Boom and Bust
I’m a senior software engineer. Since the mid-‘90’s, my job has included interviewing people. The late ‘90’s were heady times in my field, especially in the Bay Area.
The joke was that you could get a job if you could spell HTML. It was pretty much true. You needed more than that for the positions I was interviewing candidates for, though. Some of the time the interviewees didn’t have it.
And some of those times, by the time we got back to the candidate to say we weren’t interested, he or she had already accepted an offer elsewhere for a godawful amount of money.
I mentioned previously that when my job before last went south, I took a long lunch and got a new one.
The story’s true as written, but there were two omissions, one of which makes it less dramatic, one of which makes it moreso.
1) I’d already been looking for another job, and had already scheduled the interview. 2) I quit before the interview. My PHB’s reaction was to ask what was the salary I’d accepted elsewhere. It was basically condescending, asking “OK, kid, so what do we have to beat to keep you?” as if he held all the cards, and I, none of them. When I told him I didn’t have another offer for him to beat, the conversation derailed — I’d deviated from his script.
Those were the boom times, and I could get away with that.
While I was at my last job, the boom turned bust.
Not long thereafter, I hired a kid fresh out of college. He proved to be a walking stereotype: the kid fresh out of college who thinks he knows everything. Worse, he had a sense of entitlement that matched his arrogance.
I just didn’t get that for a while, but when it clicked, it was blindingly obvious. For the whole of his college career, he had known nothing but the boom. He expected to graduate and instantly be on top of the world.
Poor bastard.
I fired his ass. I hope he’s gotten over himself in the meantime.
And then the bust got much more dire: it directly affected me. I was laid off.
I had more experience and skills than 4 years ago when I quit with no worries. But I was having a hard time even getting interviews. The seller’s market had turned buyer’s market in a big way. Companies were demanding years of experience in the exact systems they were using… and getting it. I had one interview that couldn’t have gone better, and then didn’t get the job because they found someone with experience in the exact ad serving software they used.
And Perl’s fallen out of favor for web development (to judge by Bay Area job listings.) Java and MSFT systems predominate, and most of what’s left is PHP.
So for 9 long months, I was unemployed. Not long ago, my unemployment ran out. With only Pocahontas’ salary, the mortgage would cut through our savings pretty quickly. We were trying to avoid talking about what to do about that.
I’d had an interview that had gone well, and then a second interview that had gone well, and a former co-worker not only worked at the place, but shared an office with one of my interviewers, and could recommend me. We felt optimistic.
And, happy ending, I got the job.
Now there’s something big I’ve still omitted.
I haven’t worked a 40-hour week since 1997.
After taking time off due to a crippling repetitive stress injury from insane overtime in insane start-ups, I sought jobs with less than full-time hours, but with full benefits.
And I got them.
Because it was the boom, and I could get away with that.
At DNAI, I worked 25 hours a week. At my last job, 30.
I can’t get away with it anymore.
Before I go on, let me make clear that I am very grateful to have found this position. I am well aware that my life is incredibly cushy, not just by the standard of humans in general, or even the standard of First World citizens, but by the standard of American professionals working full-time jobs.
I don’t have insane hours — it really is 40 (though it’s understood there’ll be overtime required at points.) My workplace is less than a mile and a half from home; I can bike it in ten minutes if I hurry. I don’t have to wear funny high-maintenance costumes that need dry-cleaning. I’m not on call nights and weekends.
But.
The difference between 40 hours and 30 hours is huge. Suddenly, it feels like I have to struggle for the time to do everything. Things that never required thought before — spending enough quality time with Pocahontas, with the kitties, getting enough quality time alone (I’m one of them there introverts) — now take effort. It feels like I only have about four elective hours a day, and I’m in trouble if I don’t spend a couple of them doing the infrastructure maintenance that lets me go back to work the next day.
You can see why my blogging frequency is off. I don’t have much time for web surfing.
I know there are people who have even more of their time spoken for. Commuting hours a day, working insane hours, raising kids.
Don’t know how they do it.
Thanks for letting us know what's going on. I'm glad you got the new job and hope you adjust well to the 40-hour life.
Posted by Sumana on October 2 2004 08:26
"I know there are people who have even more of their time spoken for. Commuting hours a day, working insane hours, raising kids."
