Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
I had an old mate who would always hire a female if they applied. They were so rare in that techie domain, that any was welcome. It was done to widen the social circle rather than any feminist agenda.
Companies like Facebook, Google, Amazon do trim the low performers all the time.
I worked for a bank that supposedly trimmed the lowest performing 10% of staff yearly but in technology at least I saw very few people let go for poor performance.
It was all done by redundancies - when you start to see e-mails bounced and people disappearing from instant messenger you know that another wave of people have been let go.
If you got a donut in your comp meeting without any spiel about it being a bad year for the bank that was as good as a P45.
Of course BT do it differently. They offer great voluntary redundancy terms to everyone. You can leave with the best staff review and performance bonus possible, and a nice big redundancy payout. Indeed almost anyone half decent does this. All get replaced with cheap Indian nationals from the outsourcers. Its the best way to drive the quality of staff and deliverables down.
I’m noticing some rather nasty anti-slacker sentiment on this thread.
For most of us, the slower we do things, the more we get paid. Is everyone inside and a disguised permie now? Where are the businessmen and entrepreneurs?
Businesses like to earn a good reputation so people will buy their stuff. You think more like a cowboy plumber or cockney street trader than a businessman.
For most of us, the slower we do things, the more we get paid. Is everyone inside and a disguised permie now? Where are the businessmen and entrepreneurs?
Time based billing and being is slow is more akin to being a permie.
Real entrepreneurs quote fixed price and then do things as fast as possible to make a bigger profit.
Facebook’s head of engineering, Maher Saba, sent a memo on Friday to managers..
“If a direct report is coasting or is a low performer, they are not who we need; they are failing this company,”
------
Why don't they do this all time instead of waiting for recessions?
I guess they want to keep some fat around to protect the productive workers from layoffs.
I worked at a client co that kept renewing work-shy contractors (they always looked busy though)
I don't normally care it is none of my business, until they give me the work the slacker has been sitting on for the last two weeks and expect me to do it in two days
That used to annoy me no end.
I’m noticing some rather nasty anti-slacker sentiment on this thread.
For most of us, the slower we do things, the more we get paid. Is everyone inside and a disguised permie now? Where are the businessmen and entrepreneurs?
The best people are good at being self-motivated. People view these companies as being the best places to work (developers anyway) and as such they tend to hire the go-getters who actually like their work.
Do you think everything inside Facebook or Google is cutting edge and intellectually stimulating?
Anyone can become a slacker if they are not motivated by their work.
The best people are good at being self-motivated. People view these companies as being the best places to work (developers anyway) and as such they tend to hire the go-getters who actually like their work.
FB, Google et al generally are pretty good at not hiring slackers in the first place. At least they used to be.
I contracted at a place where they got management consultants in to get rid of the "slackers" before I arrived. It didn't work.
I then arrived and had apparently a couple of slackers with me in the team. The project was delivered on time and met all the requirements.
The "slackers" were just people who refused to brown nose management so they asked difficult questions about data security etc, ensured things were done properly and shared knowledge with others.
Oh and any actual slackers, whether permie or contractor, was got rid of very quickly.
Facebook’s head of engineering, Maher Saba, sent a memo on Friday to managers..
“If a direct report is coasting or is a low performer, they are not who we need; they are failing this company,”
------
Why don't they do this all time instead of waiting for recessions?
I guess they want to keep some fat around to protect the productive workers from layoffs.
I worked at a client co that kept renewing work-shy contractors (they always looked busy though)
I don't normally care it is none of my business, until they give me the work the slacker has been sitting on for the last two weeks and expect me to do it in two days
That used to annoy me no end.
Companies like Facebook, Google, Amazon do trim the low performers all the time.
I worked for a bank that supposedly trimmed the lowest performing 10% of staff yearly but in technology at least I saw very few people let go for poor performance.
It was all done by redundancies - when you start to see e-mails bounced and people disappearing from instant messenger you know that another wave of people have been let go.
If you got a donut in your comp meeting without any spiel about it being a bad year for the bank that was as good as a P45.
Leave a comment: