this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
757 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

56039 readers
5240 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] starlord@lemm.ee 274 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Couldn't you just pay them enough so that they don't need a second job?

[–] kirk781@lemm.ee 150 points 8 months ago (21 children)

The article also quotes

to "cheat" the system

As if people working two jobs are stealing and not working in exchange for proper value of money.

[–] awesome357@lemmynsfw.com 54 points 8 months ago (2 children)

It's because the system is designed to keep us paid just enough to live and keep buying from companies, but not enough to have true independence. Working two jobs is cheating that system by giving you more money and freedom than they want you to have. Once you have financial security you can start to wonder about how fucked up this "system" truly is.

[–] CulturedLout@lemmy.ca 12 points 8 months ago

Except they're not even paying us enough to live anymore

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Do you really think anyone out there actually wants you to not have more? Doesn’t seem to me that anyone cares. I think the concern is that you will perform your job halfway, not that you will become too solvent. Having more money to spend is always good for the capitalists. Hurting productivity is the fear (whether right or wrong).

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It really should depend on the role. If part of your job is being available for inbound requests, or participating in group work of some kind, it seems reasonable to expect that during the business day you will be available and not randomly tied up with other commitments. It would be hard to have two such jobs.

If it’s a task completion kind of job then it shouldn’t matter exactly when the tasks get done as long as they get done.

But you should be able to have one “high availablility” job and one “task completion” job at the same time because your tasks can always be set aside if you are needed. Or two task completion jobs, for the same reason.

In all events, the point is being able to perform your job without undue obstacles. If you can do that, and you’re meeting the goals and criteria set for you, nothing else should matter.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] bezerker03@lemmy.bezzie.world 67 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Most of these people are over paid actually. Making without stock over 150k and then around the same in RSUs or more.

The issue is many folks were only doing like 3 or 4 hr a day and then double dipped to collect another paycheck because they had the time to. I don't necessarily fault them.

Friend of mine intentionally took a boring bank job making like 50k less than he was making (so around $125k a yr) so he could coast as a high performer there then planned and did find another gig in Pacific time (were east Coast) and then pulled two checks and still only worked like 42 hr a week.

This is the true reason there making work from home optional.

[–] iquanyin@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

so they should just sit and stare if they’ve finished their work? don’t be absurd, please. the whole system is way past its due date. our society needs to scrap it and start over. and i mean human society. the world, our species. the one we have now if fast leading us to extinction, along with most of the other creatures on earth. what he says isn’t the way, but it’s better than harassing people for doing more work when they finish their first job.

[–] AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 months ago

Are they overpaid, or is every other job underpaid? Seems weird to call them overpaid when the company is making a profit on them anyway.

[–] quicksand@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago (3 children)

This is why we can't have nice things.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 42 points 8 months ago

It's management's own damn fault for trying to use butt time in seats as a proxy for productivity.

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 40 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Huh? If the job can be done this fast and the contract says, you get this money for doing that, why should that be wrong, meaning why should anyone be unhappy?

Except companies are just in for the money and would rather pay you less ... Hmmm

[–] quicksand@lemm.ee 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

All I can say is I agree with you; however, lots of contracts have you agree that you only work for that company while you're employed by them

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I think mine has a clause too, that requires me to at least inform my employee

[–] quicksand@lemm.ee 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That's the point of the clause; to fire people who tell them they're working a second full-time job. When required to be in office everywhere it becomes quite obvious very quickly. They're upset they can't tell if you're two-timing or not if you work from home, so they want to make sure you come in and work for them

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Petty tactics from petty people. If someone is doing the job they are paid for, why bother? It's like the employers are entitled to the 40 hours or something, even if all the work is done.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

and the contract says, you get this money for doing that

Almost certainly the contract doesn't say this tho.

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Mine does. But I'm not working manual labor, so it definitely can and will differ I guess

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Is that a job you could get away with working 2 at the same time remotely?

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not really, maybe this one and a half time job or sth, I work 4-8 hours a day depending on what's happening (I work in it)

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago (3 children)

And if you're working on something for the second job, do you have to drop it if something comes up with the first one? Does the second job know you're going to be doing that?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago

No idea why you're getting down votes.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 32 points 8 months ago

sad to have to come this far down to see this.

normalizing needing multiple jobs means soon we will be much more overworked....

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 14 points 8 months ago

Why would they ever do that? Only reason they would even consider such thing if if they are forced or if it somehow directly benefits them short-term. Maybe not even short-term because not doing so helps keeping people suppressed and lessens any threats to them.

[–] AlecSadler@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I mean, yes-ish? My friend has 5 and makes way more than any one job would ever be willing to pay.

More power to him. Is he burning bridges? Probably. Is he banking a ton of money? Yeah. Is anyone getting hurt? Not really, he gets his asks done and that's that - I'm not about to feel bad for a megacorp grossing hundreds of millions to billions a year.

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That smells like BS. No one can work 5 full time jobs and not be committing fraud somehow. Paying someone overseas to do the work, plagiarizing it, submitting the same work to more than 1 of them etc.

[–] AlecSadler@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Believe what you will, I work multiple myself and could easily pick up more. It's easy in software engineering at large companies with disorganized practices. I even got "exceeds expectations" at one and a raise recently. I am doing all the work myself, no hiring out. They're all in very different industries and use different tech platforms, so there is no real copying of work.

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Ok, and you've never delayed a meeting or communications with 1 company because you were working on another?

[–] AlecSadler@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No, I wouldn't feel right. Worst case is I just attend both simultaneously.

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If you can do it and not impact anyone at any of those jobs you’re a wizard.

load more comments (1 replies)