Of course we don’t - Jared is why some workplaces don’t suck. Having a dev with enough seniority to force management to do logical things is an incredible asset.
Of course Jared didn’t document anything and made themselves a bus factor. Real success is when Jared makes themself replaceable because hiding detail and making yourself critical is the best way to take a site down when you’re on holiday and prevent other team members stepping in and taking ownership.
Capitalism offers a perverse incentive in this regard. I have no motive to keep the company healthy, only to get paid. Ensuring I can be replaced benefits the company while harming me.
Professional integrity. Have you ever worked for a company that got screwed by a consultancy? Vendor lock in and charging scandalous amounts for little offer.
You are paid for your skills and your time. If you’re confident in your ability and impact, you shouldn’t have to be worried.
I’m not saying sacrifice for yourself for your company, and if they are a shitty company that would replace you with cheaper, get out, but also, giving nothing for the pay you get is a bit dishonest, and then you are no better than them.
Plus, you make the case that hiring people is bad and paying a consultancy is less risky.
Lmao fuck integrity I’m trying to make rent
It’s not like the company has any integrity in their dealings, like when they lay off entire departments with no notice. One of my current coworkers worked for Dell for 17 years before being laid off. According to you, if she were confident in her abilities, she shouldn’t have worried.
Companies don’t care about integrity. They don’t care about people. All companies would replace you with someone cheaper if they could. Why should we care about them?
I wouldn’t recommend staying with a company for 17 years. That’s for sure. Best way to get stuck in a company specific niche skill that is not transferable. For the reasons stated you got to keep yourself positioned well skills wise and relevant so you can jump into any role you need at any time.
Integrity is not for the company. It’s doing things the way you think they should be done and earn your own respect.
I would say all companies don’t replace with cheaper. Many do. Especially the shitty ones. It’s quite easy to avoid those like the plague. Many did, and learnt the hard way, many have staff that have seen failed outsourcing and are in a position to influence that.
Soloing knowledge doesn’t keep you safe though as the penny pinching companies will remove anyway and clean up later regardless. It does not keep you safe. It’s a false sense of security. Complacency is a death sentence in software development.
You are paid to benefit the company though. It’s literally your job.
Then they should pay me based on that—giving me partial ownership, for example, would incentivize me to do better for the company. As it stands, I get paid the same no matter how the company is doing. I only have an incentive not to get fired… which is easier if I’m indispensable.
If you don’t think your salary is enough you should consider switching employer.
If you never document your shit I’m surprised you don’t get fired.
Oh wow just switch employers, is that all
Beyond that, you missed my point. Even if I were being paid more, I still wouldn’t have any incentive to make myself dispensable. Unless I’m vested in the company profits, then the profits don’t matter to me.
You do everything you’re told? They say work overtime and you say how much?
At least he won’t be laid off easily like everyone is in last year.
The inmates are running the asylum.
It’s lunatics… the lunatics have taken over the asylum
I was giving a nod to Alan Cooper’s book “The Inmates Are Running the Asylum”: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/44098.The_Inmates_Are_Running_the_Asylum
Ew siloing
Well, you do you. But I doubt anyone would hire you. 🤷
We all get frustrated with scrum at times, but not all of us use TTS to make a casually sexist skit about it.
You’ve turned this into a catch 22. If there were no female characters, you could argue that’s sexist. If the idiotic boss was female, you could argue all of the dumb characters are female so that’s sexist. If Jarod were the only female, that would be sexist.
How does this sketch get rewritten in such a way that it is not casually sexist?
Good point. I guess you’re right, there are no flattering roles. But each of those options you list would have been less on top of existing prejudices.
Making her the (non-technical) project manager whose only contribution is “how many story points is that?”, who’s then silenced because “this is important!”, confirms the typical prejudices about women in tech:
- no technical expertise
- is not in charge
- does not have anything to say that is worth listening to in times of crisis
Especially being talked over. This matches many women’s experiences in men-dominated environments to a T.
I’d much rather the technically competent, important but socially weird engineer (Jared) be the woman, or the incompetent boss, who’s in charge and calls the shots. Even having no women in the skit would be better than this Cindy role.
Or, weird idea I know, multiple people with different roles being women. 🙄
What if they were all female?
