October 23, 2013 at 9:47 am
GeorgeCopeland (10/23/2013)
Ian Massi (10/23/2013)
I've heard that in some places it's mandatory to take at least a week at a time at least once a year in order to make sure that you haven't become mission critical.That sounds like a brilliant policy. I take it a step further. Every job that I have had, I have tried to eliminate it - improve processes and documentation so that my job becomes unnecessary. Everytime I am successful at this, they just give me more to do.
I always try to automate to the point that I even try to train my replacement. There are so many "empire builders" who keep their little secrets close to their vests. I've worked with a lot of those and they end up in the same job for like 20 years!! I want to grow and take on other projects, not maintain the same systems util I am retired along with that system. :w00t:
October 23, 2013 at 9:50 am
jarick 15608 (10/23/2013)
GeorgeCopeland (10/23/2013)
Ian Massi (10/23/2013)
I've heard that in some places it's mandatory to take at least a week at a time at least once a year in order to make sure that you haven't become mission critical.That sounds like a brilliant policy. I take it a step further. Every job that I have had, I have tried to eliminate it - improve processes and documentation so that my job becomes unnecessary. Everytime I am successful at this, they just give me more to do.
I always try to automate to the point that I even try to train my replacement. There are so many "empire builders" who keep their little secrets close to their vests. I've worked with a lot of those and they end up in the same job for like 20 years!! I want to grow and take on other projects, not maintain the same systems util I am retired along with that system. :w00t:
That's a really good point. Where I work now, we ended up with empires because the IT group is relatively small. We're working towards expanding who has knowledge of which systems and making sure that everyone has a backup so they can actually take some time off.
October 23, 2013 at 10:34 am
LightVader (10/23/2013)
jarick 15608 (10/23/2013)
GeorgeCopeland (10/23/2013)
Ian Massi (10/23/2013)
I've heard that in some places it's mandatory to take at least a week at a time at least once a year in order to make sure that you haven't become mission critical.That sounds like a brilliant policy. I take it a step further. Every job that I have had, I have tried to eliminate it - improve processes and documentation so that my job becomes unnecessary. Everytime I am successful at this, they just give me more to do.
I always try to automate to the point that I even try to train my replacement. There are so many "empire builders" who keep their little secrets close to their vests. I've worked with a lot of those and they end up in the same job for like 20 years!! I want to grow and take on other projects, not maintain the same systems util I am retired along with that system. :w00t:
That's a really good point. Where I work now, we ended up with empires because the IT group is relatively small. We're working towards expanding who has knowledge of which systems and making sure that everyone has a backup so they can actually take some time off.
Big thumbs up to this. I also try as much as I can to automate and develop process so I can off load things. Because the complexity and importance of the projects have always grown, even when I am loathe to give up something interesting in the end it has always been for the best. What I was trying to solve 5 years ago, for instance, would bore me to tears if I had to do it now.
On the topic of vacations, I firmly believe we undervalue them in this country (U.S.). I try to set an example by taking all that I have accrued, and NEVER saying no to a request from one of my team. This means that there has to be enough overlap in our skills that this is possible, and ensuring this is possible I view as one of my principal responsibilities to the company as a manager. As was mentioned in an earlier post, if a person can't take a one week vacation it means they have become 'mission critical', which in my view is a management failure (read -- my failure). My standard is actually a two week vacation, not one.
October 23, 2013 at 12:30 pm
Apologies for wading into the "IT union" side discussion, but I have to agree that a union is not really an ideal fit in general for developers and DBAs.
And its certainly not something I'd be tempted to do just to score some more vacation time.
I think I'd dislike the union dues, stress of collective bargaining, lack of accountability, and primacy of seniority relative to competence more than I'd like the extra vacation days. Not to mention the potential negative impact on company performance and adaptability.
Unions have their place. There are some jobs and industries where without them, employees could (and/or) have been squeezed to barely liveable conditions without them. But they are not a good fit everywhere, not a good solution to every "my pay/benefits suck" problem.
