Training - A Company or a Worker's Responsibility?

r0wan asks: "I'm currently working as a Microsoft Systems Administrator. Through a series of bungled management decisions, have found myself responsible for a Windows Server 2003 Active Directory network, that I know nothing about (the person who was sent for training was: not the Microsoft point person, as I was; and left the company, soon after the domain upgrade). It doesn't look as though training will be forthcoming, and I've just been moved from the lab, where I was training myself while simultaneously handling the domain. I've got the MCSA/MCSE Training Kit, but recently I've found numerous errors, so many that I was sent a free Press Kit book, for submitting all of the errors I had found. Between management's reluctance to shell out for training, and being moved from the lab, I'm getting the distinct sense that training is something I'm expected to take care of, on my own time. Is this the de-facto standard within IT, and for all jobs within IT? If so, how do you Slashdot readers keep up with your continuing education, while still maintaining a personal life? Is it naive to try to leave my work at work?" "I'm especially interested in hearing from the Slashdot readers of the female persuasion, as I have a husband, a dog, and a household to keep up with (no kids by choice, but I wouldn't have the time to take care of them, even if I wanted to). I also have the added responsibility of being the primary breadwinner. My free time is valuable in that it allows me to take care of that which I can't during the day (grocery shopping, dog responsibilities, cleaning, etc), and decompress/de-stress in order to prepare for the next day's work. I like tinkering with computers and learning new stuff, but I fear that if I'm expected train myself, outside of work, I may need to consider a different career.

Thanks in advance for the input."

Comments

The norm for the industry?

[lamasquerade]

Not at all! Sounds to me like your company is being miserly. Most IT companies, I believe, see the value of continuing education in our field and provide it. At my company, where I have been for two years, I have been on three training courses so far (one of three days, two of a week each). They have been for ITIL foundations, which is required for all employees, even non technical, and two HP Administration courses for products we support and deploy. In all cases I was paid while training as though I was at work, and in two cases I was flown to other cities in Australia, with the expenses taken care of - as is the norm I believe.

In fact this Sunday I'll be off to Melbourne for another course of a week, the second admin course for HPOV Performance Insight. Without the training I can't imaigine being able to deploy and support this quite complex (and not overly intuitive) product, it would in fact be negligent to have me do so.

I'd reccommend taking your need for education to your managemnt quite firmly, and if they won't budge look elsewhere - not just because of this particular issue, but because such behaviour is indicative of a lack of management vision IMO. If they can't outlay some cash now to train for the future it doesn't sound like they'll have much of a future to worry about - at least not a very interesting high growth one.

Sounds like my job...

[Jere H]

I moved from being an Excel junkie to being a network administrator with 5 servers. I had not used Active Directory or Windows Server 2003 before this point, so it was all new to me. My boss knows less than I do, and the people who installed the equipment basically showed us how to set up a new user when it was necessary.
Nobody told us how to map home folders, shared network drives, printers, set file permissions, or anything else. Everything I know was learned on my own, however, it was all researched on company time.
They've been pleased with the system so far. It's not too hard to learn.

From the across the desk

[Spazmania]

I can speak to this issue from the other side of the desk.

1. Yes, you are supposed to teach yourself. When I hire, I look for folks who are always learning, all day, every day. "Training" means I have to pay good money to have you absent from work for a week every couple months so that you can come back and spout off about the way X-Corp says it should be done instead of the way that would actually integrate into the system I spent years building. No thanks!

If you need a reference book, I'll buy it for you. If you want to take some night courses in computer science so that you can get a better grounding in the fundamentals then I'll help out in whatever way I can. Just don't waste my time or yours with these so-called training courses.

2. I expect that you'll spend a certain amount of time at work experimenting and gathering knowledge about the software and hardware you use to make my systems run. That's part of the job. You don't have to know everything ahead of time, you just have to know how to figure it out.

If you were a consultant it would be different. I'll pay a consultant twice what I pay you because I expect him to already have the answers when he hits my door. If HE doesn't know, he won't be invited back and if its bad enough he won't be paid. You, as an employee, have more leeway.

