• jverd (unregistered) in reply to Matt Westwood
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

  • Any guy who has read "The Game" (unregistered) in reply to lucidfox
    lucidfox:
    Oh how predictable, mention women even tangentially anywhere in the news entry, and sexist jokes pour in.

    Q: How many men does it take to change a light bulb?

    A: None. Bitch can cook in the dark.

  • (cs) in reply to lucidfox
    lucidfox:
    Oh how predictable, mention women even tangentially anywhere in the news entry, and sexist jokes pour in.

    OFFS you come out with this shit but you haven't got the fucking brains to quote at least one of these sexist jokes. Of of course, you're a split-arse and ain't got no fucking brains.

  • (cs) in reply to jverd
    jverd:
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

    Yeah like I post with "Most" and make a crap statement? Fuck you, you cunt.

  • Joe D (unregistered)

    It seems like Alex has too much time on his hands. Or did I miss a plethora of easter eggs in all these past articles?

  • (cs)

    Easter eggs? You mean when you click at random on the text in the article and a unicorn pops up?

    Sure. Go back and try.

  • L. (unregistered) in reply to Fligby
    Fligby:
    geoffrey:
    Fligby:
    geoffrey:
    Common Sense:
    This post, like so many on this site, reads like it came from an underachiever who is upset that they have not been handed the promotion he believes he deserves. If "Steven" and co were so incompetent, why were they headhunted by another company? Why were they kept on in a consultant role? Why was the OP not offered the job, if he was such an expert in software development and delivery?

    There is no context as to why management decided to disallow carte-blanche access to the source code, but there are several perfectly legitimate business reasons for code to be audited by a trusted, proven programmer.

    Judging by the tone of the original post, in this case this safety net may well have been the difference between product delivery as close as possible to on time and within budget, vs a PR disaster. The only "WTF" I can see here is the spoilt-kid attitude of the OP, presuming the story is true and not just the tantrum of an ungrateful man-child "leet coder". Grow up.

    This is a great point. Cream rises to the top in an organization. The most senior developers on staff get to their stations for a reason -- they are the best at what they do. New hires would do well to follow their lead. Two ears, one mouth.

    "Cream Rises to the top" - does that mean the CEO is the best developer in the company?

    Is your view so myopic that development is the only substantive function in the company? A CEO may or may not be a better developer than his charges. But he will always have better big picture view than they will. If the company has a policy that all source code goes through one person, you can bet it is with good reason. Trust in management, as they know and do what is best for the company.

    Other than I didn't realise ti was you, TROLL!!

    The point was not whether or not management is best for the company, it was whether or not "Cream rises to the top"

    I was around hot girls once, and I can assure you that "Cream rises to the top" is no laughing matter !

  • bob (unregistered)

    Been there done that. The management team employed some guy to ensure the programmers did what they were supposed to, he was not a programmer.

    First rule we had to fill in diaries, stating what we did every 15 minutes. It lasted a week, then I started writing mine in hex, the other programmers followed and within a week the guy was gone.

  • (cs) in reply to jverd
    jverd:
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

    Everything I ever post is based on personal past experiences. At every company I've worked at where the CEO has developed the initial version of the software, two things have always been true:

    1. The original version was in some amateurish language e.g. Foxpro, Access, etc. and the CEO taught himself how to use it

    2. The CEO ruled with an iron fist and had his hands in all technical decisions even when he had no idea of modern development practices, rather than hiring experienced managers (or promoting quality people from within) and focusing at a purely high-level overview.

    Methinks this Matt Westwood character has a beef with me as he seems to follow my posts and post pottymouthing and rude replies.

  • Nagesh (unregistered) in reply to Matt Westwood
    Matt Westwood:
    jverd:
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

    Yeah like I post with "Most" and make a crap statement? Fuck you, you cunt.

    I am looking up this word in dictionries, and i m totaly confused. :(

  • Nagesh (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    Matt Westwood:
    jverd:
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

    Yeah like I post with "Most" and make a crap statement? Fuck you, you cunt.

    I am looking up this word in dictionries, and i m totaly confused. :(
    I think he mean "wanker".

