A contract of employment between a low-level manager and a huge corporation like Office Depot? What color is the sky on your planet?
The only contract that exists between American companies and their workers is "Show up on time, do your work, don't complain, and we'll fire you anyway if we feel like it."
Wait, they *encourage* you to text from the theater? No wonder these idiots can't get people to go to the movies. I know *I* wouldn't pay money to be texted at.
Do you really think that this person gives a flying fuck about WHY she has to change her password? All she knows is 'hurr durr it's inconvenient deliberately hurr durr". Explaining WHY people should do things related to infosec (like, I don't know, CHANGING PASSWORDS REGULARLY) should be limited to one phrase:
"It's the current IT policy signed off on by the CTO, if you have a problem with it, please feel free to call his secretary to schedule a meeting."
It's the only sane way I've even heard of to have an effective security policy. If you don't get C-levels involved, then you'll always be pushed around / belittled / humiliated by the illiterate.
From what I can tell from the posting, OP is salaried, meaning no overtime for him, all your work are belong to us, "your own time" doesn't exist. I say finish up the project, document the work you've done, and get a better job. It's the only way he's going to get the money he's asking for. Chalk up the 'lost personal time' to experience, and move on. Next time, do work during work hours, and be sure that you get IN WRITING an agreement that work performed outside business hours UNRELATED to your job description is not property of the company, and is yours to do with as you see fit.
No, I can accept reason. I can't accept a simple "A is better than B and that's that"
And yet you immediately dismissed my "App support" argument. Convenient.
There's a damned good reaosn people like "cheaper"
Because they're short-sighted and know the price of everything but the value of nothing. If you don't value the things you buy beyond what they cost, then you're always going to have cheap crap.
I know a few people with iPhones and quite a few with droids, and I see little difference between them.
Then you're not looking all that hard.
There are some damned good reasons why Androids outsell iPhones,
Yeah, they're cheaper, and people are cheap.
If you're not really a paid shill I feel sorry for you, because it means the PR has brainwashed you.
Yep, everyone that likes an Apple product MUST be brainwashed. They couldn't possibly prefer them for any VALID reason, they must just be crazy.
Of course, "valid" to you means whatever you want, so there's no point in debating it. Any argument that I put forward you'd immediately dismiss as 'brainwashing'. I could just as easily say you've been brainwashed by Google to like their products.
And there are two kinds of phones: iPhones, and phones that WANT to be iPhones. Why fuck around? Sure, the tech specs might be a few years behind the curve, but the app support is #1 and things "just work".
What color is the sky on your planet? In the real world, people have circumstances that make them work to prevent losing their jobs. If boss says do A, you do A, unless you want to be homeless. Sure, you're free to look for another job, but most people will try to wait until they have something else lined up before they decide to rock the boat.
Business doesn't care about ethics. Ethics cost money, and anything optional that costs the company money is unnecessary and just eats into the profits.
The only valid reason I can think of to snoop is to determine your own status among your fellow employees. I for one would like to know that someone with "Chief" in their title doesn't like the way I look and is doing everything they can to get me fired, so I can be ahead of the curve and get a new job.
Business in general is about exploiting people, it's not limited to sales.
Your boss exploits you for as little money as possible. Your company exploits you in order to turn a profit. It never ends until you get to some white haired old white male in an expensive suit whose sole function is to exploit as many people as possible, while contributing no actual work.
I think you might be mistaking "difficult" for "it takes time to do it". Until marketing/bean counters/PHB's realize they're giving their web devs about a third as much time as they should most of the time, things like 'graceful degradation' get turned into 'it works in the CEO's browser, it's done."
If it's anything like in other countries, it's not a shortage of people who graduated from a CS class, it's a shortage of people who can write sensible code.
I disagree. It's a shortage of people who graduated from a CS class who are willing to be paid sub-poverty wages to work in a sweatshop. After all, they have to compete with offshore labor that drags down everyone's salary range.
Companies that complain about not having enough competent candidates and then turn around and bitch about how their payroll is too high are wrong on both fronts.
You must be new here. The American "justice system" is nothing of the sort. You've got metabolites in your system, you've been doing illegal drugs, end of story. Enjoy your fine/jail time.
There's a need to extend the learning structure because a cabbage can graduate from high school in the USA. Students are given 'social promotions' in situations where, in another country, they would fail and have to repeat the year.
The adults in the situation should bear more responsibility than the minors. The adults are (supposedly) in control of setting the tone. If that tone is such that the minors are under so much pressure to achieve that they feel they have to turn to drugs, then the adults are (mostly) at fault for 1) creating the tone and 2) failing to impress upon the minors that that sort of drug use is not acceptable.
These are, after all, children. Children sometimes make bad decisions. Those decisions should not be dealt with as severely as adults making the same bad decisions, because (in theory, at least) the adults should know better.
I'm not saying personal responsibility is bad. I'm saying look at the situation and realize that there's no bright line here, only shades of gray. Dealing with humans is like that, most of the time.
None of the interview programming tests I've ever had has allowed any outside reference material. They did, however, tolerate bad syntax and pseudocode.
They're frequently working in a language I don't know, anyhow.
Then why the hell are YOU doing the interviewing?
Developers should be interviewed by people who are familiar with the job the candidate is being interviewed for. Any company that requires HR to do any interviewing is on my list of places I probably don't want to work at. I got my current job by talking to my now-director and providing code samples that were reviewed by another programmer.
Asking a candidate to provide code samples, then to explain/describe/review them in the actual interview, is a far superior method IMHO. I'm surprised nobody's mentioned it in these comments so far.
Slashdot Mirror
A contract of employment between a low-level manager and a huge corporation like Office Depot? What color is the sky on your planet?