October 23, 2013 at 1:35 pm
Nevyn (10/23/2013)
Apologies for wading into the "IT union" side discussion, but I have to agree that a union is not really an ideal fit in general for developers and DBAs.And its certainly not something I'd be tempted to do just to score some more vacation time.
I think I'd dislike the union dues, stress of collective bargaining, lack of accountability, and primacy of seniority relative to competence more than I'd like the extra vacation days. Not to mention the potential negative impact on company performance and adaptability.
Unions have their place. There are some jobs and industries where without them, employees could (and/or) have been squeezed to barely liveable conditions without them. But they are not a good fit everywhere, not a good solution to every "my pay/benefits suck" problem.
I am NOT a pro union person in any way, most people consider me anti-union.
My main issue with unions is that they don't adhere to what they should be doing, and frequently violate laws and get away with it. For example, it is against federal law for the teacher's union to engage in politics, but we all know they do and it is ignored.
That said, what I see as the value to unions is to ensure fair pay and benefits, and to ensure that workers are not abused, and that in cases where companies have no choice but to ask people to work more than they should, the employees are compensated fairly. Meaning an employee being paid $40 an hour, should be getting $60 an hour for any hours over 40 in a week, sometimes over 8 in a day.
The other side of the coin is that our profession should see a variety of wage levels due to the differences in intelligence, technical knowledge, and capabilities of workers. An entry level IT worker in any discipline could potentially be a star already. Frequently our most senior people in a number of disciplines are incapable of doing the most basic things. Fair pay means looking at productivity and quality. Unions are better suited to assembly line work where everyone produces the same quantity and quality - IT isn't like that.
Still, how many of us work for companies where everyone is paid the same, everyone gets the same bonus, everyone is looked at as being no better or worse than their co-workers? In my experience, companies have taken IT workers and forced them through the round hole that is "office workers" and view us the same way. Sure, some IT workers are idiots, some shouldn't be in the field, but a large number of IT workers (maybe everyone reading this?) excel at what we do and make an effort to produce the best quality work we can possibly produce.
So, unions or not? I don't know. I don't like them, but at this point I don't see them hurting a lot of IT workers in a lot of companies. I imagine there are some of you who would be hurt, and I would never want to force someone to join if they did not want to, but unions don't believe in options. My preference is to find a way to ensure we are compensated fairly, given appropriate time out of work to be ourselves, and to not be asked to work 60 hour weeks every week, without true vacation time, and not being paid for the hours we put in. All of that without the downside of unions. I have no idea how to make that happen. This is a brilliant group - someone will figure it out.
Dave
October 23, 2013 at 2:21 pm
Great points Dave. I was just looking at it from a benefits side, not salary. Just trying to think of a way to help those who don't.
I would like to pose a question more related to Steve's comments on vacation. I know I was the one who opened that can of worms on unions. 😉
How much of a salary decrease would you take for more vacation? Using Dave's number say you are making $40 an hour, for a 40 hour week thats $1,600. Would you take a decrease in your salary of $1,600 or more for another week of vacation?
I think I would. That amount, or equivalent to my salary isn't going to put me into any financial trouble. And I would enjoy my time away more than I would that money.
-------------------------------------------------------------
we travel not to escape life but for life not to escape us
Don't fear failure, fear regret.
October 23, 2013 at 2:30 pm
below86 (10/23/2013)
<snip>How much of a salary decrease would you take for more vacation? Using Dave's number say you are making $40 an hour, for a 40 hour week thats $1,600. Would you take a decrease in your salary of $1,600 or more for another week of vacation?
I think I would. That amount, or equivalent to my salary isn't going to put me into any financial trouble. And I would enjoy my time away more than I would that money.
I think that depends on how many days you start with. Right now I get 20 days, plus 11 holidays and some sick days. I don't think I would give up any of my salary for more time off. There's no issue financially, but with where I am in life right now, I don't think I could use more time. If I had a family that I was missing time with it would be a different story.
The previous company I worked for you could choose between overtime pay or comp time when you worked extra hours. I think that was a nice policy.
October 23, 2013 at 7:49 pm
Steve,
How many times have you ever heard anyone lying on their death-bed speak the words, "I wish I would've worked more."
I'm guessing none.
Have a good time!
Mark Cusano
October 23, 2013 at 9:30 pm
How much of a salary decrease would you take for more vacation? Using Dave's number say you are making $40 an hour, for a 40 hour week thats $1,600. Would you take a decrease in your salary of $1,600 or more for another week of vacation?
So basically you are asking people if they'd take a weeks unpaid vacation?
October 24, 2013 at 7:14 am
Nevyn (10/23/2013)
How much of a salary decrease would you take for more vacation? Using Dave's number say you are making $40 an hour, for a 40 hour week thats $1,600. Would you take a decrease in your salary of $1,600 or more for another week of vacation?
So basically you are asking people if they'd take a weeks unpaid vacation?
Yes, but instead of having one less or smaller check it would be less throughout the year. My wife has less vacation time than I have and I would love for her boss to let her do this. I would rather have that time together than the extra $133 a month in this example.
We used to have 'comp' time for anything worked over 40 hours. Senior management found out about it many years ago and put an end to it. 🙁
-------------------------------------------------------------
we travel not to escape life but for life not to escape us
Don't fear failure, fear regret.
October 24, 2013 at 9:06 am
Working hard requires that a person take the time off they need. One cannot work at top speed or performance levels all the time, you burn out too soon and burnout can lead to a long down time or death. Many work too hard and pay too high a price in health and relationships.
To achieve balance you must work hard enough and play often enough to remain fresh and interested in both. Why drive those you love away because of a job? Do you realize how stupid that sounds? You work to have a life you enjoy, your life includes work but life is far more than a job.
Play more, Enjoy more, Live longer!
M.
Not all gray hairs are Dinosaurs!
October 24, 2013 at 9:13 am
below86 (10/24/2013)
Nevyn (10/23/2013)
How much of a salary decrease would you take for more vacation? Using Dave's number say you are making $40 an hour, for a 40 hour week thats $1,600. Would you take a decrease in your salary of $1,600 or more for another week of vacation?
So basically you are asking people if they'd take a weeks unpaid vacation?
Yes, but instead of having one less or smaller check it would be less throughout the year. My wife has less vacation time than I have and I would love for her boss to let her do this. I would rather have that time together than the extra $133 a month in this example.
We used to have 'comp' time for anything worked over 40 hours. Senior management found out about it many years ago and put an end to it. 🙁
In the US the law basically says that if you are paid a salary (no overtime pay) then you must be paid for any day where you work, regardless of how short of a time. Essentially if a salaried individual works overtime for no compensation, then if they work less than 8 hours on other days, the company must pay them for the full day. Not that it is fair, but it makes the abuse even out a little bit. Of course a lot of companies ignore the law. What really annoys me is that the FLSA clearly indicates IT staff cannot be denied overtime, but another law that is more recent (passed because companies paid off our elected officials!) says they can.
As far as unpaid vacation goes, I don't look at it that way. My view is that on salary, if I take all my vacation time each year, then my effective hourly wage is increased based on how much time off I took. A salary of $20,800 over 2080 hours is $10 per hour. If I work 50 weeks, I really only worked 2000 hours, at $10.40 per hour. So if instead of being paid $20,800 a year, I was paid $20,384 per year, the difference of $416 equals 40 hours at $10.40. So it really isn't a pay cut or unpaid vacation, because you are gaining the number of hours you took off in an amount that is equal to the number of dollars you are giving up. Less pay over the year, but the same pay per hour, to me that is a fair trade.
Now if I could actually take the time off that I earn...
Dave
October 24, 2013 at 9:23 am
Miles Neale (10/24/2013)
Working hard requires that a person take the time off they need. One cannot work at top speed or performance levels all the time, you burn out too soon and burnout can lead to a long down time or death.
One thing managers don't seem to understand is that as you work people too hard, their productivity drops to levels that are BELOW what they are if you require normal work hours.