  • Nagesh (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Matt Westwood:
    jverd:
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

    Yeah like I post with "Most" and make a crap statement? Fuck you, you cunt.

    I am looking up this word in dictionries, and i m totaly confused. :(
    I think he mean "wanker".
    That being even more folish if taking literaly.

  • Nagesh (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    Matt Westwood:
    jverd:
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

    Yeah like I post with "Most" and make a crap statement? Fuck you, you cunt.

    I am looking up this word in dictionries, and i m totaly confused. :(
    u r obvious not evan being know how to use dictionary, haker schoolboy!

  • Nagesh (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Matt Westwood:
    jverd:
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

    Yeah like I post with "Most" and make a crap statement? Fuck you, you cunt.

    I am looking up this word in dictionries, and i m totaly confused. :(
    I think he mean "wanker".
    That being even more folish if taking literaly.
    Mat Westwood post nonsense more often then not.

  • Nagesh (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Matt Westwood:
    jverd:
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

    Yeah like I post with "Most" and make a crap statement? Fuck you, you cunt.

    I am looking up this word in dictionries, and i m totaly confused. :(
    I think he mean "wanker".
    That being even more folish if taking literaly.
    Mat Westwood post nonsense more often then not.
    It is sheme to have this garbige posted by registtred users :(

  • Nagesh (unregistered) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Nagesh:
    Matt Westwood:
    jverd:
    Matt Westwood:
    You've done the statistical analysis, having got all the relevant data from all the companies who have this data in the public domain? Or are you just, gasp, trolling?

    Obviously.

    Because his posts here, just like everybody else's on all internet entertainment sites, are chock full of wholesome scientific rigor. Just as I'm sure every one of your posts is. Truthishly.

    Yeah like I post with "Most" and make a crap statement? Fuck you, you cunt.

    I am looking up this word in dictionries, and i m totaly confused. :(
    I think he mean "wanker".
    That being even more folish if taking literaly.
    Mat Westwood post nonsense more often then not.
    It is sheme to have this garbige posted by registtred users :(
    Stop being to mok me now too, mordor-shard!

  • Steve (unregistered)

    I for one welcome our new Nagesh overlords.

  • Remy Martin (unregistered)

    Guys, I have some terrible news. I can't get into the details now, but Alex has suddenly and unexpectedly passed. Mark and I will hash this out over the weekend and decide if dissolution of this site is the right answer.

    Pray for Alex's family, please.

  • (cs) in reply to Remy Martin
    Remy Martin:
    Guys, I have some terrible news. I can't get into the details now, but Alex has suddenly and unexpectedly passed. Mark and I will hash this out over the weekend and decide if dissolution of this site is the right answer.

    Pray for Alex's family, please.

    Oh good grief, again? Send in the Igors. Again.

  • Sadly Missed (unregistered) in reply to My Name Is Missing
    My Name Is Missing:
    Same place where we all got a memo about saving the company money by reusing paperclips. At a defense contractor no less...

    You have any idea how expensive Mil Std paperclips are ?

  • Nagesh (unregistered) in reply to QJo
    QJo:
    Remy Martin:
    Guys, I have some terrible news. I can't get into the details now, but Alex has suddenly and unexpectedly passed. Mark and I will hash this out over the weekend and decide if dissolution of this site is the right answer.

    Pray for Alex's family, please.

    Oh good grief, again? Send in the Igors. Again.

    Is this speculate becase Alex is not posing artical on daly basis? He is needing to purchase new url.

  • Josh B. (unregistered) in reply to Remy Martin
    Remy Martin:
    Guys, I have some terrible news. I can't get into the details now, but Alex has suddenly and unexpectedly passed. Mark and I will hash this out over the weekend and decide if dissolution of this site is the right answer.

    Pray for Alex's family, please.

    WTF happened?????

  • (cs) in reply to Matt Westwood
    Matt Westwood:
    lucidfox:
    Oh how predictable, mention women even tangentially anywhere in the news entry, and sexist jokes pour in.

    OFFS you come out with this shit but you haven't got the fucking brains to quote at least one of these sexist jokes. Of of course, you're a split-arse and ain't got no fucking brains.

    Given that most of this thread before lucidfox's comment has been devoted to trolling about management instead of sexist jokes, we can safely assume this is a personal meme.

  • (cs) in reply to PedanticCurmudgeon
    PedanticCurmudgeon:
    Matt Westwood:
    lucidfox:
    Oh how predictable, mention women even tangentially anywhere in the news entry, and sexist jokes pour in.

    OFFS you come out with this shit but you haven't got the fucking brains to quote at least one of these sexist jokes. Of of course, you're a split-arse and ain't got no fucking brains.

    Given that most of this thread before lucidfox's comment has been devoted to trolling about management instead of sexist jokes, we can safely assume this is a personal meme.
    I'm going with "broadcast troll".

  • jverd (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    Methinks this Matt Westwood character has a beef with me as he seems to follow my posts and post pottymouthing and rude replies.

    Seems he has a beef with a lot of folks. Doesn't handle it well when someone disagrees with him. Methinks he's, gasp, a troll.

  • (cs) in reply to jverd
    jverd:
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    Methinks this Matt Westwood character has a beef with me as he seems to follow my posts and post pottymouthing and rude replies.

    Seems he has a beef with a lot of folks. Doesn't handle it well when someone disagrees with him. Methinks he's, gasp, a troll.

    I prefer the Nageshen to this Westwood fgt.

  • jverd (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    jverd:
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    Methinks this Matt Westwood character has a beef with me as he seems to follow my posts and post pottymouthing and rude replies.

    Seems he has a beef with a lot of folks. Doesn't handle it well when someone disagrees with him. Methinks he's, gasp, a troll.

    I prefer the Nageshen to this Westwood fgt.

    Meh. They can all go bugger each other to death for all I care.

  • (cs) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    In situations like this, the correct answer is always to quit immediately - no notice, no two weeks, just immediate I quit. If you're feeling particularly vengeful send a scathing email that basically says words to the effect of "In case you can't tell, this is a software department. Your ridiculous standards and lack of trust for your developers clearly show that you have no clue how to run a modern software department, or any kind of software department. In fact, I wouldn't trust you to run a bath. Go away and grow up."

    There is nothing wrong with burning a bridge that should never have been erected in the first place.

    Would it be in bad taste, instead of sending an email with those words, to send an email with a link to your comment? I mean, you've already laid it out for them, why should one waste time on eloquence when bridges await to be burned! ;)

  • Mike (unregistered)

    Is it ironic that next to this article is an ad for "BuildMaster, Your New Deployment Overlord"..?

    Is that Stephan in a goofy costume portrayed in the ad?

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    In situations like this, the correct answer is always to quit immediately - no notice, no two weeks, just immediate I quit. If you're feeling particularly vengeful send a scathing email that basically says words to the effect of "In case you can't tell, this is a software department. Your ridiculous standards and lack of trust for your developers clearly show that you have no clue how to run a modern software department, or any kind of software department. In fact, I wouldn't trust you to run a bath. Go away and grow up."

    There is nothing wrong with burning a bridge that should never have been erected in the first place.

    Great plan! So now you have no job and if you try to use this job as a reference they'll tell them how you were insubordinate, unable to get along with co-workers, and broke your employment agreement by leaving without notice.

    Those of us who are not living in our parents' basement and don't have a trust fund to fall back on can't just quit a job without having some plan in place for how we're going to continue to pay the bills.

    You might want to be careful about burning that bridge. You may need it to live under in your cardboard box.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    And again, *smart* HR people would think "How bad must that place have been to get a response like that?" and not "What an ungrateful employee, daring to speak against such a wonderful company!" I know I would if I was in HR and someone at another company told me how such-and-such employee stormed out. My first thought would be "Wow your company must be a complete shithole" and not "The nerve of that peasant! I'll be sure to blacklist him."

    Really? When someone tells me about a disagreement he had with another person, he almost always describes it as he was 100% right and the other person was 100% wrong. And I always take this with a grain of salt. Maybe it's true. But maybe if I heard the other person's side, it would give a very different impression.

    Here's one rule of thumb I've figured out: If someone says that three of his four previous bosses were pretty good and one was an idiot, I'll probably believe him. If he says that every job he's ever had the boss was an idiot, it may be that he's just been very unlucky. But more likely the problem is him.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to Keine Macht fuer niemand
    Keine Macht fuer niemand:
    s73v3r:
    I really, really, really don't understand this. Ok, they want to track hours, not for pay purposes, as you're all salaried, to have a better idea of how long things are taking. But if that's the case, then why would you want to fudge the numbers like that?

    Reminds me of my last job where I had to fill in timesheets the same way. When I entered the really number of hours my PM told me that I was too slow. When I entered the expected number of hours he told me that I was not working enough.

    I'm reminded of the job where we got a memo stating:

    (1) Timesheets must be completed and submitted each week.

    (2) Timesheets must show hours actually worked. Therefore, you cannot fill out your timesheet in advance, you must fill it out only after completing the work.

    (3) Timesheets for the week must be turned in by noon on Friday.

    I asked the seemingly obvious question: If we cannot fill out timesheets in advance, how can I turn in a timesheet at noon on Friday that includes hours for Friday afternoon, hours that I haven't worked yet?

    The boss replied by explaining that HR needs the timesheets by noon so that they can get them entered into the system in time for payroll, etc etc. i.e. no answer to the question.

  • jverd (unregistered) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    Great plan! So now you have no job and if you try to use this job as a reference

    Why in the world would he do that?

    Those of us who are not living in our parents' basement and don't have a trust fund to fall back on can't just quit a job without having some plan in place for how we're going to continue to pay the bills.

    Right, because the only two options are "Trust fund baby living with Mommy," and "Barely scraping by paycheck to paycheck." It's completely impossible for anyone to have some modest savings to use for a cushion and a well-founded expectation of being finding a new job quickly. And it's completely impossible that this situation is what Obi was envisioning when he made his comment.

  • (cs)

    I don't know what country or state you live in but where I am there's no such thing as an employee agreement that entails working x time before leaving. Two week notice is a courtesy to wrap up any projects remaining, not an obligation. If a place was particularly loathsome I'd give a day's notice, if not "effective immediately"; if they were tolerable I'd give at least one week, and if they were decent but had fundamental issues they get the normal two weeks. But it's always a courtesy, not an expectation. Just as they can call me into the conference room one day and terminate me immediately without any warning or prior notice, I can quit without warning or notice.

  • Socio (unregistered) in reply to geoffrey
    geoffrey:
    Socio:
    geoffrey:
    Is your view so myopic that development is the only substantive function in the company? A CEO may or may not be a better developer than his charges. But he will always have better big picture view than they will. If the company has a policy that all source code goes through one person, you can bet it is with good reason. Trust in management, as they know and do what is best for the company.

    Trust management to do what is best for the company.

    Trust yourself to do what is best for you.

    Never confuse the goal of one for the goal of the other.

    Management expects employees to do what is best for the company. When that compact is severed, so is the relationship.

    The relationship is severed when management discovers the compact has been severed. Employee success is measured in accomplishing employee goals while giving the appearance of accomplishing company goals. Employees should employ deception as necessary.

  • Devils Advocate (unregistered)

    Firstly, if somebody else is offering to take care of all the merging, that's great! Merging is boring.

    Sometimes it's worth sacrificing a little optimality for the purposes of consistency. If cursors are usually slower, it may be simpler to never use them.

    Presumably the project managers were trying to capture real hours worked while encouraging people to avoid overtime. Seems reasonable, and Miguel appears to have behaved passive-agressively, which is common in second-rate "also-ran" nerds.

  • snave (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    I don't know what country or state you live in but where I am there's no such thing as an employee agreement that entails working x time before leaving. Two week notice is a courtesy to wrap up any projects remaining, not an obligation. If a place was particularly loathsome I'd give a day's notice, if not "effective immediately"; if they were tolerable I'd give at least one week, and if they were decent but had fundamental issues they get the normal two weeks. But it's always a courtesy, not an expectation. Just as they can call me into the conference room one day and terminate me immediately without any warning or prior notice, I can quit without warning or notice.

    Yep, it's a courtesy. My last job got so annoying, I gave my 2 weeks notice before even finding a new job. They complained about me having to finish my project, so I told them it wouldn't happen. After the first week of my notice, I decided to take off on Friday. Going into work the next monday, i found my key access had been revoked, they took my computer, and told HR that I was fired for job abandonment. Talk about courtesy. I thought it was hilarious, and my next employer didn't care at all.

  • (cs) in reply to snave
    snave:
    Yep, it's a courtesy. My last job got so annoying, I gave my 2 weeks notice before even finding a new job. They complained about me having to finish my project, so I told them it wouldn't happen. After the first week of my notice, I decided to take off on Friday. Going into work the next monday, i found my key access had been revoked, they took my computer, and told HR that I was fired for job abandonment. Talk about courtesy. I thought it was hilarious, and my next employer didn't care at all.

    Scenarios like that are always funny, because if you've given notice who cares if the company "fires" you? Pretty much once you give notice if they don't tell you to leave immediately, you can do what you like - take long lunches, extra breaks, miss days, because really you already said you are quitting, so what can they do? Legally all they can say is that you worked x amount of time and they would not hire you again, but it's opening up to a lawsuit if they start talking shit about you.

  • jverd (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    snave:
    Yep, it's a courtesy. My last job got so annoying, I gave my 2 weeks notice before even finding a new job. They complained about me having to finish my project, so I told them it wouldn't happen. After the first week of my notice, I decided to take off on Friday. Going into work the next monday, i found my key access had been revoked, they took my computer, and told HR that I was fired for job abandonment. Talk about courtesy. I thought it was hilarious, and my next employer didn't care at all.

    Scenarios like that are always funny, because if you've given notice who cares if the company "fires" you? Pretty much once you give notice if they don't tell you to leave immediately, you can do what you like - take long lunches, extra breaks, miss days, because really you already said you are quitting, so what can they do? Legally all they can say is that you worked x amount of time and they would not hire you again, but it's opening up to a lawsuit if they start talking shit about you.

    Except of course that during that notice period, you are still an employee and they still have a reasonable expectation that you will produce. If you don't (including if you take a vacation day without proper approval according to the company's policy), you should expect to be summarily canned.

    If you don't care about the money, that's fine, but you're burning bridge that you presumably didn't want to burn, given that you did them the courtesy of giving notice. Why bother giving notice in the first place if that's what you're going to do?

    IMHO, giving notice and then cocking off is worse than walking out with no notice. At least if you simply walk, you have made the clear and honest choice that, "Employer and I have no common ground and there's no point in continuing," vs. "I'm going to be a petty, lying, immature little dick and milk Employer for all I can while giving the false impression that I am still contributing."

  • Sam (unregistered) in reply to Jerry

    Yep, my employer is exactly like that. Last year we had compulsory ethics training, for which no jobcode was provided. The irony hurt.

  • db (unregistered) in reply to Jerry

    In one place upper management demanded the previous weeks project billing details by 9AM every Monday morning. Of course nothing was ever collated until around Thursday so the solution was to instruct everyone to fill in their billing details ONE WEEK AHEAD OF TIME. Such a practice was in place for at least a year and generated huge amounts of interdepartmental hostility, especially since every section was supposed to be a profit centre from internal billing.

    The guy in charge of all that mess later went on to be in charge of an electricity authority that entirely blacked out the biggest city in New Zealand for a couple of weeks due to cutting back on maintainance.

  • db (unregistered) in reply to db

    By billing details I mean timesheets billed to projects. It wasn't the sort of place where tasks could actually be planned a week ahead either because it was a support area that was supposed to have a faster turnaround than that.

  • M (unregistered)

    I think he swapped the good and bad news.

  • (cs) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    I don't know what country or state you live in but where I am there's no such thing as an employee agreement that entails working x time before leaving. Two week notice is a courtesy to wrap up any projects remaining, not an obligation. If a place was particularly loathsome I'd give a day's notice, if not "effective immediately"; if they were tolerable I'd give at least one week, and if they were decent but had fundamental issues they get the normal two weeks. But it's always a courtesy, not an expectation. Just as they can call me into the conference room one day and terminate me immediately without any warning or prior notice, I can quit without warning or notice.

    In the UK the notice period tends to be a contractual requirement, and in most professional positions this tends to be one month or, for positions with more responsibility, three months. This serves our professional community well, and exists to safeguard the interests of both employer and employee.

    In extreme cases where it is apparent that no benefit will accrue to either party by insisting that this obligation be adhered to, personnel are frequently allowed to depart without notice being worked, sometimes on full pay. It all depends on circumstance.

    As I say, these practices seem to work in the UK. One is generally expected not to commit the acts of vandalism and sabotage which certain irresponsible contributors to this forum advocate through a combination of malice, offended dignity and sheer delight in morally-justified evil. And, I repeat, if one does deliberately commit such acts, they are likely to be brought to justice.

    I sigh with despair when I read about the business concerns that cause the appalling bad feeling discussed here, most of which appear to emerge from the US market (although I may be wrong), and conclude that either American software engineers are in general a bunch of clowns, or that the business enterprises for which they work are what we brits refer to as cowboy outfits. Having worked at an instance of one with a bunch of the others, I express no surprise that their once proud nation seems to be falling down around their sorry ears.

  • MrBob (unregistered) in reply to Chelloveck
    Chelloveck:
    The exactly 40 hour week is surprisingly common. I worked at a place that wanted to track hours worked on various projects. We were all salaried, so it's not like it mattered to our pay. We just filled in what we worked. Then management said that our hours must add up to 40, every week. If we worked more we had to fudge all the times proportionately to total 40. They could have changed the web app collecting the data to scale everything to 40 hours if they wanted, but that didn't seem to occur to anyone in power.

    And speaking of the web app, it was an IE-only beast. A huge matrix of input boxes mapping out hours worked per project per day. It took 30 seconds to move from one box to another; I think it was submitting data to the server onblur() for each box. It was so bad that everyone in engineering just stopped using it after a while. And you know, no one ever said anything about it.

    Then there was this other place who wanted our time broken down into 10-minute intervals. Each interval had to be accounted for in the proper category -- Requirements, high-level design, low-level design, code, write testplan execute testplan, debug, review HLD, review LLD, review code... Each feature request and bug report had a full set of categories, and there were a lot of categories for overhead tasks as well. Yes, there was a category for filling out timesheets.

    I did an internship with a government contractor that had a phone-based timesheet system. The routine went like this: every day at 4:30, everyone start calling the 800 number.

    After 10-15 minutes of busy signals, you would then proceed to enter hours spent on each project using the asterisk as a decimal point (6-minute increments) along with the 5-6 digit project code for everything you did throughout the day. All billable projects and "overhead" (meetings, breaks, vacation, sick leave, timesheet reporting, etc.) each had a project code to be entered.

    After each entry, the voice system would pause for 15 seconds to think about what you typed. After entering in your entire day, if the total was not 40.0 hours a pleasant voice would spend 30 seconds explaining the importance of accurate record keeping before inviting you to start over.

    Good times.

  • MrBob (unregistered) in reply to s73v3r
    s73v3r:
    I really, really, really don't understand this. Ok, they want to track hours, not for pay purposes, as you're all salaried, to have a better idea of how long things are taking. But if that's the case, then why would you want to fudge the numbers like that?

    You didn't believe them when they told you it was to measure how long things are taking, did you?

    Even if you're salaried, at many places if you're not putting in 10-20 hours of unpaid overtime a week you're "just not working out" and need to "show the company you're dedicated to success"

  • MrBob (unregistered) in reply to QJo
    QJo:
    ThomasX:
    Maybe we're just naturally polite in Britain, but the *slightest sniff* of political, social or moral dissatisfaction with your last place of employment at the job interview is likely to lose you the job. Also, think of it like this: HR personnel talk to each other. Wait till you've *actually landed* the next job till you start telling campfire tales round the proverbial water cooler.

    This is just a sign of a rotting culture. That incompetent gatekeepers of HR just can't seem to deal with reality. They probably "think" because someone was unsatisfied with a job therefore he will be unsatisfied with every job. Stereotypical thinking at its best. Some people are so overly sensitive that they seem to be hurt by a simple fact. Problems are "solved" by sweeping them under the rug because "We are too weak-spined to deal with them." It's all about "saving face".

    It's not a matter of weakness or ignoring problems. It's purely a matter of wanting to employ someone with sufficiently good social skills to be able to remain polite and professional in situations where a lesser person would let his ego take over and cause embarrassment. I've seen what happens when an engineer (worthy and clever though he was in his chosen field) "throw a wobbly" (at a substandard piece of code he was supposed to maintain, or something) to such a degree that his string of screamed expletives were heard in the conference room where a group of potential customers for a lucrative contract were being briefed. For better or worse, those customers became uncomfortable and embarrassed (not to mention the poor engineer who was doing the presentation) to the extent that the customers' experience of our company was soured. So be damned to the icy purity of truth and goodness - if there's a hint on the horizon that an engineer hasn't got the emotional maturity and self-control to comport himself in a professional manner, I most definitely want to hear about it. *No* egotistical little cry-babies are going to work anywhere near me, if I have any control over it.

    If indeed you do have a genuine grievance with a company you are leaving for another, then: a) Express your concerns in your exit interview b) Share your reasons for believing you are hard done by with your manager, in a polite and non-confrontational manner c) Once you have landed your next job, bring your experience at the previous one into the public domain by suggesting where certain potential (or actual) policies at your new company may have possible shortfalls.

    Anything else is pointless, and is also damaging to both yourself and the software industry as a whole. The "general public" have already got an image of us as a selfish bunch of overpaid prima-donnas who act like a bunch of child supermodels as it is. Don't go compounding the problem.

    Good points, except for the exit interview. That's your last chance to leave on a good note, so don't screw it up by being critical on your way out the door. And because the interview is being conducted by HR, you can be sure those notes will be in your employment file.

    The fact you're even at an exit interview means that it's too late to salvage the workplace for you. Anything negative you say will not fix anything for you. You also no longer owe them any of your time. So be cordial, take your final check, and keep it under 10 minutes. Rant all you like on the drive home, but it's all smiles and handshakes in the exit interview.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to jverd
    jverd:
    Those of us who are not living in our parents' basement and don't have a trust fund to fall back on can't just quit a job without having some plan in place for how we're going to continue to pay the bills.

    Right, because the only two options are "Trust fund baby living with Mommy," and "Barely scraping by paycheck to paycheck." It's completely impossible for anyone to have some modest savings to use for a cushion and a well-founded expectation of being finding a new job quickly. And it's completely impossible that this situation is what Obi was envisioning when he made his comment.

    If you are really confidant that you can get another job in a few weeks, why not get the job first and then quit? Is this job really so intolerable that you can't put up with it for another couple of weeks, just to be safe? What if you THINK you can get another job quickly, but when you start looking you find that the job market is much worse than you thought? You might end up having to accept a job that sucks worse than the one you just left, or maybe even finding that you can't find any job at all before you exhause your "modest savings".

    In practice, I've always found that getting a new job is very unpredictable. I've had times that I've looked for months without finding anything, times when I found a job within a few weeks, and once I called a head hunter in the morning, they set up an interview that afternoon, and I had a job offer by the end of the day.

    I'm not "living paycheck to paycheck", I have about three month's pay in cash and liquid investments, plus a retirement fund. But I'd much rather keep the income coming in and keep those assets in case of an emergency truly outside my control, rather than burn though it just so ... what? I can have the satisfaction of telling my boss where to go? If it takes you a month to find a job, is that satisfaction really worth losing a month's pay?

    Are there a lot of people who feel this way? If I ever own a company, maybe I should have a standing policy that any employee can come in and yell and swear at me for half an hour with an absolute guarantee of no reprisals for $2,000. (I assume most programmers make more than $2,000 a month.) If lots of people feel the way you do, I could make a lot of money with that.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    I don't know what country or state you live in but where I am there's no such thing as an employee agreement that entails working x time before leaving. Two week notice is a courtesy to wrap up any projects remaining, not an obligation. If a place was particularly loathsome I'd give a day's notice, if not "effective immediately"; if they were tolerable I'd give at least one week, and if they were decent but had fundamental issues they get the normal two weeks. But it's always a courtesy, not an expectation. Just as they can call me into the conference room one day and terminate me immediately without any warning or prior notice, I can quit without warning or notice.

