Woman Ordered To Repay Employer After Software Shows 'Time Theft' (theguardian.com) 167
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: A Canadian woman has been ordered by a civil tribunal to compensate her former employer for "time theft" after she was caught misrepresenting hours worked by controversial tracking software. Karlee Besse, who worked remotely as an accountant in British Columbia, initially claimed she was fired from her job without cause last year and sought $3,729 in compensation -- both in unpaid wages and severance. But the company, Reach CPA, told the tribunal Beese had logged more than 50 hours that "did not appear to have spent on work-related tasks."
Reach said it installed employee-tracking software called TimeCampon Besse's work laptop after it found her assigned files were over budget and behind schedule, a strategy companies are increasingly taking in the era of remote work. The software tracks how long a document is open, how the employee uses the document and logs the time as work. Weeks later, the company said an analysis "identified irregularities between her timesheets and the software usage logs." While Besse told the tribunal she found the program "difficult" and worried it didn't differentiate between work and personal use, the company demonstrated how TimeCamp automatically makes those distinctions, separating time logs for work from activities such as using the laptop to stream movies and television shows.
Besse said she had printed documents to work on, but did not tell Reach she was using hard copy because she "knew they wouldn't want to hear that" and she was afraid of repercussions. The company said that the software also tracks printing -- and that few documents had been logged as printed. It also said any work from the printed documents would have needed to be input into the company's software, which never happened. [...] The judge tossed out Besse's claim of wrongful termination and ordered her to pay $1,840.27, both in returned wages and as a part of previous advance she had received from the company.
Reach said it installed employee-tracking software called TimeCampon Besse's work laptop after it found her assigned files were over budget and behind schedule, a strategy companies are increasingly taking in the era of remote work. The software tracks how long a document is open, how the employee uses the document and logs the time as work. Weeks later, the company said an analysis "identified irregularities between her timesheets and the software usage logs." While Besse told the tribunal she found the program "difficult" and worried it didn't differentiate between work and personal use, the company demonstrated how TimeCamp automatically makes those distinctions, separating time logs for work from activities such as using the laptop to stream movies and television shows.
Besse said she had printed documents to work on, but did not tell Reach she was using hard copy because she "knew they wouldn't want to hear that" and she was afraid of repercussions. The company said that the software also tracks printing -- and that few documents had been logged as printed. It also said any work from the printed documents would have needed to be input into the company's software, which never happened. [...] The judge tossed out Besse's claim of wrongful termination and ordered her to pay $1,840.27, both in returned wages and as a part of previous advance she had received from the company.
Right to Work (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Right to Work (Score:5, Interesting)
I did tons of consulting gigs and it was always about the deliverables... the tangible outputs of your time that was what clients wanted and paid for. Lots of consultants gamed the timesheet, but if the job didn't get done, the paycheque didnt get cut.
To me, this reeks of the automation of everything. So the judge just trusts the monitoring software?
There's two ideas in play there: 1. all non techies seem to trust software without question and 2. all non techies will apparently install anything that anyone says. Zoom. Slack. Etc. No one seems to have any idea what they are getting into. And the client company probably doesn't know that Salesforce or some other backend service is sucking them dry of their data either.
From what I can see, the consultant, the client, and the judge are all clueless, and running around in a maze designed by software.
Re: (Score:2)
1. all non techies seem to trust software without question and 2. all non techies will apparently install anything that anyone says. Zoom. Slack. Etc. No one seems to have any idea what they are getting into. And the client company probably doesn't know that Salesforce or some other backend service is sucking them dry of their data either.
We're talking about the company's computer that they provided to the worker. Of course it has whatever the company wants instealled on it.
And what personal data of the employee is on that computer? There shouldn't be any. Quite sure the employee manual (for one place) says the company can (a) monitor the computer and (b) see any personal shit you're using it for, so don't do that.
Especially since your very own personal non-company computer is sitting there with you about three inches away.
