Slashdot Mirror
Tech Pros' Struggle For Work-Life Balance Continues (dice.com)
Nerval's Lobster writes: Work-life balance among technology professionals is very much in the news following a much-discussed New York Times article about workday conditions at Amazon. That piece painted a picture of a harsh workplace where employees literally cried at their desks. While more tech companies are publicly talking about the need for work-life balance, do the pressures of delivering revenues, profits, and products make much of that chatter mere lip-service? Or are companies actually doing their best to ensure their workers are treated like human beings with lives outside of work?
"do the pressures of delivering revenues, profits, and products make much of that chatter mere lip-service?"
Yes.
"Or are companies actually doing their best to ensure their workers are treated like human beings with lives outside of work?"
No.
Next.
I've had three employers: one Fortune 500 company and two 50 employee consulting companies. At the big company, I worked 50-60 hours/week in a high stress environment, but the work was exciting and I really enjoyed it.
At the two smaller companies, it is rare that I would work over 41 hours/week. I've never done it in 6 months at my current company. I think it is easier for small consulting companies to offer a balance like this because our clients won't pay for more than 40 hours/week except under exceptional circumstances, and our company does a great job being realistic about timelines so we almost always deliver on time.
You can find work-life balance, but you have to look for it and prioritize it in you job search. I would probably make 10-20% more had I stayed at the large company, but the relaxed hours are worth it to me.
I'll also note that this is in the Midwest, where all you tech people from the coasts complaining about not finding jobs should move.
Just a friendly reminder that Nerval's Lobster is a Dice shill account, and posts articles for Dice.com. Oh, and that editors either refuse to, or are banned from, putting a disclaimer that Dice.com is owned by Dice Holdings, Inc., the parent company of Slashdot, as they once would when posting a link to "sister" sites prior to being purchased by Dice.
I wonder if someday "going Amazon" will be part of our vocabulary.
As an I.T. support contractor for the last ten years, my contracts prohibits me from working overtime. I'm only allowed to work from Monday through Friday, during regular business hours. Which is fine with me.
If your company has a "first to leave is a slacker" culture, don't expect me to show up before noon.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If I'm hired to work days, which is all I will take, I work from the minute I start until the minute it's time to leave. I don't work for free. I'd rather be an hourly worker because they will not be so quick to take advantage of you. Currently I'm salaried, but my boss knows I'm 8-5, no nights, no weekends. I might work a special event if I get a comp day. My time is valuable, I'm in my 40s so I know how the game is played, and I do push back when pushed. I do my job, they like the results, so no one messes with me when it's time to find warm bodies to work odd events. My time at home is more valuable. I cannot hit the rewind button. The time I have with my children can never be given back to me.
That works as long as you don't need to train your staff. But, well, you know how managers are. "Burger joint, IT security consulting, I can manage anything, what's the difference anyway?"
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Yes, companies sometimes push employees too hard. Lately in engineering though, you can punch the CEO in the face and he/she'll say "Sorry, please don't quit", with the current market. Obviously not true of all IT positions, but in engineering, it almost is.
So there's really no reason to screw over your work life balance, aside for maybe a pager rotation for emergencies (but the company should have a level 2 or 3 support to handle he common cases...I guess those guys work/life balance is fucked. Sorry)
Engineers however, are arrogant as fuck, and want to be at the top of the food chain, so a couple of them will willingly fuck over their work life balance. Then they'll get promoted for it (which is a problem with the company...but its hard to say no to someone who delivered twice as much for the same pay, even if he/she screwed over their life over it).
Then, people will feel they have to do this to compete. And thus, the New York Times Pseudo-Amazon is born.
Employers should not reward those people, and other engineers should NOT worship them. You don't need a union to make things reasonable, but please for god's sake, don't encourage your peers who do that shit.
When a story is first posted, it's in red. Now be good boys, and take your blood pressure meds.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
It's not just engineers. I work in education and there are two of those people I can think of off the top of my head. Both of them gave tons of free time to the company to get promoted and now everyone else is held to their standard.
Already have my resume out.
"Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
Quote from TFA
If we can make sure projects are planned and time is allocated for the right tasks, we can really improve balance.
Good joke!
It is really easy to solve this problem. Hire more tech workers.
No one wants to be the first to exit at the end of the day.
I am always happy to be the first one to leave at the end of the day. We shouldn't be unduly affected by peer pressure.
I can get away with it because my work is good, and I work hard during the hours I'm at work. If a company prefers "sitting in a seat" over "doing quality work," then I can find a better company.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Office boys don't know much about hard work. When I was a young bloke I worked the fishing boats in Bass Straight (the notorious stretch of water that separates Tasmania from mainland Australia). Pay was ok if the weather allowed you to get three trips into two weeks, but working conditions were brutal, 70+ hours straight with a 30min break every 5hrs, it was not unusual to have visual and auditory hallucinations toward the end of the trip due to lack of sleep.
That was 1980-81, long before I got a decent education, I now work for as a "senior software engineer" for a Japanese multi-national, 40hr week, 3 out of 5 days working from home, lots of autonomy, six figure pay pack, and a great deal of institutional respect for old farts with decades of experience.
Even if I wanted to go back to fishing boats my aged body would be unable to handle the conditions.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
This is what I was taught in Business School.
Employee turnover cost 150% more to replace then to keep. So you will break even if you replace a $125k with a $50k assuming that the new guy is capable of doing the work. The period of burnout means you will not be able to recoup your costs, as you are just paying the employee to be trained to work for your competitor.
I don't know where a lot of companies went to business schools to get their MBA. But I went to an accredited one that focused a lot on ethics, and long term planning.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Engineers however, are arrogant as fuck, and want to be at the top of the food chain, so a couple of them will willingly fuck over their work life balance. Then they'll get promoted for it (which is a problem with the company...but its hard to say no to someone who delivered twice as much for the same pay, even if he/she screwed over their life over it).
I suppose I resemble that remark, probably including the arrogance, though I don't care about being at the top of the food chain. I just like what I do, and really feel it's important and makes the world a better place, so I sometimes work extra hours to get stuff done. On the other hand, I sometimes work a bit less, and I usually feel no compunction about dropping what I'm doing for a while for family-related activities, or to go out for a hike in the summer or skiing in the winter.
I'm posting mainly to make the point that work/life balance isn't some fixed thing that is demarcated by a specific number of hours per week. It's not the case that if you work one minute more than 40 hours in a week you've "screwed" your life. It's about your total quality of life. If you enjoy what you do for work, a few extra hours may be personally rewarding, completely unrelated to what your company or peers want from you. On the other hand, everyone needs time away, and family time will likely have a greater impact on your short- and long-term happiness.
Balance is a dynamic thing.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.