Calling an employer/employee relationship slavery after a Googler complains he wasn’t promoted fast enough is peak self-importance.
Calling an employer/employee relationship slavery after a Googler complains he wasn’t promoted fast enough is peak self-importance.
Especially when they use phrases like "back breaking work".
It mainly indicates a severe lack of perspective.
Mercy.
I was raised in a generation that you had to prove you could in fact, do the work.
I appreciate and enjoy their confidence, and don't much care for what you might call "being entitled", though I can see this will become a protected phrase in the near future.
You can sugarcoat it however you want, but to an employer, you are just a liability, not an asset, even when the "current" they call you as one. Because, the "next" they might not. The terms "employer", "they" are relative. As in the previous comment, "A company as a whole is a faceless, consciousness-less creature".
And that keeps companies, even the bad ones, from getting away with dehumanizing its workforce.
""" And when you don’t like one company, you have incredible mobility to find another. """ You are joining another one that has the same common goal.
""" And that keeps companies, even the bad ones, from getting away with dehumanizing its workforce. """ Please tell that to the Amazon's warehouse workers who had to piss in a bottle, because they don't want a slippage in their quota.
Within tech specifically: I do think it's true that software employers shift and change their rhetoric and/or practices to meet the (sometimes entitled) demands of developers.
But some of the issues silicon valley tech firms are relentlessly unwilling to move on are ones around unionization and collective bargaining.
If employees are truly creating the market, and it's the companies that have to work to attract and retain them, then why are employers so fearful of anything except individual bargaining?
For people who are all of: confident, socially mobile (few family/social ties to bind them) and physically in good health you are probably absolutely correct. But I would wager that setting those expectations across entire populations doesn't scale.