Case in point - a consulting company I used to work for held a class on project management for all new PMs. They strongly pushed this idea. They asked us how many productive hours we expect to see on an 8-hour a day worker. The class was full of recent college graduates, who felt 8 hours was a reasonable answer. I said 6 hours and they were all offended. The instructor said I was wrong, my estimate was HIGH! The realy answer was something like 5.5 hours. Think of all the time in the bathroom, getting coffee, water and other refreshments, talking about the game last weekend. He went on to ask about increasing hours to 10 a day, and what to expect. The result was something like an increase of almost 2 hours for a while, but within 6 months, the expectation was for less than 5.5 hours of productivity per day. I think it dropped to somewhere between 4-5 hours.
The point was that the longer you over work people, the more likely you will actually see a decrease in output and quality.
For myself, I know there are times where I can't seem to be as productive as I like, usually when I am burnt out. It can take me weeks to get back to where I want to be, and usually I do it by walking away from everything, and spending a few days just sorting out what needs to be done. The change in focus helps, but it wouldn't be necessary to take days away from my real work if I had a reasonable work load most weeks. I would bet that all of us handle the overload in some manner that is non productive for the company, whether it is by taking time off work as vacation, or some other method. Those who don't probably end up paying a high cost later on.
Dave
October 24, 2013 at 10:02 am
My view is that on salary, if I take all my vacation time each year, then my effective hourly wage is increased based on how much time off I took.
The view in the UK is slightly different. You contract states what your salary and leave allowance will be, and if you are not allowed to take your leave then this is a breach of contract on behalf of your employer as it is a de facto pay cut. If you choose not to take your leave, despite reminders, then you are giving your employer free work over and above your contract.
There use to be a practice, especially in industry, of forfeiting a weeks leave for a weeks extra pay, so you effectively got paid two weeks wages for one weeks work, but this has (quite rightly in my opinion) been outlawed.
November 5, 2013 at 1:12 pm
Dear Steve,
Over the past months I have taken to reading your daily editorial. I am not a DBA , but currently work with SQL Server as a developer and analyst. I have been interested in how one manages data and found interesting insights in your posts. However that is not why I am writing today. I am writing in response to your editorial encouraging us to take time off. You also shared how four friends of yours under the age of 50 had died in the last three years - how sad and how true your expression that life is short.
Through my reading of your eidtorials, I feel in some respects I have come to know in a small way the character of the man Steve Jones. You seem to be quite level headed, kind and personable. However, I could not help but think after reading your post that you are also a man without hope beyond the grave. A mindset that says this world is all there is and we need to grab what enjoyment we can while we are here, for who knows what lies beyond....
At our church I have been engaged in study of the book of Ecclesiastes. In it Solomon laments that no matter how wise or accomplished we may be, we all face the prospect of death - rich or poor, wise or foolish. Moreover he writes about how life is so unpredictable and that what we strive for with such energy, is in the end futile and seemingly meaningless and soon to be forgotten by the next generation. And yet there are sections of the book where he encourages us to enjoy life's blessings as a gifts from God: food and drink, good looking clothes, companionship and enthusiasm in our work (Eccl 9:7-10).
However the Bible does not begin and end with Ecclesiastes. Rather for us who now live after the resurrection of Jesus Christ, God has freely opened the gates to Paradise. Yes, Paradise beyond the grave for all that will trust in His Son Jesus, the God-Man, as their Redeemer. They trust that He bore the penalty of their sin and guilt. I know this message may offend you, Jesus offended me at one time as well. However, God changed my heart. I now have a Father in heaven because of Jesus. He is the only way to the eternal happiness we all inwardly long for and try so desparately but in vain to attain on our own.
So while you possess practical wisdom for getting along in this life and I would add a generous spirit, I would encourage you to seek the true and everlasting wisdom found in Jesus Christ that will secure your future in the world to come and save you from the judgment we all know in our heart of hearts awaits us.
Sincerely,
Howard
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 44 (of 44 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply