Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Why "loyalty" ??? (Score 1) 224

Did you miss the part where I said I don't begrudge them their decision to leave for greener pastures? Employee loyalty to company is almost entirely dead. Company loyalty to employee is also dead. It's not fair to employers to expect them to be loyal to their employees when those same employees aren't loyal to their employer.

Comment Re:Good news! (Score 1) 224

Honestly, I'd rather my employer not risk spending money to train him (not to mention having to keep him on for another six months) only to have him perform exactly the same at the end of that period. I'd rather "we" as a development organization start to have actual hiring standards, and apply those standards retroactively to current employees based on the body of work we've already seen from them.

Comment Re:Good news! (Score 1) 224

"They" (meaning employees where I work) frequently "discard" my employer whenever a higher paying position comes along; there's no real "company loyalty" any more. (And I don't begrudge them that decision.) So why should my employer feel an obligation to not respond in kind? Besides: I'm not convinced training would help. The guy writing bloated, buggy, poorly performing code isn't going to magically starting writing clean, robust, succinct, performant code if we send him to a 3 week class.

Comment Re:Good news! (Score 1) 224

I'm relatively certain I could go get another job inside a week or two, possibly making more than I do now. So I'm winning to risk being the one who gets laid off. It's pretty liberating, actually, being in that position. Or, at least, perceiving myself to be in that position. I can speak a-politically about things at work (hard truths, etc.) and have no anxiety about possible consequences.

Comment Re:Good news! (Score 2) 224

Certainly seems as if the market considers it the right move w.r.t. the success of Seagate, Inc. If you disagree, and feel Seagate should have retained those 6500 employees, why should that be the steady state? Couldn't Seagate afford to take on additional employees? What should factor into Seagate management's calculus when they try to determine what the size of their workforce should be? As large as possible with the constraint that the company remain profitable? Whatever size maximizes long-term growth? Something else?

Honestly, I often wish my employer would lay off 15% of the company. Or, better yet, lay off the lowest-performing 30% and back-fill half of those positions with more competent new-hires. Productivity would stay roughly constant but payroll would shrink by ~10%. (This assumes the new hires would need to be paid more in order to guarantee the caliber of employee likely to be more productive than those being replaced.)

Comment Re:What is a "city" (Score 1) 100

Well, first off, you come off as bitter and spiteful. Need to tone that shit down. That said, a couple points/questions:

1. I would only move to the Seattle area if I thought I could roughly match my current standard of living. Given cost-of-living differences I'd need to make 15-20% more in Seattle for that to be the case. I say "roughly" because I consider there to be certain intangibles that favor Seattle. Namely, the ability to drive an hour or two out of town and be at Mt. Ranier or Olympic Natl. Park. My current mortgage payment + insurance is something around $1500/mo for a home that's comparable to the one you mentioned. To absorb a $4000/mo payment I'd need to earn $30k more per year. If I couldn't at least approach that then I probably wouldn't move.

2. Your home tripling in value is still meaningful even if you're not planning to move any time soon. Eventually you're going to move, most likely to a geography w/ cheaper housing, at which point you'll reap the rewards of that appreciation. This same phenomenon is happening in Austin too, so that's somewhat of a wash. I bought my place in 2003 for $240k; 13 years later its appraised at around $475k.

3. I'm curious why you're so derisive toward the newcomers who, because of housing prices, subject themselves to a long commute. We have the same folks here; they live out in the suburbs (because you get a lot more house for your money) and commute in to central Austin. It's a trade-off; you get more living space in exchange for a longer commute. Personally I'd rather have a smaller place and live closer in, but I don't begrudge them their decision.

4. I personally know some folks who work (or worked) at MS and they're good people. Perhaps you're painting them with too broad a brush? I'm willing to concede for the sake of argument that Amazon and MS have a higher-than-normal ratio of jerkwads per capita compared to other tech companies, but that doesn't mean everybody there sucks.

Comment Re:What is a "city" (Score 1) 100

Gee, chip on your shoulder much? Hypothetically speaking, if I were to move from Austin to Seattle (which I'm not considering) it would be for the following reasons:

1. More tech employers = less likelihood of my ever being without a job.
2. More / better outdoor stuff. Texas is kind of "meh" in that regard.


Haven't run the numbers, but I've always suspected that cost-of-living differences (not just Seattle, but generally speaking) are to a large degree offset by differences in salary. Places that cost more also pay more. It may not be enough to completely offset the difference in cost-of-living, but I'm sure it blunts the effect somewhat.

Comment Re:Cost of living (Score 1) 100

Caveat: I've never lived in NYC. That said, I AirBnB'd a family's apartment for 2 weeks in Washington Heights while I was there on vacation. On a lark, I looked up how much it would cost me to buy a condo in a nearby building that was being remodeled. Roughly two bedrooms and ~1200 sq. foot. If I recall correctly, I think it was around $550k. Granted it's not the best part of town, but on the particular block where we stayed I never felt in danger. It was a 2 block walk to the A-line so I could be downtown in 20 minutes.

My not-super-nice 1500 sq. foot home in north-central Austin is appraised at around 475k (mostly because of the land; not the structure) and it just gets worse the closer you move toward the city center. The inverse is also true; suburbs (e.g. Cedar Park, Leander) are very reasonable, albeit devoid of character. The nicer close-in neighborhoods (Rosedale, Tarrytown, etc.) run about $425/sqft.

Point being: Considering only housing and not taking into account other factors in cost-of-living it seems like I might be able to relocate to NYC without taking a big hit to my "real" income.

Slashdot Top Deals

PL/I -- "the fatal disease" -- belongs more to the problem set than to the solution set. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra, SIGPLAN Notices, Volume 17, Number 5

Working...