• FaeDrifter@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are you being honest with your second job that you’re only going to do your job during the stretches of job #1 that require long compile times?

      It’s like dating two people but pretending to be monogamous with each. It might work for a bit but at some point you will need to choose one over the other.

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s like dating two people but pretending to be monogamous with each.

        That’s a great analogy.

      • xantoxis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        at some point you will need to choose one over the other.

        Maybe, maybe not. I’ve heard of people doing this stuff for a LONG time.

        But it doesn’t matter, does it? If you are forced to choose one over the other, you’ve still made a lot of extra money on all the double-dipped hours you’ve accrued up to that point.

        • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s true but that reflects more on how bloated and inefficient the tech sector is. And now the other shoe is dropping with mass layoffs.

          • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The layoffs are a power grab against wage increases. Companies have been reporting record profits for years, inefficient my ass.

            If you can do your allotted work in less time you’re just more productive, if a company gave a shit about this they could solve the problem by having a direct compensation increase for work load increase. After all, the employment negotiation happened in the interview. Responsibilities and compensation are already decided upon, it’s insane that you can just be handed more work because you’re too good to do the work they gave you slow enough. If the workers actually had power in the negotiation like free market morons think they do, they’d be able to adjust their own salary when the employer adjusts their workload. Since they can’t, the balance of power is obviously squarely in the employers court.

            Want them to do more? Pay them more and then give them more responsibilities. It’s so easy to solve, but companies think they can just extract more effort for the same dollar they agreed upon when the employee was hired. Ludicrous.

            • phillaholic@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Want them to do more? Pay them more and then give them more responsibilities.

              The article cites tech workers double-dipping on $250,000 salaries. It’s clearly not about not getting paid enough.