Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by JonFish85 4295 days ago
It's probably a gamble. I'd imagine that these positions are at a company that's doing reasonably well, and hasn't had to make cuts anywhere. From what I've read, Yahoo had lots of these positions pre-Marissa Mayers--the company was just coasting along, not really having to change anything, but when she came in with energy & force, these kinds of people were the first to go.

I'd say this is a terrible thing to aspire to: you'll dread work. It'll be a matter of how many hours a day you're going to play tetris, and you'll end up just trying to pass the time. Passing 40 hours a week is tough to do when you're not really free. And heaven forbid the company blocks your ESPN/Fark/Deadspin/whatever you're reading. The stories you hear about these boring jobs--do the people who have them love them? I've never heard of someone with minimal responsibility actually enjoying their job. Sure, everyone loves an easy week now and again, but after that, a boring job really drags.

Boring jobs will eat your brain. There is no fulfillment, no pride in your work, etc. And ultimately, you'll probably end up weeded out, unless you're "lucky" enough to stay hidden in the folds of the company long enough to retire.

And what happens if/when the company hits a rough patch and realizes they can remove you? Your marketability is at a minimum: you're making a lot of money, have no new skills and are on the same job market as people who have actually worked.

Best thing to do would be to find a way to make money at something you enjoy. You don't have to make a lot of money, but enough to coast with minimal expenses. Do you really want to spend your life doing nothing, accomplishing nothing and with nothing to show for your years? It doesn't have to be anything in particular, but spending 40 hours a week doing nothing for a career is a gigantic waste of time, resources and energy.

2 comments

Regarding Yahoo, post Marissa, these positions still absolutely exist and are mostly in middle management. Most of 'deadwood' elimination has been amongst engineers because guess what, the career bureaucrats are exactly the ones who end up deciding who are the people not 'adding value' to the company. The core of Yahoo is still rotten. Its just that a new layer of paint has been slapped on.
You're pretty spot on.

This is anecdotal, but I've worked both the vapid, high-paying job that comes about from credentials and experience, and the average-paying, engaging job doing work that I love.

I'm currently working the latter, and while I voluntarily took almost a 30% pay cut and sometimes miss the extra disposable income, I can say that I am happier and healthier for it.

One of the negatives you missed of working these fluff positions is that it's difficult to nail down what you did to contribute to your current employer. This makes it difficult when looking for other jobs, when interviewers start asking the "... and how did you do that?" detailed type of questions.