The only contract that exists between American companies and their workers is "Show up on time, do your work, don't complain, and we'll fire you anyway if we feel like it."
Do you mean 'soda'?
Wait, they *encourage* you to text from the theater? No wonder these idiots can't get people to go to the movies. I know *I* wouldn't pay money to be texted at.
Do you really think that this person gives a flying fuck about WHY she has to change her password? All she knows is 'hurr durr it's inconvenient deliberately hurr durr". Explaining WHY people should do things related to infosec (like, I don't know, CHANGING PASSWORDS REGULARLY) should be limited to one phrase:
"It's the current IT policy signed off on by the CTO, if you have a problem with it, please feel free to call his secretary to schedule a meeting."
It's the only sane way I've even heard of to have an effective security policy. If you don't get C-levels involved, then you'll always be pushed around / belittled / humiliated by the illiterate.
From what I can tell from the posting, OP is salaried, meaning no overtime for him, all your work are belong to us, "your own time" doesn't exist. I say finish up the project, document the work you've done, and get a better job. It's the only way he's going to get the money he's asking for. Chalk up the 'lost personal time' to experience, and move on. Next time, do work during work hours, and be sure that you get IN WRITING an agreement that work performed outside business hours UNRELATED to your job description is not property of the company, and is yours to do with as you see fit.
That doesn't make the software good, just expensive.
No, the person that writes the checks sets priorities. Is it any wonder that there's so much crap software out there?
Take a look up, sparky.
but the app support is #1 and things "just work".
I think we're done here, if you can't be bothered to read my posts.
And yet you immediately dismissed my "App support" argument. Convenient.
Because they're short-sighted and know the price of everything but the value of nothing. If you don't value the things you buy beyond what they cost, then you're always going to have cheap crap.
Then you're not looking all that hard.
Yeah, they're cheaper, and people are cheap.
Yep, everyone that likes an Apple product MUST be brainwashed. They couldn't possibly prefer them for any VALID reason, they must just be crazy.
Of course, "valid" to you means whatever you want, so there's no point in debating it. Any argument that I put forward you'd immediately dismiss as 'brainwashing'. I could just as easily say you've been brainwashed by Google to like their products.
Some people have spouses.
And there are two kinds of phones: iPhones, and phones that WANT to be iPhones. Why fuck around? Sure, the tech specs might be a few years behind the curve, but the app support is #1 and things "just work".
No, it's a sign of not being a team player, and will work against you in looking for a new job in 99% of all situations.
What color is the sky on your planet? In the real world, people have circumstances that make them work to prevent losing their jobs. If boss says do A, you do A, unless you want to be homeless. Sure, you're free to look for another job, but most people will try to wait until they have something else lined up before they decide to rock the boat.
Business doesn't care about ethics. Ethics cost money, and anything optional that costs the company money is unnecessary and just eats into the profits.
The only valid reason I can think of to snoop is to determine your own status among your fellow employees. I for one would like to know that someone with "Chief" in their title doesn't like the way I look and is doing everything they can to get me fired, so I can be ahead of the curve and get a new job.
That's a laugh. Find me one company of any consequence that doesn't treat IT like criminals.
Business in general is about exploiting people, it's not limited to sales.
Your boss exploits you for as little money as possible. Your company exploits you in order to turn a profit. It never ends until you get to some white haired old white male in an expensive suit whose sole function is to exploit as many people as possible, while contributing no actual work.
I think you might be mistaking "difficult" for "it takes time to do it". Until marketing/bean counters/PHB's realize they're giving their web devs about a third as much time as they should most of the time, things like 'graceful degradation' get turned into 'it works in the CEO's browser, it's done."
I disagree. It's a shortage of people who graduated from a CS class who are willing to be paid sub-poverty wages to work in a sweatshop. After all, they have to compete with offshore labor that drags down everyone's salary range.
Companies that complain about not having enough competent candidates and then turn around and bitch about how their payroll is too high are wrong on both fronts.
You must be new here. The American "justice system" is nothing of the sort. You've got metabolites in your system, you've been doing illegal drugs, end of story. Enjoy your fine/jail time.
You miss my point. Creating an environment where the children think they have to cheat to be competitive is the adults' domain.
I call those people 'baby boomers'.
There's a need to extend the learning structure because a cabbage can graduate from high school in the USA. Students are given 'social promotions' in situations where, in another country, they would fail and have to repeat the year.
The adults in the situation should bear more responsibility than the minors. The adults are (supposedly) in control of setting the tone. If that tone is such that the minors are under so much pressure to achieve that they feel they have to turn to drugs, then the adults are (mostly) at fault for 1) creating the tone and 2) failing to impress upon the minors that that sort of drug use is not acceptable.
These are, after all, children. Children sometimes make bad decisions. Those decisions should not be dealt with as severely as adults making the same bad decisions, because (in theory, at least) the adults should know better.
I'm not saying personal responsibility is bad. I'm saying look at the situation and realize that there's no bright line here, only shades of gray. Dealing with humans is like that, most of the time.
None of the interview programming tests I've ever had has allowed any outside reference material. They did, however, tolerate bad syntax and pseudocode.
Then why the hell are YOU doing the interviewing?
Developers should be interviewed by people who are familiar with the job the candidate is being interviewed for. Any company that requires HR to do any interviewing is on my list of places I probably don't want to work at. I got my current job by talking to my now-director and providing code samples that were reviewed by another programmer.
Asking a candidate to provide code samples, then to explain/describe/review them in the actual interview, is a far superior method IMHO. I'm surprised nobody's mentioned it in these comments so far.
To be more accurate, you can't say, "No, Mr. CEO-who-will-fire-me-for-saying-no".