If you mean the CO
Re:Right to Work (Score:4, Insightful)
The apps thing is starting to get ridiculous. Fast food chains have been pushing them for a while, some of them are pushing them really hard. At McDonald's, for example, it's starting to become less like a classic points-based reward program and more like "Order through the app if you want anything like a reasonable price."
Even here on Slashdot, I read a post (that I think was not even a shill) about how convenient ordering through the app is. Had to break it to the guy that it's not for his convenience. If it was about that, they'd let you place the order in a web browser.
I'm not going to install an app for every store and fast food joint I want to visit. Nor do I have enough fealty toward McDonald's that I'll just install their app and never eat anywhere else. Combined with the general nosedive in service recently, I'd rather just avoid McDonald's, and now I do. When the rest of the fast food places inevitably see how much monetization they're getting out of the data, and start going the same route, I will skip all of them too. Eating healthy doesn't sound like that big of a drag on my life.
Re: (Score:3)
Had to break it to the guy that it's not for his convenience.
I find it amusing that the same people who yell and point "conspiracy theorist" have never read the terms and conditions and don't know what they are permitting an app to do.
Re: (Score:3)
never read the terms and conditions and don't know what they are permitting an app to do
We know what we are permitting the app to do. Unfortunately, despite being privacy-concerned, Android does NOT allow me to sandbox applications when they have ridiculous demands (like a calculator requiring access to address book or camera). The correct solution would have been to sandbox and provide such applications with a blank address book instead. But actual choices are all or nothing. So if I need the app for some reason, I have to give it these permissions.
Re:Right to Work (Score:5, Interesting)
There should be containerization software for smartphones that allow you to install apps, but just fuzz and sandbox all the environmental data.
That way, you could just install all the loyalty apps to a container and let them play with themselves with no real data being delivered and no notifications reaching out of the sandbox.
Re: (Score:3)
If you had an iPhone you could just tell the app not to track you the first time you open it.
Re: (Score:3)
Android can do that too, just don't give it permissions
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing happened to deliverables. Quote:
> after it found her assigned files were over budget and behind schedule
To me this smells potentially of "we tried talking through the issue first..."
As for the rest of how the software actually works, I hope the court mandates an audit.
Re: (Score:2)
To me this smells potentially of "we tried talking through the issue first..."
Indeed, it would be rather weird if they didn't talk to her about it before they fired her.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"I did tons of consulting gigs"
So you weren't an employee, thus your experience is irrelevant to a question of employment.
-1, offtopic
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it strange, though, on how, as soon as you're paying consulting rates, it stops being 'I expect you to be at a desk for eight hours, regardless of your output' and starts being 'I expect maximum output in minimum time, and I'm paying for the final product, not the process?'
Odd that employees are incentivized to be inefficient to fill out a full 8 hours, while consultants are incentivized to deliver quickly to get paid and move to the next task.
Re: (Score:2)
BUT... whatever happened to "deliverables" ?
Based on my understanding, lack of meeting deliverables were the reason the increased monitoring was put in place, and the monitoring demonstrated not that the person was under-performing in a way which could be coached, but actively not performing the tasks they were paid for.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they could be doing anything, and time theft was thing long before the internet and remote work... BUT... whatever happened to "deliverables" ?
A reasonable line of thinking that apparently the company also followed. According to the article, "Reach said it installed employee-tracking software called TimeCamp on Besse’s work laptop after it found her assigned files were over budget and behind schedule." That is, the original deliverables weren't delivered in spite of spending more than the expected time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like the corporations have completely taken over the labor laws.
Being able to prove that you fired an employee for slacking off with evidence that they weren't doing what they were paid to do is "taking over labour laws"? That logic is so far left leaning it makes Bernie Sanders look like Mussolini.
unions could be a very valuable bridge
This example is everything that is wrong with unions. You painted a true slacker, someone who hasn't done the assigned work, an underperformer in every metric as a "victim" that needs protecting by a union. FUCK NO!
Re: (Score:2)
Well... we're not further south... that's something.
