Yeah, I hate the exploitative nature of overseas hiring, just colonialism with a fresh coat of paint. I also dislike their in-person requirement of two days per week. As has been noted elsewhere in this thread, there is a good, non-exploitative use case in providing overnight coverage for US-based orgs so that no one has to work night shifts. I’ve done both, and it’s hard to get and keep good people on a night shift, regardless of where they live.
I’m all for doing the minimum to stay employed, but in this case I was told the employee didn’t, so not only were they not meeting even a low bar, but they were exploiting someone else in turn to do it.
Having started on the night shift in the position I was hiring for, I felt it was good. Emphasis on the “keeping people” part of it. Hardly anyone (except this one guy) wants to stay on the night shift forever, and eventually no amount of shift differential will make up for it. Personally, I would much rather hire people from around the world since the work could be done remotely, so that no one has to work in the middle of the night.
Pretty easy to be flippant with “just pay more” without considering the realities of people’s preferences, how much I was able to offer before I was told no more, the quality of the people applying, the skills required, etc.
Seeing more and more of this domestically.
People are recognizing that their relationship with their employer is exploitative and are trying to return that energy.
I’ve worked with a few people recently that clearly were holding multiple jobs or were much more focussed on their side hustle.
Symptom of a bigger issue in my opinion.
Could it have been Jesus that said “Those who live by the free market shall die by the free market?”
I like how his expression of inspiration / passion is destructive (running through a wall). It’s very on brand.
Yeah, I hate the exploitative nature of overseas hiring, just colonialism with a fresh coat of paint. I also dislike their in-person requirement of two days per week. As has been noted elsewhere in this thread, there is a good, non-exploitative use case in providing overnight coverage for US-based orgs so that no one has to work night shifts. I’ve done both, and it’s hard to get and keep good people on a night shift, regardless of where they live.
I’m all for doing the minimum to stay employed, but in this case I was told the employee didn’t, so not only were they not meeting even a low bar, but they were exploiting someone else in turn to do it.
like everything else, it’s really not
you just have to actually pay for it
Having started on the night shift in the position I was hiring for, I felt it was good. Emphasis on the “keeping people” part of it. Hardly anyone (except this one guy) wants to stay on the night shift forever, and eventually no amount of shift differential will make up for it. Personally, I would much rather hire people from around the world since the work could be done remotely, so that no one has to work in the middle of the night.
Pretty easy to be flippant with “just pay more” without considering the realities of people’s preferences, how much I was able to offer before I was told no more, the quality of the people applying, the skills required, etc.
please tell me this is satire lol
deleted by creator
that person is so fucking out of touch with reality lol
deleted by creator