[toomuchtodo]

May I add, if your manager demands you're available anytime outside of business hours and you're not compensated for that time, you should immediately be looking for your next job.

Unemployment has never been lower in 40+ years (in the US). You're likely to get a pay bump moving. Always Be Interviewing. No one is going to look out for your comp and work/life balance except you.

[ticmasta]

Well, most jobs are salary so there's no notion of compensation per unit of time. I rarely expect overtime but sometimes I need help outside of regular work hours; I also don't make you get HR approval and book off time to go to the dentist or pick up your kid.

It seems like the same people who complain about a lack of employer care & "greedy corporations" are also the same people counseling "always be interviewing" and the only priority is #1. It must be exhausting.

[AnimalMuppet]

I'm going to split the difference between you and toomuchtodo. I accept that overtime comes sometimes in this business. I accept it as long as it's rare. There's a crisis for two weeks? OK, I'll be there - maybe not every possible second, but quite a bit more than normal.

There's a crisis for six months? That's not a crisis; that's a management failure. Management should have fixed it by then. That's on them, not on me.

They want overtime every week? FORGET. THAT. NOISE.

[conductr]

Why always the jump straight to interviewing? Raise the flag that the team needs resources, propose a solution, negotiate with management (it’s going to take a lot but we can deliver x & y, or z but not x, y, and z). There’s a bunch of things you can do besides jump ship, coincidentally these are all management skills and it’s called managing up.

[krageon]

The jump straight to interviewing comes with the ironclad faith that changing an organisation from the inside is now much harder than changing organisations. In the end, salary and work is something you do to support yourself. If you are going to take time and energy out of your life to improve the company where you work, that's time and energy you're not using to improve yourself (or at least, you're not using it as efficiently).

[conductr]

I don’t get this rebuttal. You don’t need to change the organization. You just need to set expectations with your boss. This is what allows you to go home on time. Instead, technical workers tend to let the deadlines be driven from the top and then they complain about working for slave drivers.

[noahl]

I have worked a job that was salaried, in the sense that I got paid a lump sum for the year and didn't track my hours, but also paid extra when I was on call. This is possible, and it works fine.

[EpicEng]

Yeah, but that only tends to work in favor of the company. Try telling them you're salary, so you'll only be working 25-35 hours / week. Even if you get your work done and don't have a 'butt needs to be in the seat' type job, they'll laugh at you.

[chii]

The usual is to get time off in lieu for working weekends.

It's sometimes unavoidable to work on weekends - e.g., a tight deadline. But I would ahead of time get the agreement in writing that the weekend work is going to be given back in time off in lieu after the deadline - otherwise, don't work weekends. there needs to be a feedback loop (via money or capacity) to management. Otherwise they'd just see amazing results, and keep wanting more. That's how you end up in a permanent crunch job.

[krageon]

> unavoidable to work on weekends

It was avoidable, just not by you. That's not your problem though - it's your bosses' problem. Letting them make that your problem is a choice for you, but I would posit it is a poor choice.

[eropple]

> It seems like the same people who complain about a lack of employer care & "greedy corporations" are also the same people counseling "always be interviewing" and the only priority is #1.

Did you consider that perhaps the latter is caused by the former? When executives and managers, in the main, are rewarded for "optimizing" at the expense of humans, those humans are eventually going to push back.

[lsiebert]

I mean, that's how many employers may want you to think, but I suggest you actually look at the laws, both federal and state, surrounding overtime and salaried positions. Just declaring a position is salaried doesn't mean that you don't get overtime.

[yardie]

> most jobs are salary so there's no notion of compensation per unit of time.

Most jobs are wage and it's perfectly normal to be salary and non-exempt. Unless you are a founder or management if an employer is trying to classify you as exempt to avoid paying overtime they are breaking the law.

[opencl]

How would anyone in the software dev industry not fall under the "computer professional" exemption?

[eropple]

Exempt status means that you may not be paid for overtime. It doesn't mean you can't be. I haven't tried to push that point in a negotiation but I'd be curious to see how it goes. It could backfire on you, for sure, but who knows the balance until one tries?

And while I haven't negotiated for it, I was paid overtime on a contract gig once. Pulled in ten thousand dollars a week. That was a wild summer.

[goalieca]

> Unemployment has never been lower in 40+ years (in the US).

Big difference here is quality of jobs. Lots and lots of underemployed and low quality work.