That's why their kids are asocial video-game addicted zombie freaks. Perfect for creating a new generation of stressed freaks able to handle their own future jobs.
It's been said by others better, G B Shaw for one, that rather than have half the people full time employed and half unemployed, split the jobs in half and let everyone work halftime. Avoid the rich/poor division AND, everyone gets part of their life back. Unemployed, all the time in the day, but less utilizable with out money, which is the flip of employed but no time to play. Or in your case, no time to get creative with your own thoughts, reading, writing.
There is no reason this general idea couldn't be implemented, EXCEPT bureaucratic/cultural inertia. Which is major. What about health plans? etc etc....
There is no capitalist incentive to have the workers have part of their life back. Unless it makes them more productive. Yes, but what if they start thinking about politics, or unions? Can't have that.
I could go on. But I'll let someone else go on...
Posted by asdfsdfd on October 2 2004 10:22
I don't sympathize with the presumed health benefits, or with having to work like most of us shlumps worked most of our lives, I sympathize with the 40 hours, which sucks, and with the lack of option for 30 or 20 hours, or other flexibility. That sort of life is what we should all have, in my preference, indeed.
I rarely had it, formally, at a job; I worked as a standard publishing employee, which is 40 mimimum, 60-70 expected, or secretarial, at least 40-50 expected, or at worse jobs, at low pay, even near mimumum employment pay, at times -- woohoo $5 plus incentivies, only occasionally gotten. So I feel the sympathy, and I don't. Basically, it sucks, and that's how it is for most Americans, and the Bush lies about "flextime" are evil, and I'm pretty bitter about all that. I'm glad for those who do better, which most of my friends should and do.
I'm angry at the system. But I'm in a bad mood just now, as you know if you've checked my blog.
I'm glad you're doing better.
Everyone should be in a better mood than I am now.
Posted by Gary Farber on October 3 2004 14:08
I'm not asking for any sympathy. I know I got away for a long time with an employment situation a hell of a lot better than most get. I know that my new situation is also a lot better than most.
Nonetheless, it's a situation that I'm having some struggle adjusting to, and thus I'm writing about it on my blog.
Posted by Zed on October 3 2004 19:10
I could write a long rant in response to this, but it wouldn't be worth raising my blood pressure. Although it's not the system I'd prefer, I long ago accepted the reality that no one is going to give me a roof over my head and food and electricity for free, and to obtain the means to pay for that I'm going to have to sacrifice some of my time.
But I'm still hoping to get back to a job that lets me commute by train. Train time is useful time; driving time is lost time.
Posted by Jimcat on October 4 2004 05:39
"Train time is useful time; driving time is lost time."
Ivan Illich called it "shadow work".
The work you do just to be ABLE to do your work, unpaid of course.
I guess high maintenance clothes maintenance would qualify.
"... accepted the reality that no one is going to give me a roof over my head and food and electricity for free.."
But you sets the price for roof/food/electricity? If you could provide with 20 hours instead of 40, wouldn't that be better? Maybe it's only 40 because some else is willing to do it at that rate. Or less
Labor solidarity, my friend, solidarity.
Who sets the price?
Someone stands at a football game to see better. People behind have to stand to see at least as good as before. Soon, everyone standing, but no one seeing better. But their all 'working' harder. Arbeit Macht Frei.
Posted by nghjghjdghj on October 5 2004 14:51
they're
Posted by sdfgsdg on October 5 2004 14:57
Well, Mr. I-Don't-Want-to-Identify-Myself.
Leaving aside the reality of what happened to Marxist goals when actual livng, breathing, thinking, scheming human beings got their hands on them, I will concede that they are nice ideals, especially compared to what we have now.
But I will be more impressed when I see some actual plans, and the true respect will start when I see results. "Solidarity" is a good word to throw around. Now, for your first exercise, please explain how you intend to get the high tech workers in China and India to refuse to work for lower wages and fewer benefits than their American counterparts. Next, tell me how you're going to get the American public to support a national health care plan with enough decisiveness that our elected representatives have no choice but to pass it.
Once you've solved those problems, then we can really start talking revolution.
Posted by Jimcat on October 8 2004 05:34