Slashdot Mirror


Should You Be Paid For Being On Call?

theodp writes "Fortune's Dear Annie takes on the case of poor Dazed and Confused, an independent webmaster who's expected to be on call for his client at all hours of the day and night, but doesn't get paid for being on call, only for the 40 hours a week that he's in the office. Surprisingly, Annie throws cold water on the contractor's dreams of paid OT, citing these pearls of wisdom from an attorney who's apparently never had the 'privilege' of being a techie on call: 'Many companies see the on-call issue as analogous to a fire fighter's job. Most of the time, a fire fighter is off-duty but on call, hanging around the firehouse, cooking, sleeping, or whatever. What that person really gets paid for is the relatively small, but crucial, amount of time he spends walking into a burning building with an ax. A webmaster, likewise, has slow times and busy times.'" What on call policies are you used to working with and how should it work in an ideal world?

40 of 735 comments (clear)

  1. Well, then... by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's the way I see it. Mr. Lawyer, you want to pay for support 40 hours a week? I'll give you a cellphone number I'll answer 40 hours a week.

    It is ridiculous to presume that offering the opportunity to interrupt one's life at any time, any place, with an overriding obligation to deal with your problems, has no value.

    Oh, you want the 168 hour phone number? Well, that's gonna cost ya...

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re:Well, then... by Shikaku · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh, you want the 168 hour phone number? Well, that's gonna cost ya...

      ... Your job.

    2. Re:Well, then... by Deflagro · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right, I'm sure Mr Lawyer wouldn't mind being on retainer for free either. We'll call you when we need you and pay you on the go.

      Firefighters get benefits though in that they are provided food and shelter at no cost and can practically live at the firehouse, albeit not something everyone would love to do :P

      I think if you expect someone to be at your every beck-and-call, then you need to pay them. At least give them some reason to care.

      --
      Der Tod ist der einzige Weg hier raus!
    3. Re:Well, then... by MrMr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't understand that. If he's an independent webmaster it will cost him a non-paying customer, the kind you really can do without.
      If he is on the pay-roll he should probably join a union.

    4. Re:Well, then... by Delwin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Have you ever heard of a webmaster union, or for that matter any IT/programming union?

      I haven't.

    5. Re:Well, then... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From my experience with unions, yea there are good reasons not to have an IT union.

      Suppress wages, defend the inept, petty crap during "bargaining" years, strong arming members, and take money away for political purposes.

      I was in a couple unions, two for IT in the public sector, I'm not a fan.

    6. Re:Well, then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yep. I won't work on call again without stringent conditions:

      1) If I carry the pager, and have to answer, I get paid for carry time regardless. Being interruptable intrudes on my life and costs you. Typical rate would be $50/weekday, $100/weekend day.

      2) If I am interrupted between 7:00pm and 7:00am I get 4 hours comp time the next business day, regardless of how long the call is.

      3) If I spend more than 4 hours working between 7:00pm and 7:00am I get the full day off the next business day.

      The rational is this: If you can call me for free, you will call me when ever you want. There's no penalty for having products or systems which are error prone.

      If it costs you money to interrupt me, you'll think about whether it's really important. You'll also consider the cost benefit of creating systems which are more robust which will be implemented during business hours.

      Without cost to interrupt your people during their personal life, you have no incentive to take the steps necessary to avoid the need to interrupt.

      Needless to say, I don't expect anyone to offer me this, which is just fine with me.

    7. Re:Well, then... by natehoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Independent Contractor". No such thing as a base salary.

      The trouble ensued when he was about to be laid off and his employer decided (instead of letting him go) to offer him a position as an independent contractor, paid at a rate of 40 hours a week in the office. He didn't realize that the position included being on call 24/7 with no compensation, even though his old salaried position had the same on-call responsibilities, and he signed up to do "the exact same job as before, only paid by the hour instead of on salary, with no benefits."

      The difficulty lies in the difference between an employer and a customer. As an independent contractor, his customer is not bound by the same labor laws as they were when he was an actual employee of theirs.