3. I expect that you'll spend a certain amount of time at home using similar technologies in the pursuit of your own hobbies. I expect that you'll learn things there that you apply to work just as you learn things at work that you'll apply to your hobbies.

Its not about taking your work home with you; its about getting paid to do work that you enjoy. This work I do was my hobby before it became my career. I enjoy it immensely and I want people around me who feel the same way. If you're just here for the paycheck then I hired the wrong guy. You won't deliver the standard of quality I want because when push comes to shove you just don't care.

Now, if you're like four out of five people out there then having read this you think I'm full of shit. And that's OK. There are plenty of suck jobs out there that will pay you well enough to drive a nice car and vacation at the beach. I wish you all the best in life and may you find your bliss.

But if you're the one out of five that finds the job worth working for its own sake then I want you working with me.

Oddly enough...

[DaedalusHKX]

I grew up under communist policies, and then moved here...

In the last 15 to 20 years I've seen the following VERY disturbing trend here in the USA.

People here do not leave their work at work. We work EXCESSIVE hours and are expected to kill ourselves, damage our health and wound our minds to "be more productive" or "increase productivity". (Ever since I left IT, I sleep more, I have more restful sleep, and I'm not at the edge of becoming homicidal.)

In Europe, even the eastern side, people left their work at work. I recall my mother telling me stories when I started hating the working world I encountered here. "Yep, I remember how we used to have it back home, it wasn't as bad as it seemed, now that I think about it. At least we had assured work, nobody got laid off, everyone had assured (and delivered, without need for lawsuits) pensions and retirement, and when they walked out the door at the end of the day, and off the premises, the coat of "labor" wore off, and it was time to enjoy life.

(Nevermind that she left for work at 0700, came back around 1600 in the afternoon, that would be, 4 o'clock for those who cannot read 24 hr clocks.)

I don't know, but now that I look back at it, the commies weren't nearly as abusive in the work place (corruption was rampant, but at LEAST one could actually get ahead based on their skills, if those skills were formidable, here, its very hard because your healthcare is assured by massive expenses, and the healthcare is rarely there when needed, because most people do not want to "get into expenses", I should know, I've been there... or perhaps "they can't find the time" (I've spent weeks trying to plot a day off to go get a filling for a tooth...)

~D

PS - I'm not praising communism, but I am saying that there are some merits to limiting the amount of power CEO's and CoB's have. Perhaps even making them "the people"... it wouldn't hurt to make those dirty bastards have to EARN a living. They bleed the same as we do, perhaps they should put something back into society before they see another dime.

Re:Oddly enough...

[Alpha_Traveller]

I think you've got a great point there. I think what we need to see in America isn't Communism , it's Socialism... How anyone can presume a business has your best interests at heart, and freely gives a business the keys to effect your life at a massive scale (i.e. Healthcare) without better regulation is an incredible insult to human intelligence.

Re:Oddly enough...

[antarctican]

In the United States we have a free-market where small business is the backbone of our economy. If people don't like working for corporations they always have the option of starting up their own business and working for themselves. The other option is getting an MBA and learning business where you can work your way up the ladder on the business side instead of being in the trenches of the Data Center. Either way everyone has options.

The business world is a pyramid, isn't that what the economics and MBA classes always teach? A large number of people have to be at the bottom so others can climb up.

Not everyone can climb up, otherwise the system wouldn't work. So who gets left at the bottom? Do those who don't get the breaks and can't climb up the ladder deserve their conditions and life? Should they be left to a lesser life because in every competition someone must lose, no matter how good the competitors?

That's a very simplistic answer that doesn't actually solve the problem, that someone is always going to have to take these crap jobs. And unless it's a job seeker's market (which last time I checked it wasn't, particularly with increasing outsources), the employees left at the bottom are not in a position to make such demands for better treatment. That is why unions were formed.

So, rather then being confrontational through organizations such as unions, why can we not proactively correct the system so all workers, including those at the bottom of the pyramid, get the respect and decent working conditions they deserve?

Re:He's discovering reality. Isn't it cute?

[ranton]

what's your lifestyle advice ? How does a person make money while being employed by a corporation ?

