue salary and would be considered "poor" by most of the Slashdot neocons. But having more time outside of work then at work is worth more to me than six figures, an SUV and a cluster home.
Europe has the right idea. If we all worked less, we'd get more done with a higher level of quality. And maybe not everyone would be as uptight.
Un-news
I NEVER work for free, and neither should you.
PS - I must admit that while working as a contractor I have worked huge amounts of overtime - but I was getting paid for it.
Anarchists never rule
Okay, I can come in on Saturday, but I can't work on Sunday. An Orthodox Jew can't work from Friday Evening until Sunday. A muslim can't work on Friday.
That is well within the demands of our religion. Get laid off? Ask why, in writing. If they say "could not work to meet the demands of our contract", that is enough to haul them into court: religious discrimination, and sue for company ownership.
No kidding, that 1-day-off is God's minimum-benefits plan. It is also extremely important for a different reason: people who don't get 1 day off tend to start making very bad decisions. Ask my brother, who was working 7 days per week on his grad program. He got an ion trap working that had never worked before, then got data; it was given to a previous student for her PhD. He accepted it, and went to get more data... but long story short, destroyed the million dollar superconduncting magnet through a series of plausible, but erroneous mistakes.
His grad professor approved every one of the decisions, but was not overseeing the work, since he too was making bad decisions...
I really think 1 day off a week is quite important, and the 3 major religions of Jewish origin provide a good means for that 1 day a week.
But if you aren't religious, that's okay. Go ahead and put bugs in the customer's code [you can't help it... it'll happen.]
Or go back and argue this one out with your management, saying "this isn't acceptable -- you need to hire more workers or the work isn't going to get done right, and you need to charge the customer the extra."
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
--What good is your extra money if you never have TIME to do anything with it? What good is buying things with your extra money if you never spend any time at home?
--A balnace *has* to be struck between work and personal life. I don't care if you're a single bachelor even - if you devote your entire life to work, you rob yourself. Your employer does NOT CARE about you. Stand up for your personal time, and don't agree to be a slave.
.
== WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??