      His former employer is now his customer. The customer doesn't "have" to pay him jack for anything. They "have" to pay him what the contract between the two of them states. And in the absence of a written contract, if the conversation never came up about overtime or even straight-time pay for being on call or even handling calls, the customer is not liable for anything. They are paying for office time at 40 hours and he's giving them any additional time out of the office as part of the contract.

      His best bet, if he really wants to be paid for on-call, is to go and ask for the terms of his contract to be clarified/changed, at which point his customer will either negotiate with him to find an equitable arrangement, or they can also terminate his contract if they so choose.

      The question is not whether he's entitled to overtime for oncall duties. He's not. Sorry. He's offering a service at a set price and if he wants to change that he needs to work it out with his customer.

      The real question is whether it's worth the risk to him to renegotiate with his only customer in this sucky economy, because his customer might decide he's not the best vendor after all.

      If his skills are truly unique, he can probably work something out. If he's just monitoring a web server and doing things that can be done remotely, his customer might decide that it's cheaper to move the website into a monitored hosting provider.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    8. Re:Well, then... by ravenshrike · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're in SWEDEN. Not the US. Attempting to compare the two systems, which have the same name but under the hood work off of entirely different precepts, is foolhardy.

    9. Re:Well, then... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If he's an independent webmaster it will cost him a non-paying customer, the kind you really can do without.

      Well...

      Having played both sides of this issue, let me throw some thoughts out to the wolves (so to speak):

      1. If he is asking slashdot on how to handle this, I doubt he is in a position to lose any customers.

      2. If the website is so problematic that he needs to be on call, then maybe he should make an effort to improve the reliability.

      3. I've had a few customers who used to call after hours for issues not related to the work I was doing. If the problem was small and can be done over the phone (or remotely) I usually helped them out for free. If the problem looked like it was going to take some time to fix or required me to drive to their location, I charged. If the problem could not wait until regular business hours, I charged accordingly. The trick was that I did enough gratis work for them, that they didn't flinch when I required payment for the particularly difficult problems...

      4. As the economy worsens, the number of competitors for your clients will increase. It's easier to work a little harder to keep a client, then it is to replace one.

      5. Keep in mind, that some advice given here on Slashdot are from those who wouldn't mind taking your client.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    10. Re:Well, then... by aix+tom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Agree on the workplace culture here. I'm salaried with no overtime pay, but there is not much overtime, maybe 1-3 hours a week max, and on more "slack" weeks I can also work less, I just have to make about the hours that are in my contract each year.

      If there is a *real emergency* I get called, too, but in those cases I basically prefer to know when something is seriously broken right away, instead of having to pick up the pieces after someone else tried to "fix it".

      But the flexibility has to be mutual. I don't mind getting a call in the evening, as long as my boss doesn't mind if I take a longer lunch break to go to a bank appointment or something. The stricter *their* rules get, the stricter *my* rules would get.

    11. Re:Well, then... by blueskies · · Score: 2, Insightful

      so you can say the business division is doing poorly and can't afford respectable raises for the employees.

      Who cares if they do this? Can't you just quit and get a job somewhere else that will pay well?

    12. Re:Well, then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It may in fact be US unions - there are historical ties between the labor movement and organized crime over here which helps explain some of the strong arm and machine politics issues that our unions have. There is also a very strong adversarial relationship with management. It probably also has something to do with our level of income imbalance as well - unions have to be more forceful to get the same results. That level of adversarial behavior colors other relationships, leading to the aforementioned protection of the incompetent rather than have the union work in better member's interests.

    13. Re:Well, then... by Falconhell · · Score: 1, Insightful

      My experieces with the Education union in South Australia.

      Suppress wages. No, we get a rise of between 3 and 4% EVERY year.

      Defend the inept- NO sign at all.

      Petty crap during "bargaining" years; No industrial action that ensures the pay rises above.

      As for Strong arming I have never seen any such thing at all. All unions here use secret ballot, so whether or nbot you show a card to enter is irrelevant.

      Before unions we had 10 years olds in mines, earning pathetic salaries.

      It's typical for Americans to moan about unions without any knowledge of the way they work I have noticed.
       