While I do not agree with your parent's post, I think the answer to your question is to not work for a corporation. If you are working for someone else then you are making them rich. It is almost guaranteed that you arent being paid what you are worth, because then where is the profit for your employer?

The only way to make what you are worth is to go into business for yourself. If you cannot hack it, then you were never worth that much in the first place. I program small niche software, and make sure that there is some reason for the customers to have to keep paying (like updates). After launching and dealing with initial patching, it can run by itself with just the cost of a tech support guy making $10 an hour. Sell only 50 copies a month of a $100 program and you are making $5k a month, with only $2k going to employees. Keeping releasing a new peice of software every couple of years and you are soon a very rich man. And this does not count updates or tech support fees. Just find some way to make someone else's life easier and they will pay you for it.

Sure you are paying your employees alot less than they are making for you, but that is life. If they were smart enough to actually do something with their life other than working for someone else, then they would branch off and start their own company. If they arent smart enough, then I am doing them a favor by employing them and helping them feed themselves. Most of my employees are only treading water while finishing school or saving up some money to work on something they really want to do; and I wouldnt have it any other way.
--

Of course. Capitalism no longer has competition

[Animats]

The problem, which is obvious when you think about it, is that capitalism no longer has competition from communism. When communism promised "the worker's paradise", and at least took some steps towards delivering it, the capitalist world had to treat its workers better than the communists did, out of fear that the workers would revolt, or vote in a different system.

With that competitive threat removed, capitalism can be as nasty as it wants to be. Because it has monopoly power now.

Another aspect of her statement

[SmallFurryCreature]

"My free time is valuable in that it allows me to take care of that which I can't during the day (grocery shopping, dog responsibilities, cleaning, etc."

If she said the same to her employer/manager I am not suprised she didn't get training.

Training is expensive. Not just the training costs themselves but also because it usually removes the person from work.

Now who would you choose for training? Female A: claims she has a life outside of work, probably going to have a baby anytime now or Male B: Work is his life, can't have babies.

Gee, that is a thoughie. Oh the baby argument is sexist but I am telling you what it is like in the real world. One woman in a company of thousands pulls the being absent for years trick and every woman in the company and every woman in companies where the male managers know a guy in another company where it happened will be tainted with the brush of being unreliable.

Common perception is that women see work as something to do until they get kids. You put them in a position where they are critical and they will just disappear for months. True? Sorta, while I never met any "highlevel" females who did this it sure can mess up a company when the "lowlevel" secretary decides that she has had it and is going to take care of her own baby and no a bunch of middle aged babies. Offcourse the fact that this female was underpaid, undervalued is never mentioned. Just maternity leave is risky. Every male knows this. Sorry.

Then stating also that you value your private life is not a good thing. I am male and even I can't get away with that one. Companies investing thousands of dollars in a person want to be sure they get a willing slave in return. Doesn't matter if that person is going to leave right after completing the training what matters is perception.

And finally the biggest killer in getting training? Just being to damn valuable. I actually been told I couldn't get trained because they couldn't get me the time off needed from projects. So the guys who were "unemployed" got the the training while the guy who was earning the salaries by being outsourced had to buy his own books. Oh and ended up having to be the teacher to the guys just having received a 20.000 guilder training. Grrrr.

Whenever an employer starts talking about training your bullshit meter should spring into the red. I have had several "offers" and it never works out. In the rare occasions where it actually reaches a "planned" stage there is always some project that I am suddenly needed on because the guy that was on it and received lots and lots of training can't hack it. Or left for greener pastures with his shiny new diploma.

Those who can, do. Those who can't get trained and leave the company.

As for the whole butter trap, can you blame men for trying it? Call us sexist pigs if you want, just also remember to call us master and serve us. Resistance is futile. We are male, you will serve us.

If you think it is wrong, just realise that no matter how fucked up men are, women are worse. Just examine yourselve (if your female) what you want in a male partner and then check how many of your wishes contradict themselves. Strong, yet caring. Able to express his emotions but not a cry baby. And the biggest one, "he musn't mind me earning more then him" vs "he better earn a good income". No women respects a man with a low paycheck. The only way for a woman to get the man she wants is to have a harem or someone with a split personality.