Why do you want to view the world like this? This kind of mindset puts you in a very weak position.
I look at it like this: I work for a company because it's a win-win. They need some work done, and I need money.
In fact, as a coder, the company is the one in the weak position. If I leave for another company, I can get paid the exact same amount instantly. They will have to get a new person, pay them the same, but first have to get them up to speed to get to the same productivity level as me. They lose, and I even might gain a raise. So they better make sure they don't piss me off.
If you have this kind of mindset, people can't fuck with you.
Take for example a manager that says "Hey, this customer expects it to go in production on Monday, so make sure you finish it this week, maybe do some weekend work". Now the problem is in your lap. What you do is you push that shit right back, so you tell your manager "Why did you promise this customer it will be finished on Monday? You're going to be in a lot of trouble when it isn't. Maybe next time check with the developers first about the time schedule, then you don't end up in situations like this again."
You have to educate your managers a bit.
I know that some people will respond "not every employee is in this position to make demands". Well, it's all about how valuable your skills are. Make sure you can do things that other people can't, and you put yourself in a position where you always have the option to go work for another company.
A company selling services to other companies, is not that different than a person selling services to companies.
Some of us remember successfully saying "no" well before we became coders.
Even for supposedly low skill minimum wage jobs, finding reliable employees that show up on time, don't steal, don't get high at work, stick around and get things done, and otherwise aren't a pain in the ass to work with - can be a time sink and cost. Even the most selfish manager may tolerate some pushback and some "no"s if it means they don't have to go through all the work to hire someone "better" (which might require hiring and firing a lot of unknowns to arrive at, even if there's plenty of applicants.)
The vengeful and dysfunctional might fire you anyways, even if it's more work for them, if only to flex their power. The downsizing might not want to replace people. Life circumstances might mean you can't be reliable and are already on the fence (or - to put it another way - you might already be saying "no" to too much to say "no" to more without getting fired.)
So, sure, there are people without power. But - perhaps it's not quite as bad as jiggawatts is making it out to be either.
1. If I didn't have my brain, I would be a plumber. These guys start earning when they are 18 or younger, and make a shitload of money because we have a shortage here. So even if you work with your hands, you can choose something that is in high demand.
2. Coders in US and EU are doing OK. Coders in Ukraine and the likes (I have multiple colleagues in that region) are absolutely killing it. They earn about 2x less than us, but 10x more than their neighbors. They don't borrow money to buy a home, they just buy it.
3. No idea about that one. But in US it's so hassle free to start your own business.
4. Yeah, then it's up to you what your options are, and how much you are willing to put up with.
> 2. Not everyone who codes is in the US, or a small number of other countries, where salaries for coders are high.
I don't have much stats, but this is true in countries that I know of: US, Switzerland, Germany, Poland, Ukraine, India
So I wouldn't expect other countries to be much different, it might depend on company you work for, if you stay in small < 10 people places, you won't get much salary as a coder.
Is it possible that the entire reason that you know about the coding salaries for these countries is precisely because the salaries for coding are high there?
Like, I live in the US, and I knew someone who transferred to Switzerland and got a pay raise for cost of living increase. So when you mentioned Switzerland I was thinking, "Well, yeah. Zurich is an expensive place to live, and there are some big engineering offices there." But I've also met software engineers who seemed pretty miserable when I've traveled to other countries.
Anyone can have a voice in the outcome of their life and society around them. When you give up on this belief, you relinquish power and control to others. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Stop focusing on the power of others, and obtain your own power and influence, and then govern with empathy for others.
Are you saying that people without power do not exist? Or are you saying that when someone does not have power, it is their fault? I am not sure you are saying either of these things, but I am finding it difficult to make any kind of charitable reading of this comment.
Positive thinking only gets you so far. When taken TOO FAR, positive thinking becomes a delusion. We with loving families can thoughtlessly & brutishly suggest to a friend that they “should definitely reconcile with their father”, because the idea of abusive parents is outside our experience.
Same applies to things like companies. I can easily tell people to “obtain power and fix problems” at work, but it is not necessarily possible. If we pretend that conflict does not exist, or can always be solved by the right actions, we’re just hurting people.