Re: (Score:2)
McKenzie Brothers, though he got it wrong.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is that when I work from home, I don't sit in front of my PC after 3pm and browse Facebook, I do something useful instead
Re: (Score:3)
What I have observed, and why wfh has actually increased productivity for some, is the food pattern most people here have. We generally have lunch very early, around 11:00 or 11:30. That means that around 4 or 5, you start to get hungry again. So around 4 or 5, productivity usually plummeted, but having a snack and then continuing working isn't exactly what makes a lot of sense when you're leaving around 6 anyway, so what most people did was to somehow tide over that hour or two, pack up, go home and eat.
In
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Gee... seems like they're getting him somewhere... :)
Re: (Score:2)
Apk?! Really?
Re: (Score:3)
Nobody cares about Creimer. APK was legendary.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in the US, she would have to repay it, and go to jail for theft of time, and at that amount of cash, it would be a felony. She would not be stealing from a job for the rest of her life with a felony conviction.
This is true in some states. Usually companies use it as leverage to get out of paying unemployment.
Re: (Score:2)
If they have to sit at and monitor a work computer, that is still working... it isn't being productive but it is working.
Hell, I've got netflix open most of the time regardless of what else I might be doing.
Re: (Score:3)
"at what point do you go "wtf m8""
Is the job you need done getting done and if not is failing on a reasonable curve relative to her peers and the obstacles which have been reported? Those other factors don't really matter, results matter.
Now I'm speaking in general terms with regard to this type of monitoring. But in her case it sounds like her results were subpar and she actually tried to sue them on top of it so I'm not really blaming the workplace for canning her and having a grudge in this case. She tot
I let my cats play with my computer mouse (Score:4, Funny)
I put some nice smelling mice leather on it and my cats can't distinguish it from a real mouse.
In any case, my employer thinks I'm extremely busy all day.
I only need to come up with a solution for my keyboard.
Them microswitches are just too heavy for my hamsters to push down.
Re: (Score:2)
I use an arduino
Re:I let my cats play with my computer mouse (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
A cheap Digispark clone will do this in a conveniently small package. or if you don't want to write any Arduino code at all, this one is even smaller than a Digispark and ready to go: https://www.tindie.com/product... [tindie.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I let my cats play with my computer mouse (Score:4, Informative)
The serial chip in most arduinos is a small programmable microcontroller
Most arduinos by number of units produced do not use a programmable micro for serial, they use a CH340 or if you are lucky, an FTDI chip. The most popular Arduinos are the uno and nano, neither of which can be used in that way. Leonardo, Micro, Zero and Due can be used for this, but not "most" arduinos.
Time.... (Score:2)
As someone who both manages others and is a worker, I am totally conflicted about time micromanagement.
If I pay you $x.xx to work for an hour, you will work at a pace that we both find reasonable for that hour. I am purchasing an hour of labour. It's like a contract. Labour is a commodity. I measure inputs and outputs and thresholds as a manager and you WILL be within that range or you will not work here. I buy something called a toaster for $x.xx, and I take it home, I put bread in it, I expect it mak
Re:Time.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I care about the amount of work being done. I had a worker a while ago (that I couldn't hold simply because I can't really pay as much as Google does) who got the workload of 40 hours accomplished in less than 25. Yes, he was goofing off a lot, but I still came out ahead. And if you can do your standard workload in half the time, I don't mind if you are only around half the time. I don't need you to keep a chair from flying off into space with your ass, I need you to get shit done.
Re: (Score:2)
If your criteria for labor is strictly hourly but you don't actually vet the time card before paying out, that seems like the employer's problem. They agreed at some point that X hours of work had been done and paid out. This is the whole process of "I have my time card, I need you to sign it". It's unreasonable to sign a time card, then go back and say 'nuh-uh, I was wrong, give me money back despite signing for the hours you did'.
Bad Writing (Score:2)
A Canadian woman has been ordered by a civil tribunal to compensate her former employer for "time theft" after she was caught misrepresenting hours worked by controversial tracking software.
She misrepresented the hours worked by the tracking software?
Not even the worst abuse of spyware (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I constantly get job spam for some company called Crossover that makes all their "employees" use webcam software that constantly watches them. If they go for a piss, or answer the door, or simply aren't in frame then they don't get paid for that period of time. And I say "employee" since no vacancy is ever closed and everyone is a contractor who can be fired at any time. This sort of abusive shit is legal somehow.
It gets worse, SCOTUS has for all practical purposes leaked that in the case of "Glacier Northwest v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters" it is going to rule that workers are liable for damages due to profits lost during a strike. The USA, the land where everybody is free, except workers, to fight for better pay and conditions. Because soon, when you stage a mass walk-out and all quit your jobs because you have no other leverage, you'll have to compensate your company for the profits they lost due to yo
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not even the worst abuse of spyware (Score:4, Insightful)
Tasks completed, not time expended = best measure (Score:3)
Vehiclemechanics are generally paid either by flat rate (per industry guides) at dealerships. If they knock out jobs under the allotted time they make more, if the work takes longer they make less.
Skilled line mechanics can make bank, the less capable earn less. Being skilled labor and readily employable (no mechanic worth their salt doesn't have near infinite side jobs available) they can quit any time, haul off their tool boxes and have a new job in days if not lined up beforehand.
It's a fine old system which generally works well. The dealer profits from completed tasks not time spent completing them.
Re: (Score:2)
That's fine when the tasks are basically the same thing over and over again. Is accounting like that, or is there variation that only averages out over a larger number of jobs? I don't know, but if this bit from TFA is accurate, then I don't have much sympathy for the lady:
According to a video meeting between Besse and the company when they confronted her with the discrepancies, she told her manager âoeyou canâ(TM)t fight the timeâ, admitting she had âoeplugged time to files that I didnâ(TM)t touch and that wasnâ(TM)t right or appropriate in any way or fashion ⦠and so for that Iâ(TM)m really sorryâ.
Re: (Score:2)
That only works if your tasks are billed at a fixed rate while costing a variable rate to complete. Most deskjobs are not like that. I could spend 5minutes writing a very valuable email solving a problem, or an entire month writing a long and complex mandatory report. It would be impossible for my employer to adequately calculate the remuneration for each activity.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, and that incentivises shoddy work in order to make the most money possible
It also provides an opportunity for the service manager to fuck over an employee by assigning them a bunch of shit jobs that can't be done profitably at flat rate. Flat rate is just another name for piece work, which is illegal in California when it comes to garments but not when it comes to cars, because fuck mechanics anyway right?
I don't understand the world anymore. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's clearly the Gen-X in me that just thinks that if my employer is purchasing my time, that time should be used to their benefit. This whole trend towards working as little as possible - and viewing it somehow as a positive - just perplexes me. Or the view that "if the work gets done" then that should be enough. If one of my reports told me that, I'd make sure to load them up with enough work with tight enough deadlines to guarantee they remain busy.
I am not claiming I work every second of the workday, but I'm generally good for at least 6.5 hours out of 8. The padding is just needed to reset. Like a lot of people here I do technical work, and the brain just needs a moment from time to time. I don't begrudge people going for coffee either - social interactions grease the communication wheels of a company, and provided the privilege isn't abused... no problem.
i know the company I worked for previously (for 20 years I might add) had the capability of monitoring all those things listed in this article. I also know that they only turned on monitoring when performance was a serious issue. I was in leadership for 12 years there and I never once requested it be turned on for anybody... but I understand it, and I don't disapprove.
I am reluctant to afford an IT worker any more latitude on productivity than I would a carpenter on a housing job. If when the job is over your hammer looks brand new, you're fired.
Re:I don't understand the world anymore. (Score:4, Funny)
. If when the job is over your hammer looks brand new, you're fired.
What I get from this is "Do not take care of your tools"
Re: (Score:3)
Its more of a gen YZ reaction to nepotism, email application leading to hundred if not thousands of applications, lower level positions being denied training, working for people who isn't willing to put in the legwork, being demanded a high GPA when the people hiring will have a lower GPA than you.
But its also a result that higher levels of education and certification isn't rare, especially combined with national email application forms, resulting in people getting hired to do a job below their skill level.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't deny all of these things exist, but I think that the self-fulfilling prophecy is real.
If you do land a job, and you only work barely enough to remain in the seat, why in heaven's name would the company share a limited training budget with you, when the guy in the seat next to you is a better contributor, and is demonstrably more interested in growing? Of course then that guy is a suckup, part of the clique, a suspected relative, etc... all the stuff the unmotivated, sub-average, or confrontational t
Re: (Score:2)
Are they paying you for your time, or are they paying you for your work product?
If you're manning a counter, yes, they're paying you for your time. You're standing there for eight hours, and if no customers show up, you're still standing there.
If you're hired to, say, produce code to a certain level and quality, and you're producing that code, then who cares if it took you one hour or ten?
Go read 'Bullshit Jobs' by David Graeber.
Re: (Score:2)
I do. That's the point. Time is money, directly and in opportunity cost. I wouldn't let a carpenter build a cabinet for 10 times normal on the basis that it's "better" - why would 8 allow that from a developer?
I'll play Devil's Advocate (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm the boss. Do I have not the right to fire a worker that do NOT do its work?
If you say NO, you *********.
If you say YES, then: Why are you denying me the tools to check a worker is actually working?
If the worker were at the office, I could go in there and check and reprimand (if needed).
If the worker is at home, why can't I go in there and check and reprimand (if needed)? Obviously, I CAN'T GO physically to each worker's home (with the "delay" in transportation that makes work less effective).
So, now what? Do you want to work from home? I'll check what you're doing and keep a record, JUST LIKE I DO IN THE OFFICE.
Cry me a river.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Reach said it installed employee-tracking software called TimeCampon Besse's work laptop after" if they owned the laptop then they can put what ever software on it they want. If you don't ask question's of what software is on there that could track you that is on you for being willfully an idiot.
Reach said it installed employee-tracking cameras over each employee's desk, if they owned the office they can put any cameras in it they want. If you want to eat and have a place to live then you can live with the ubiquitous surveillance, peasant.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
as long as you document it on the TPS forms
Re:I'll play Devil's Advocate (Score:5, Insightful)
If you can't figure out whether you're getting a fair amount of work from a worker based on their output, then you're not a manager. You're an impediment.
Re: (Score:2)
I would not install this software, I would rather find another job. If you can't tell whether I am working based on the code I commit and the tasks I complete, you're not fit to be my manager. No software required.
That's not even an unusual way of doing things, all the companies I've worked for have not had employee-monitoring software.
Re: (Score:3)
That's the rub with remote work (Score:2)
How does it count (Score:4, Funny)
Asking for a friend.
So I can charge for commuting time? (Score:2)
Not to mention "unplanned emergency" time? And mandatory office get-together time?
Cursor mover software (Score:2)
Re:Did she get her assigned work done? (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny, when I get my work done early, I take on more work.
Come time for consideration, I'm usually given more fun work / more interesting work / more important work, trusted to learn/introduce new things, and all that sort of stuff. At least, compared to people who try and do the bare minimum. No growth at all.
I've heard in the past: 'If a worker automated himself out of a job, I'd give him 20 more jobs to automate himself out of!' -- and I've never been layed off from a company. hbu?
To each their own, I guess. Maybe you can say that I'm "buying" my better lifestyle, with all the work that I perform for "free". Maybe you're getting "exactly" your job done, and that's enough, and your lifestyle is enough, and what you can do and what you know is enough. Ok.
Re:Did she get her assigned work done? (Score:5, Interesting)
Funny, when I get my work done early, I take on more work.