    I'd have to check the details, but many if not most jobs I've had, there's been an offer letter that gives some very basic terms of employment, usually including that if the company lays me off, they'll give me two weeks severance pay, and if I quit, I must give two weeks notice.

    I'm not a lawyer; I don't know if such conditions are enforcable in court. I would think they are: it's in writing, and I indicated my acceptance by taking the job. I would think that qualifies as a "contract".

    In any case, it's a gentlemen's agreement, and unless the company has failed to live up to their side of the bargain -- not "I don't like the policies here", but "they didn't pay me" or some such -- I would feel bound by it.

  • jverd (unregistered) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    jverd:
    Those of us who are not living in our parents' basement and don't have a trust fund to fall back on can't just quit a job without having some plan in place for how we're going to continue to pay the bills.

    Right, because the only two options are "Trust fund baby living with Mommy," and "Barely scraping by paycheck to paycheck." It's completely impossible for anyone to have some modest savings to use for a cushion and a well-founded expectation of being finding a new job quickly. And it's completely impossible that this situation is what Obi was envisioning when he made his comment.

    If you are really confidant that you can get another job in a few weeks, why not get the job first and then quit?

    Maybe the current job sucks SO HARD that one doesn't want to hang around for the extra one day to few weeks it may take to get another.

    Is this job really so intolerable that you can't put up with it for another couple of weeks, just to be safe?

    I thought that it was obvious that that was a fundamental premise of this hypothetical job that led the discussion to this subthread in the first place.

    So, yes, it is. If it weren't, we wouldn't be having this debate.

    What if you THINK you can get another job quickly, but when you start looking you find that the job market is much worse than you thought? You might end up having to accept a job that sucks worse than the one you just left, or maybe even finding that you can't find any job at all before you exhause your "modest savings".

    By that reasoning, nobody should ever quit any job without another already lined up that they are 100% sure will be better, and if you carry it to it's logical conclusion, everyone should at all times be looking for another job just in case the current one ends tomorrow. And nobody should ever start a new business, because you can't predict whether it will become profitable before your funding runs out.

    But in the real world, people can make reasonable guesses about how long it might take them to land a job, and can make reasonable estimates of how long they can live on their current savings, and can factor in a margin of safety, and can weigh those risks against the benefits of not having to spend one more day in their current hellhole, and can make an informed decision as to what's best for them.

    Of course, they could be wrong, and they may not find a new job, or their new job may suck worse than the current one (but that risk exists even if they land the job before quitting). There are always risks, but we weigh them and make the best decision we can.

    I'm not "living paycheck to paycheck",

    Didn't say you were. Your post, however, implied the false dichotomy of that or trust-fund-baby.

    I have about three month's pay in cash and liquid investments, plus a retirement fund. But I'd much rather keep the income coming in and keep those assets in case of an emergency truly outside my control, rather than burn though it just so ... what? I can have the satisfaction of telling my boss where to go?

    That's fine, and that's your choice. That doesn't mean that it's the right choice for everybody in a similar situation. Maybe for somebody else, yes, it IS worth diving into that savings to be able to leave an intolerable situation.

    Are there a lot of people who feel this way?

    I don't know. I once had a summer job in college that I quit on the spot about an hour after coming into work one day about 2 weeks before I was scheduled to be done. It was really tough not having that money, but it was worth it to avoid the soul-crushing hell that was that job.

    In my adult professional life, however, I've never had a job that was so horrible that I couldn't stand two more weeks of it, although another poster's comment above about 1-3 months in the UK might have made me make a different decision in one case. I can imagine that SOME people might experience that, and might be willing to accept the risk of being jobless for the ability to end severe pain right now.

Leave a comment on “The Source of Control”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #368938:

« Return to Article