I am saying that assuming or accepting you have no power or less power than others is a sure way to create that reality. Are there limits. Sure. But there are countless examples of people that created more than society would have “allowed”.
Put another way. Ignore inequality as it effects you, assume you can overcome it. But acknowledge its existence with respect to others and do everything in your power to create equality.
> Ignore inequality as it effects you, assume you can overcome it. But acknowledge its existence with respect to others and do everything in your power to create equality.
This sounds hopelessly inconsistent to me. Why should I hold myself to a different standard than I hold other people to? If acknowledging inequality elsewhere is required to be kind to other people, that means that ignoring inequality when it affects me is being unkind to myself.
If you assume you can’t do something you definitely won’t. If you assume you can, you may not succeed; you may be blocked by some external cause, but not by something you could have controlled.
In the case of helping others, you may play a role in clearing an obstacle that, not withstanding their own effort and belief, would have blocked them.
In both cases you are assuming you have power. Power to help yourself and power to reduce inequality by empowering others.
It's a good rule of thumb. It's the difference between accepting and acknowledging. You can acknowledge the hardship of others but still fight against your own.
I don't tolerate inequality, but I do know it exists. It will continue to exist if we don't fight it.
If you get the reputation of being a difficulty employee, they don't hire you, doesn't matter how good you are.
They make a cost-benefit assessment and as long as your benefits outweigh the costs, they'll bear the costs, otherwise you're gone. Feudal system at its finest.
Well, I'm also making that same assessment for them. If they give me too much shit for the pay, I'm going to work for someone else. It's all about negotiation and win-win deals, no?
IMO this is why it is so critical to get to a position of having fuck you money as quickly as possible. This includes something having a side hustle that's ramen profitable so you won't starve to death when you get the boot for not working on weekends.
Make it much easier on yourself: Micro fuck you money. 6 months of living expenses saved up, ready to go in an emergency or to say fuck you. Even if you were to get assistance from the state where you live, you want to be able to say fuck you to the state as well.
Along with being able to minimize the lifestyle your probably accustomed to when getting a decent wage (this is another hurdle even if you have micro fuck you money), mondays will never feel dreadful again.
You're constructing a giant mountain to climb if you require a side hustle or actual fuck you money (1 mio.+). 99,999% of people will not achieve that, look at how much people save for retirement. Micro fuck you money is very achievable though.
> I know that some people will respond "not every employee is in this position to make demands". Well, it's all about how valuable your skills are. Make sure you can do things that other people can't, and you put yourself in a position where you always have the option to go work for another company.
I think GP was talking about workers in general, not just software developers. Software developers are in a super entitled position when it comes to this. Not every grocery store cashier, McDonald's worker, taxi driver, etc. can be expected to "do things other people can't".
The overwhelming majority of people have whatever job they can get. They don't get to be selective, because they have bills, and kids, and rent to pay.
The overwhelming majority of people don't live in the US. In Europe, you have access to free healthcare, unemployment and education. It's not a silver bullet, but it significantly reduced your vulnerability to eating shit from your current employer.
Why the US doesn't value safety nets and collective action is beyond me.
Continuing that line of reasoning, the overwhelming majority of people don't live in Europe either. They live in India, China, Africa, South America where free healthcare, unemployment, and education are not always available.
This reminds me of this article [0] where more than 50% of world population lives inside of the circle compared to outside; which is fascinating as it covers only 20% of land-area.
Unemployment benefits are bit tough sell when you don't have enough savings and you don't get it for quite a while when you leave on your own... And educations isn't always that simple matter either.
You know we live and work in some sort of dream land and 99% of people in other jobs don't have anywhere near this level of freedom and bargaining power.
You will sell yourself short by forgetting this. Coding isn't guaranteed to stay like this - as tooling gets better and better and more people get into it we will be seen less and less like wizards.
You can get the same level of freedom with manual labor. I don't know where you live, but here, contractors make a shitload of money. Especially plumbers are in high demand.
Plumbing is skilled labour and requires school/training - proper apprenticeships take four years, though there are fast-track options.
Any "manual labour"? Certainly not true. Unskilled manual labour is a race to the bottom in most places and usually done by immigrants who can afford to work for peanuts.
In my experience just as often the manager asks for an estimate, get one and plan accordingly. When the developer inevitably does not finish on time they have multiple excuses, but the manager is getting the heat. Which is exactly why the developers are part of the team that plan and set deadlines. And let me let you in on a little secret. There is still delays - we're working on that.
The feudal analogy still works. The difference is that the Black Death has swept the place, and you are now the only pawn left on the field, and suddenly you are in a negotiating position with your local lord. Which is actually something that happened during the Black Death.
I agree with your point but ultimately, why not have the engineer document how long the last cycle took to get into production. So when the manager asks, hey do this in 70% of the time, you have reference to live recent data that it’s impossible.
Or even simpler.
Manager asks to finish something and have it live in Y
days.
You will finish it in Y days because the last project needed an additonal 3 days and you communicated that immediately back then, so your manager already has provided a solution by the time you’re ready for the next development cycle or sprint. Hence Y days should be computed with feedback you already communicated from the last cycle.
>> You have to educate your managers a bit.
Ironically, this could come off as feudal since a manager is “senior” in terms of time and experience at the same company. In which you are currently a junior. How often will a manager be like “so glad you educated me on my own delivery and timelines, you were right!” Versus hey, that’s my job, you worry about yours and I got mine.
I think the word “synchronize” (delivery times for production, ie) applies better than educate.
Why worry about educating them if you’ve set a self-expectation to communicate immediately when something is not as expected. Or as initially agreed between the employee and their team or manager (s).
Majority of these empathy gaps b/w managers and engineers is actually the byproduct of failed communication protocols that both parties can maximize upon assuming consistent internet service (unfortunately still not the case or available with examples of significant gains. The moment you start caring about how another feels or thinks towards your execution, work, or biz strategy, gg.
You are now thinking about what others are thinking, and planning all these scenarios to ensure you act accordingly + optimally. This whole hr analogy shouldn’t even exist - it reminds me or read receipts on iMessage. Back in the old day, you didn’t have the information of when someone actually opened your mail indoors.
All I’m saying is to forget about the hierarchy + roles and just crisp clean communication up front.
Any gaps in understanding means that you needed to communicate much clearer, earlier. Versus, omg hr might be out to get me or something.
So when the manager asks, hey do this in 70% of the time, you have reference to live recent data that it’s impossible.
All the data in the world won’t sway a manager - and his manager, and his manager - if they need a scapegoat. This is something engineers only figure out when it’s too late.
Yeah that’s not a powerful move, that’s the equivalent of leaving the country. What happens if they’re all run along the exact same lines? You can start your own I guess, which is not feasible for most people.
That’s why we require the democratically elected leviathan to limit the power these people have over others.
I think you are taking your job and skillset security and demand for granted to some degree potentially. Wage slavery is real for a majority of people whos responsibilities and inflexibility of skills dont allow for the leverage you describe
I look at it like this: I work for a company because it's a win-win. They need some work done, and I need money.
In fact, as a coder, the company is the one in the weak position. If I leave for another company, I can get paid the exact same amount instantly. They will have to get a new person, pay them the same, but first have to get them up to speed to get to the same productivity level as me. They lose, and I even might gain a raise. So they better make sure they don't piss me off.
If you have this kind of mindset, people can't fuck with you.
Take for example a manager that says "Hey, this customer expects it to go in production on Monday, so make sure you finish it this week, maybe do some weekend work". Now the problem is in your lap. What you do is you push that shit right back, so you tell your manager "Why did you promise this customer it will be finished on Monday? You're going to be in a lot of trouble when it isn't. Maybe next time check with the developers first about the time schedule, then you don't end up in situations like this again."
You have to educate your managers a bit.
I know that some people will respond "not every employee is in this position to make demands". Well, it's all about how valuable your skills are. Make sure you can do things that other people can't, and you put yourself in a position where you always have the option to go work for another company.
A company selling services to other companies, is not that different than a person selling services to companies.
Feudal system my ass.