[...] To each their own, I guess. Maybe you can say that I'm "buying" my better lifestyle, with all the work that I perform for "free". Maybe you're getting "exactly" your job done, and that's enough, and your lifestyle is enough, and what you can do and what you know is enough. Ok.
Yes indeed. Just getting through the day is indeed what most people do. They do not love their jobs. They do not like to work. Nothing about it is interesting, nor could there really ever be a job that they would like to do.
Have you ever heard the phrase, "That's why they call it a job"?
You're part of some weird 6% or something. (Like me.) Not normal.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Remember the most important lesson in life: If you're good at something, never do it for free [youtube.com].
Yes, I'm good at what I do. Yes, it's also very interesting "work". But there are people who need it and they are willing to pay for it because they cannot do it themselves. So yes, I have them pay for it.
It's probably like being an artist. I'm fairly sure that almost every artist out there loves his work. I can only imagine how great that must be. They would certainly want to create art because they love it, and t
Re: (Score:3)
Hell I even like my work, it's pretty interesting data science stuff and can be pretty rewarding and exciting.
But it's still work. The directions, requirements are deadlines are often set by someone else and you have to live with it. Right now I'm working on a project that both me and my manager agree is kind of dumb, but for a variety of reasons it's better to get it done rather than fight it. So I'm doing it, but imagine the excitement and motivation.
Re: (Score:2)
So driving around collecting garbage cans should be an exciting and motivating career? Sitting in a fast food kitchen slapping together the same identical food over and over is exciting and fulfilling? Futzing around with coding medical procedures for accounting purposes sound nice and exciting?
There are *tons* of tedious, uninteresting jobs with zero opportunity for growth. I'd say the majority even. Sure, there are jobs that are opportunities to expand your experience and you can evolve it over time, bu
Re: (Score:2)
> Machines have not taken over most of the most tedious of jobs
Interesting claim. How do you calculate that? Some example jobs:
- Washing laundry
- Washing dishes
- plowing a field
- Transporting stuff
- Digging something
- Finding seagul islands and collecting fertilizer
- Collecting things from sea to make purple color
- Calculating
- Copying books (with a pen)
- Making pens
- Digging tunnels
Do I need to continue? The world looks pretty automated to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Whenever you find it obvious that someone is wrong, you should rethink what they are saying. Perhaps you are misinterpreting it, or they stated it poorly. Try to give it the best reading possible, and you might get some insight.
Of course, over the history of humans, almost all "jobs" have been automated. But how about today? Are the majority of jobs tedious? I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true. Somewhat ironically, the most painful, tedious jobs pay the least. Given the media
Then you're a sucker (Score:3, Interesting)
A worker can't just take 20 more jobs. At a certain point you run out of jobs. It's not about how much work there is and we're not always supposed to be creating more work to do. Whatever happened to working fewer hours thanks to technology?
You can ta
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
lol @ you dribbling out snark because someone enjoys his work and his relationship with his employer. It's probably impossible for you to imagine, but some people can actually be enjoyable to work for. Of course throwing around the word "sucker" is how you cope with the fact that someone's career is more rewarding than yours.
Re: (Score:2)
When I get better at my job, and as a result do more or better work, my employer pays me more. When I think that's not worth what I should be getting, I find a new job. (The last time that happened was 19 years ago.) Doing more or better work lets me directly improve my life for the same number of hours worked. And right now, I work fewer hours and get paid more than 15 years ago -- because I work more efficiently.
If you want to accept a 16th century standard of living, with dysentery and all, you could
Re: (Score:2)
"Whatever happened to working fewer hours thanks to technology?"
The entire question is whether she actually worked fewer hours.
Re: (Score:2)
A worker can't just take 20 more jobs. At a certain point you run out of jobs.
A worker can take on 20 more jobs, but they may be taken away from those who are less capable and/or hard working.
Re: (Score:2)
Granted in this scenario I'd do probably 1.1Y work just to make sure everyone knows who's pulling their weight, but if anyo
Re: (Score:2)
According to the summary, she wasn't getting work done. The tracking software was added after she was regularly late and over budget.
