[t-writescode]

The truth of the matter is that if you’re working on a web service, you should be responsible for it, at the very least during its initial days of launch, you should be ‘on call’. Same with any time there’s changed you’ve made that are going live.

The “throw it over the wall and let the SREa handle it” pattern is overflowing with anti-patterns.

Now, if you’re making non-internet products, feel free to do it any other way; but, if you’re managing a website or web service, you should be available for it.

[omosubi]

Yeah I'm not saying that people shouldn't be responsible for the things they build just that there are a lot of people who will give up their time for usually some small amount of money (given what they make hourly) rather than to just take that time for what they want to. Where I work we have little leeway to fix issues and clients do dumb shit all the time and we have to deal with it. why would you give up your personal time for some marginal amount of money?

[t-writescode]

I've always expected on-call time to be part of my job. It's part of how I can be okay with working 4 hours one day and 10 hours the next day.

I'm salary and my compensation includes my on-call hours. That's how I've always seen it. Now, if there's a balance and if the work becomes excessive, then a conversation needs to be had and probably standards need to be looked at because something is very wrong at the company. On-call shouldn't regularly be demanding, almost everybody that's capable of it should be doing it in a given role, and so on.

When that's not true, it needs to be investigated because it's unsustainable.