Hacker News Reader

> While I agree with your sentiment, I don't think 1.5x for 48 hours for being on call over a weekend is a sensible or reasonable ask

I don't think me being asked to work weekends is a very reasonable ask either so here we are. Pay me or find someone else. Pretty basic.

> Personally I'd be happy to ...

Personally I won't. That's my point..

> Don't risk being mis interpreted as being a money-grubbing mercenary by pretending you'd be happy to do it for a high enough price

That is exactly the situation though? I'm not working for you for feels. If you pay me enough I will work weekends on top of my normal 40, but it will cost you.

"Fuck you pay me." Comes to mind.

https://youtu.be/jVkLVRt6c1U

> then PIP you out for being a jerk

Mate, if you were to suddenly ask me to work weekends without pay you wouldn't need to pip me I'd already be interviewing.

> “Fuck you pay me." Comes to mind

In a weird piece of internet serendipity, Mike is an old old friend…

You might not think it's sensible, yet millions of people live the reality of 1.5x+ overtime rates for on call duties in other industries, unionized workplaces and first world countries with better labor laws.

> a money-grubbing mercenary

Yes, we should all be working for free for the sheer pleasure of changing the world, making VCs and company owners richer, and for the privilege of working under you.

Come on, expecting to be paid for work shouldn’t be a fireable offense or a signal for you to look for a new chump that will accept a worse deal.

Maybe I worded that badly.

My point is that asking for 72 hours compensation for being on call over a weekend is unreasonable, and I will consider you unreasonable for asking that.

Saying "No, I was never asked and never agreed to doing on call when I started, and I'm not going to agree to it now." is way way less unreasonable, in fact it's a perfectly reasonable response.

Negotiating "more than free but less that 72 hours" is also perfectly reasonable, I'm not looking for "chumps" to do it for free.

But if you tell me "2 weeks pay for a weekend of on call or GTFO!" I'm going to encourage you to keep your end of that ultimatum.Being _that_ unreasonable is the thing that's very very close to "a fireable offence" in my opinion.

Quite where that line is drawn between "zero" and "72 hours" is certainly arguable, but I'd suggest its somewhat closer to zero than 72. Like I said, personally I've done it for 16 hours or 24 hours, and been happy enough with both. YMMV. I guess it also depends on your experience with how often your on call alerts go off, and how much time is typically spent actually doing anything while on call. For me, the worst I've ever had is for me to get paged once or twice on maybe 30% of my on call weekends, and typically spend less than 10 or 20 mins on the vast majority of those pages, with only very rare times when actual serious time is required, like maybe once or twice a year tops.

It's not clear to me why you think "I refuse to do the thing you're asking me to do" is _less_ reasonable than saying "I will only do the thing you're asking me if you pay me $large_amount"

To me, the latter response is perfectly reasonable. There are plenty of tasks that I wouldn't want to do as part of my regular work duties, that I would be happy to do in exchange for the right bonus check.

If a manager is looking for someone to perform the task, and they decided to _fire_ an employee because they said "I'd do it for $X" instead of saying "No I won't do it", I'd say that manager was either on a delusional ego trip or looking for another chump to exploit.