Re: (Score:2)
Why, though?
Seriously, why are you doing this? You've entered a contract. They pay you in return for your work. If you get your work done, but keep doing more work anyway, you're not getting more pay.
This isn't your company. You're not benefitting yourself, you're making a CEO richer, and pushing yourself closer to burnout.
Re: (Score:3)
If you get your work done, but keep doing more work anyway, you're not getting more pay.
Not OP, but the place I work has structures in place such that if I put in the extra effort, I'll be rewarded for it in the form of increased compensation (salary increases, bonuses, stock - not talking about a $20 gift card) and a higher likelihood that I'm the one who gets to take on prestigious/interesting projects in the future.
There seems to be a divide in this comment section between people who work at places that meaningfully incentivize exceeding the base expectations of the job, and those who do
Re:Did she get her assigned work done? (Score:4, Insightful)
There seems to be a divide in this comment section between people who work at places that meaningfully incentivize exceeding the base expectations of the job, and those who do not.
I've never worked anywhere that did that, so the divide is between people who are privileged and don't understand that, and people who aren't and do. When I've worked harder I've just gotten more work and no more money, so my employers clearly have never wanted me to work hard. I've worked for big corporations (like Cisco and IBM) and small startups alike, and none of them ever rewarded going above and beyond. They just expect it, and they expect it more once you've done it once.
Right now the real unemployment rate is multiples of the published one, this is usually true but it's been getting progressively worse for decades (with occasional blips that didn't change the overall trend) and now it's a bigger lie than it's ever been. So this whole "just find another job" narrative is bullshit, too. There are dozens to hundreds of applicants for any job worth having.
Re: (Score:2)
I've never worked anywhere that did that, so the divide is between people who are privileged and don't understand that, and people who aren't and do. When I've worked harder I've just gotten more work and no more money, so my employers clearly have never wanted me to work hard. I've worked for big corporations (like Cisco and IBM) and small startups alike, and none of them ever rewarded going above and beyond.
In my experience, you need to work smarter, not just harder. Putting in extra hours / extra effort is pointless if no one knows you're doing it or if it makes no difference in the business outcome of the project. On the flip side, if people see you working extra hard and delivering results where they matter (aka, "getting things done"), you will be rewarded for it. I learned this lesson the hard way in the first years of my career. Unfortunately, it seems some people never learn this lesson.
If you were unab
Re: (Score:2)
If you were unable to do this at startups, I'd suggest maybe you need to reflect on yourself and what you could have done differently.
Get luckier, and go to work for startups that weren't total fucking scams, mostly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why, though?
Because I have received raises and promotions for working hard in the past, and I want that to continue.
you're not getting more pay.
Actually, I get a lot more pay.
If you don't, your poor work attitude and mediocre "just-the-minimum" performance are likely the reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Consideration? Trusted? Lucky you.
Re: (Score:2)
IMO, it seems like a situation where an employee was not getting the work done (with respect to schedule and budget) assigned, they investigated and found that she was no
Re: (Score:2)
In the summary, it says "it installed employee-tracking software called TimeCampon Besse's work laptop after it found her assigned files were over budget and behind schedule" so is seems like she wasn't getting her work done?
That's one possible interpretation.
But at the same time, it's convenient that they don't have any log data on the other employees and on the managers to compare with.
Re: (Score:2)
Those other employees and the managers aren't over budget and behind schedule on their assigned work. They are getting their jobs done. Ultimately that's the criteria. The log data is only needed to investigate why she's failing to meet the criteria, comparing it to other employees who are meeting the criteria would only be needed to quantify how badly she was neglecting her job. The only relevant comparison would be her budget and schedule vs. other employees to determine if the failure were because she'd
Re: (Score:2)
That's one possible interpretation.
But at the same time, it's convenient that they don't have any log data on the other employees and on the managers to compare with.
This thinking is why companies make crappy policies that effect everyone due to a few people not being able to multitask and complete their job.