    14. Re:Well, then... by humphrm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unions in the U.S. are much different than your unions in Sweden. For one thing, unions are big business here. Big, corrupt business. It's just one big business making deals with another big business (the employer) for those "minimum" wages that end up being "the most anyone in a union shop makes".

      Their employees make a living off of union dues. Members are strong-armed to support political candidates and other laws and referendums that are union-friendly, even if they don't agree with them. "Support" in this case generally means putting a "I support X" sign in your front yard, but may also mean donating a percentage of your salary increase to a political candidate.

      And then there's the elected union leadership. Sometimes a particular shop supports one candidate for union boss, and if the other candidate wins, that winner will punish the shops that supported his opponent. And not to mention if you get high enough in the union leadership and cross them, you could end up "sleeping with the fishes."

      --
      -- "In order to have power, I must be taken seriously." -Mojo Jojo
    15. Re:Well, then... by JWW · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While the Constitution has its flaws, I cannot fathom how horrible a "new" Constitution developed by our current political "leaders" would be. I believe that it would be too horrible to behold.

      The current political classes in DC need to be run out of town in total before we should even think of changing the constitution...

    16. Re:Well, then... by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It does not have to be laborious. It has to be FAIR. Generally, being fair implies a good deal of paperwork and due process which becomes somewhat tedious. Of course, no one is saying that teachers should be fired on a whim.

      However, the union isn't protecting due process or preventing unethical firings. They simply cause so much hell that it takes hundreds of thousands of dollars and several years to fire a teacher. This isn't due process and this isn't fair, it's just nonsense

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    17. Re:Well, then... by tmosley · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, I'm sure it was the unions that brought that about, and had nothing to do with the rising productivity brought about by those evil child employing capitalists.

      Certainly, the capitalists must have built some sort of device that forced perfectly happy and well fed rural laborers and their well educated children to leave their rural squalor without offering a demonstrably better life, including such aspects as not forcing their children into prostitution or starvation. Because, you know, people can just point a finger at a hunk of metal, and a vast factory will spring up without any need for sacrifice or thought, mere muscular action is all it takes. If it weren't for those evil capitalists, we'd all be living in paradise right now, just like we were before they poked their heads into the loomhouses of feudal England.

      Unions have done nothing that basic economics and group preference wouldn't have brought about on their own. The only real benefit of unions is that they make it more difficult for employers to break the law in their dealings with their employees (though they make it far more likely that employees will break the law when dealing with their employers, so the social gain is a wash in most cases). In the end, when you have strong unions, you have an unsustainable system that feeds on increased regulation and tax revenue (think United Autoworkers and the auto bailout).

    18. Re:Well, then... by Sparr0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Suppress wages. No, we get a rise of between 3 and 4% EVERY year.

      Yes, and either you are a below-average worker being over-paid, or an above-average worker being under-paid. Standardized pay scales and raises mean wage suppression for any above-average employee. Since you said "No", I assume you aren't.

    19. Re:Well, then... by binkx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is spot on. I was involved in a case of law enforcement officers years ago. The case was decided in their favor on most all of these criteria. They were required to be within 10 minutes of their patrol vehicle, parked at home. They had to have their uniform and duty gear ready to go. When "on call" they could no have alcohol. etc. As pointed out, the more restrictive the on call was, the more likely it was going to be viewed as work. Several officers collected over $70,000 for 5 years of abuse. The agency involved wanted 24 hour coverage but was unwilling to pay for it. They now have officers on regular shifts with full coverage. The other good comment here, amongst all the static, is that the benefits we do enjoy (40 hour work week; overtime; health coverage; off on Sat/Sun or compensated for working -- Sunday anyway) were all hard-won victories of unions. Most certainly not the tender concern of business owners, though there are some who recognize that if you treat employees well, you get better production. George

  2. There seems to be some confusion here... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Obviously, with all else equal, the guy who is 40 hours + on call needs to be paid more than the guy who is 40 hours only, unless we want to go back to the good old days of indentured servitude or something.

    However, it doesn't really much matter exactly how that extra money is delivered. It could be that "The job description of 'Job A' includes being on call, which is why people who do it earn a hefty salary" or it could be "'Job B' is 9 to 5; and time on call is X dollars/hour outside of that". That seems to be the point of confusion.