Answer: no...but do you prefer your boss' hunch? (Score:3)
Unions shouldn't exist just to protect shitty em
Re: (Score:2)
She didn't get her work done and according TFA, that's why they tracked her. I am pro-union, but...yeah...if someone has a remote job, she needs to actually do it according to the employer's standards. If they are telling the truth and they only monitor underperforming employees, I think that is a reasonable compromise. If someone is paying your salary, it's very reasonable to monitor them if you are candid and transparent about what you're monitoring. Unions shouldn't exist just to protect shitty employees. They should ensure employees are treated fairly, but also ensure that employers who pay extra for a union employee are getting good labor. That is common sense. With many trade unions, they benefit the employee and the employer, if I hire a union electrician, I can breath easy knowing that I will get a known level of competency. Any accounting union should do the same...ensure that a union certified accountant meets a certain standard...and work with its members to maintain a level of professionalism and competency...as well as fair treatment. As a software engineer, do I want to be monitored?...fuck no...if my employer started doing that, I'd go find one that doesn't. However, if I underperformed, I would welcome metrics to show I am trying and not fucking off like my boss may be accusing me of doing. In the hands of an ethical company, the data can be used to confirm the employee is actually putting in strong effort and the nature of the work is the source of the delays...that she is putting in good-faith effort and maybe her tasks really are challenging....vs she's goofing off on Instagram, Facebook, or whatever. It's very unwise to get draconian with employees who are not problematic, even if it's your legal right. However, if they are problematic, monitoring to gather accurate data of your performance is preferable to being fired based on your manager's hunch.
You can hate on unions all you want but I'd join a union even if unions only existed for the purpose of crowd-funding lawsuits that benefit workers in general against abusive employers because taking a case to the supreme court of any modern country is far beyond the financial means of a normal citizen. In fact that is probably the sinlge most important aspect of unions in my experience. Even in countries where the loser pays for a lawsuit, and if the employer loses the case, the worker is still expected to
That's what her ex employer is saying (Score:2)
Re:Answer: no...but do you prefer your boss' hunch (Score:4, Informative)
Commits is a very bad measure. Some people commit constantly, I knew a guy that used commits as a "save", and was commiting every few minutes. Thousands of commits and his coworkers were mad (hardware guy, they didn't really learn this stuff from experience or have best practices). I know several people who made tons of commits but over half of those commits were to fix bugs on the stuff committed too soon. It *does* make you look good to the boss though, one of the guys that did this feels like an arch nemesis because he added so many features and I spend half my time years later actually making them work... I do this a lot slower, as the most senior guy on the team, but I'm testing the code, making sure it works, trying the permutations, and I rarely have to go back and patch up the commits later because of mistakes.
On the other hand I know someone who had 2 commits before being laid off, and he was laid off for good reason, however I strongly disagreed with the boss who fired him that he wasn't doing work because of few commits. Because I saw him doing lots of work, just wasn't good at it, but he made a lot of changes and then committed in a big chunk. Which while looking at code history, I much prefer having a few big commits then a huge stream of tweaks because the history is much easier to understand.
I do know that in the time I was a manager and as a team lead, I sometimes had to tell people to slow down. If this was carpentry you don't give raises based upon how many nails they pounded in each hour, and you'd probably rate the employee less if the work had to constantly be redone, which sometimes feels the opposite of some software managers.
Re: (Score:2)
Erh... no. Sorry, but no. It also HIGHLY depends on what kind of work people do. You will see vastly different commits, and amount of change, between someone writing fresh code and someone debugging ancient one. Quite frankly, 2 lines changing in 2 days may all you get from someone chasing down a particularly nasty bug that's hard to recreate and hard to track down.
And I better not start about the differences in languages. If you judge me by the amount of lines written, my language of choice is assembler.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't want your time managed, you'll get your tasks managed. And you won't like that much either.
Re: (Score:2)
That's also not really hard to track in my business. Sometimes, you simply have to trust your workers, there isn't exactly a great way to measure some things.