    1. Re:There seems to be some confusion here... by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

      However, it doesn't really much matter exactly how that extra money is delivered. It could be that "The job description of 'Job A' includes being on call, which is why people who do it earn a hefty salary" or it could be "'Job B' is 9 to 5; and time on call is X dollars/hour outside of that". That seems to be the point of confusion.

      Exactly. The first question here should be, are we talking about a salaried position or an hourly wage? If it's a salaried position, then the salary should just be higher for taking on a job with the increased responsibility of being on call. "Being on call" should be part of the job description, and part of the negotiation for salary at hiring. If it wasn't and they ask you to be on call, then I think it's generally reasonable to say, "That wasn't part of my job description. If you want me to be on call, then I want a pay bump to go along with it."

      If it's an hourly wage, then again it needs to be negotiated. If it were me, I'd probably want a certain rate for working the normal 40 hour week, a different rate for being on call, and a third (relatively high) rate for work done outside of normal hours, while on call. If you want me to make an effort to ensure that I can be reached 24/7, I expect some kind of compensation. If you expect me to actually come in at 2am and work, then I expect to get paid more for that time than I get paid during the normal weekday.

      Of course, negotiating terms of employment can always be tricky. If you really like your job and don't mind being on call for the amount you're paid, then you might not want to push it. If you play hardball, it's possible they'll just let you go.

  3. Dear Mister Lawyer.... STFU... Thanks. by theNetImp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As someone who is a web developer/webmaster web-whatever-you-want-to-call-it. At most of my jobs I spend most of my 40 hours a week busy. Doing work. When I have done systems administration, it's been the same thing. I am 90% busy those 40 hours per week. There are VERY little slow periods, unlike a Fire fighter (not to dis fire fighters) who spend most of their day waiting to be called to work. If I work 40hrs during the week, and then get called in 3-4 nights because something is acting up, in a way that wasn't expected, I should get paid for being on call, or the employer should wait until I am in during the morning. Mister Lawyer. Until you are in my shoes, please politely STFU.... Thanks

  4. NOT GONNA DO IT! by iplayfast · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I tried this once, but I hated being on a leash so much that I quickly found another job. It just wasn't worth my sanity.

    1. Re:NOT GONNA DO IT! by scamper_22 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One the items often missed here is the exempt employees are supposed to be able to exercise judgment. It's a vague concept in many circumstances. However, if you are able to exercise judgment, you MUST be able to use the following word:

      NO.

      Do some companies make it hard to say no? Absolutely. Been there done that. But that is what you must do. If you are a worker bee that just takes instructions from management... you are not a professional and you should be paid overtimes.

      It's amazing to me the number of people who never even TRY to say no. I don't know how I'd act if my manager actually threatened to fire me for saying no. It's never happened. Granted, I am sure it has cost me in terms of promotions, bonuses... Perfectly fair if you ask me. Someone else is willing to work harder than me... they deserve it.

      I'm a pretty reasonable person. I'll put in some extra hours if a deadline is coming up. I'll do a late night call once in a while if there's an emergency. If I start to see a pattern... emergencies happening weekly... then it ain't an emergency and management had better start budgeting for that.

      And yes, we should all be grateful to have a job in this time. But never forget this is not a one way street. No employer is going to value you unless you value yourself.

      You know the code/equipment; you know the domain; you know the processes; you are known to do good work. You're worth something. If you leave, the company has to go find a replacement, train them, deadlines pushed back because a new person is coming in... and there's uncertainty if it works out... Chances are the company is understaffed as is... and losing you would just make things even more unmanageable. In short, value yourself. Don't overvalue yourself... anyone can be replaced :P

  5. A contractor? by Greg_D · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You want the opportunity to use my services at your convenience? Pay me a retainer equal to X hours a month. I work any more than X, you pay me an hourly rate. I work less than X, you still owe me for those hours.

  6. hospital model... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, the firefighter mentioned is flawed - he is *at work* waiting for a call to come in. On call is not at work, but available should the shit hit the fan.

    The hospitals I worked in, the staff that were on call (CAT scan techs, nuke med techs, OR nurses, recovery room nurses, dialysis folks) were paid $1 or $2 per hour just for carrying the beeper. Should they get called in, they were guaranteed 2 hours of pay, but they had to stay waiting for something to do for that whole time (a CT tech could come in and scan someone in 10 min - but they then had to hang out and wait for the extra hour and 50 minutes). This pay was at regular pay rates/levels, so night shift differential or holiday differential kicked in, as would over time if their total for the pay week was over 40 hours.

    So... followign this, our poor over worked web master would be paid say $1/hr for totin his beeper or whatever. If he gets called, he comes in and fixes the issue, gets a minimum of 2 hours of work at his hourly rate, and probably gets over time. Sounds good. In reality, he's probably a salaried employee, so over time is out the window, and if he's lucky he may be allowed to leave 15 minutes early on Friday to make up for it.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  7. The point is that your time is not your own by Fished · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem is that, when you're "on call", your time is not your own. You're expected to be ready and able to drop everything at a moments notice and go to work, immediately. Furthermore, you can be limited as to where you can go, particularly in areas with poor cell phone coverage. Most employers I've worked with have given a day of "comp" time in exchange for a week on-call, although they've sometimes been a bit sketchy on actually doing this and on how you should report it. To me, it should be official, recognized, and fully compensated--but often it just happens at manager's discretion.

    --
    "He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
    1. Re:The point is that your time is not your own by Belial6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Comp time cannot be recognized for salary because when you are paid for a position instead of time, also know as salary, the term is meaningless. It is impossible to have paid time off if you are truly salary, as you are not paid for the time.

      The reason you are confused is because you have fallen prey to companies misuse of the term salary. They would like you to think that salary means "x dollars for 40 hours a week and we don't pay you for overtime". If you are docked pay for not showing up, you are an hourly employee, not salary, irrelevant of what your HR department says.

  8. Here is where the lawyer's analogy fails. by wcrowe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Firefighters aren't just "hanging around the firehouse" when they're not putting out fires. They spend that time maintaining equipment, training, performing building inspections, and a lot of other duties. I'm sure municipal policies vary, but I'm certain that many firefighters work regular shifts, and when an emergency call extends beyond their regular shift they are paid overtime.

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
  9. nonsense and bullshit by Tom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    On-call duty is to be paid, end of story. Anyone trying to sell you otherwise is trying to save money at your expense.

    That said, of course it isn't paid at the same rate as a regular work hour. After all, you can spend it dozing, surfing the web for porn, fighting with your loved one or going shopping.

    The alternative for the company to having someone on call is to have someone there, on the clock. Obviously, that's a lot more expensive. Since they're a company and trying to make a profit, they'll try to get things as cheaply as possible, and free if at all possible. That doesn't mean you have to give it to them for free. Next they'll be asking for free overtime, and then if you'd mind not being paid at all.

    Really, I'm not being sarcastic. They are essentially asking you to work for nothing. It's not much work (carrying a cell phone and picking it up if it rings), but it's work.

    And don't let them fool you with examples of other jobs. There are some jobs where being on call is so standard that it's figured into the regular salary. That doesn't mean it's free, it's just not explicitly listed on the paycheck. And of course firemen get paid for the time they're waiting for an emergency. After all, that's why we have professional firefighters - to have someone ready to come at a moments notice. And if you check their contracts, they certainly don't say "a work week consists of 3,5 hours inside burning buildings and 1,5 hours rescuing lost cats", but much more likely something like "a work week consists of 40 hours".

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  10. Law varies from state to state by Archfeld · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But in California I was always payed 2 hours for responding to a page, just carrying the pager was considered a 'better' alternative to requiring after-hours onsite staff. This was a large financial institution, and I was a Unix Systems Engineer, one among 8 or 10. Once I moved to a smaller venue, ie development lab and system support, the pager time dramatically decreased and was swapped with comp time as it arose. I don't think you are going to get payed up front for carrying the pager but you DO have a right to get payed if a response is required, and if you are required to remain within a certain distance from home or work you might have a valid issue as well.
    http://www.gotovertime.com/facts.html#myth_comp

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  11. Re:Paid call by KraftDinner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think you'll find many businesses do though.

  12. Re:Of course you should be paid by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're basically hooked to a pager, which means you need to be near a phone, and usually near a computer with internet connectivity.

    And you need to be sober. Depending on what it is you like to do with your free time, the possibility of having to work at any moment might severely impair your ability to properly enjoy your free time. That has value.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  13. Do I have to be sober? by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At my last job we didn't have an on call schedule but we were generally expected to be accessible to our customers if Something Bad happened. One Friday night, around 7pm, my colleague got one of those calls. He listened to the customer explain the problem, and then proceeded to tell him that he would be best served by calling the manufacturer's support line as he had been drinking for several hours and would probably just make things worse in his current condition. No one could really fault him; he did the right thing by the customer.

    --

    Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

  14. At-Will On-Call by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm the "lone" IT guy where I work. Web admin, network engineer, helpdesk. I'm "On-Call" but with the stipulation of "you get me if you get me. If you don't, call our service vendors" ... if I answer a call, I get an automatic hour's pay, and then whatever else is needed after that, plus travel.

    So far it hasn't worked out at all.

    "You get me if you get me" has been to the company owner "Get him. Get him now. Where is he? This is unacceptable!" and nothing like what we agreed to. I've had to correct them once already when they tried to write me up for neglect and I produced the documented they agreement to defend myself.

    As the only person, I can't be reasonably expected to always be on-duty and my manager (nor do I) want me to make updates to her as to when I'll be available. The policy seemed fair until they get bent out of shape.

    The moral of the story is - get whatever you can for being on call, and make sure they know the rules apply only when you're on call. Expect your employer to try and abuse it and be firm with them when they do. Set boundaries early and keep them in place.

  15. Re:Of course you should be paid by Aliencow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Maybe for now it works well, but over time it can be a pain. I consider my time at 3am on a sunday morning to be worth WAY more than time at 10am on a monday morning.

  16. Lawyer's retainer? by bokmann · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And does the lawyer offering this advice accept a retainer fee from his clients so that he can be on call for them?

    24x7 support is costly in any business. The firefighter is not an apt analogy... Is he expected to work an 8 hour day and THEN be on call for fires?

    And is he serious when he thinks a firefighter is paid for only the small amount of time he is out firefighting? If that were the case, I expect we would see a lot of financially insolvent firefighters-turned-pyromaniac in order to put their kids through college.

  17. Re:He's not really "on call" by thadmiller · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If the guy FTA agreed to "whatever" to not be unemployed, then he needs to live with the consequences, force a contract renewal, or look for a new job.

    That said, I don't think you can equate what he's doing to a plumber, lawn mowing guy, electrician, mechanic, etc. Inferring from his comments, Dazed and Confused is working 40 hrs/week and getting paid for it, but then he's on call 24/7 without any type of reimbursement (not only no pay for being "on call", but also no compensation for work performed "after hours"). If you paid your auto-mechanic for 40 hours of work, do you expect him to be at your beck and call, no matter the day or time, and expect service without further payment? If someone manages to convince any of these "use you when I need you" people to work on this basis, they are one hell of a salesman.

  18. Re:Is Dazed and Confused really bad at his job? by geminidomino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seems you've never dealt with these kinds of people. :)

    Even if his system is rock solid, with "free 24/7 contact" (essentially what we're talking about here), one can expect calls at all hours of the day or night with such wonderful nuggets as these:

    "I know you're not the website-guy/guy who does the copy/whatever, but..."
    [SELECT]
    [OPTION] We'd really like to change the text on our About Us page ...
    [OPTION] The main page is off center on our senior partner's (320x200) screen
    [OPTION] The site is running really slow (9/10 times, some asshole in the office has eDonkey/Bittorrent going full blast)

    "... and ..."

    [SELECT]
    [OPTION] the website-guy is out of town
    [OPTION] the website-guy wants to charge us
    [OPTION] the website-guy isn't taking our calls since we decided not to pay him
    [OPTION] we trust your work more <====== My personal favorite. Get your waders out...