What does one do about said eager beavers? Colleagues who jump on Zoom calls at 8:52 for a meeting at 9:00? Or those always the most eager to call to see “how it’s going”? Or those who want progress reported every single fucking evening.
There are too many of said creatures around these days, especially during the pandemic and after furloughs.
Let them wait those 8 long minutes because that's the time you scheduled the meeting, tell them to send an email instead of calling you all the time or just don't pick up, and make clear that you only report on progress if there's something to report.
Be an energy vampire--suck up their enthusiasm until they are hollow shells of a human. It will keep you young. I'm 143 years old, looking for a young helper...
drives me nuts. but yes, best to ignore and not reinforce such behavior in anyway. i force myself to turn off email after work and do not look at it until 9am. in other words, don't play the game.
I used to work in an "always on" office - it would go late at night, everynight, and if we didn't answer the call right way, we got "giged" for it by the COO, 3 strikes and "game over" The Amazon of architecture if you will
"Eager Beavers" should be a welcome sign in an industry. That means the person is genuinely inspired in their work and is "eager" and motivated to grow and succeed.
Eager beavers in this case, as I interpreted it, are the people who show up too early not because they can't wait to get started but to make others look bad, that want to know exactly what everyone else is working on but keep their own cards to their chest to claim all the credit. They are motivated to grow and succeed but are only able to at the expense of others...
Yall are hilarious. I am an engineer and have met a few "downers" like that around the office: got stuck in the rat race and never found their passion in life. I know mine, and that's why I am here. I'm trying to keep it light, but I just had to respond to this one. =) xoxo @code amen brother.
That's weird. I thought the entire profession was eager beavers and I was just some surf bum who'd gotten lost. At least theres one other out there, let the revolution begin!
i think there's some conflating going on here with "being a good employee" and "overachieving to the point of annoyance by showing up way too early to meetings or sending emails at 9pm."
with the Covid induced recession and numerous layoffs in architecture, many are pushing for advantage to avoid being layed off. Many are working later and later, sending out Slack's, E-mail at 10pm. And nobody wants to be the one who "didn't get the e-mail" about a revision
Mar 19, 21 11:38 am ·
·
square.
sounds like you're in a toxic environment. it's been the complete opposite at our office- everyone is trying to understand that there has been added stress in life, and management has encouraged everyone to end days early when they need to, go on a walk etc, and not send electronic communications past business hours.
It's really disappointing that there are people that 1) actually think that being taken advantage of in your workplace is not only ok, but how it should be, 2) feel like they need to convince others of this so they continually spout this nonsense for anyone to read, and 3) read it and think it checks out.
Doing big things requires big effort, but it should be more of the institutional/ organizational/ collective effort of firms, not the "kill yourself for the project" effort that many architecture offices ask individual employees to substitute for the former.
That said, architecture still isn't a 9-5 job. There aren't many other undertakings in our current civilization more long-lasting or durable (nor impactful to our environment) than buildings, and I think the effort that goes into them should reflect that.
If your institutional / organizational / collective effort can’t happen in a 9-5 window ... you probably need a better institution with better organization that is better able to manage collective effort. You want to make a long-lasting durable impact on your environment? Pay your employees a decent wage and tell them to go home at 5 and spend time with their families (or whatever version of that applies to your particular situation).
in countries with stronger labor laws, buildings still get built when architects work 40 hours or less in a week. and often they're better.
all of this has less to do with architecture specifically, and more to do with the new myth of "work as passion" or "love your work" that has come to replace many of the other social beliefs and systems that were more prevalent during the 20th century. (there is also plenty of longer histories such as weber's "the protestant work ethic"). sure, architecture has its own way of selling the myth, but it stems from the same source.
this is uniquely american, and the sooner you realize feeling the need to work more than 40 hours a week is something you can have a different disposition towards, the sooner you'll be free- free to do what is personally meaningful in your own free time, not what is meaningful for you boss.
I'm really interested to hear about the top design firms in any country where the rank-and-file staff works 40 hours. Everything I've heard from friends and coworkers with direct experience is that it doesn't happen much - whether it is Benisch Arkitekten, OMA, NADAA, MVRDV, Kersale, Foster, Piano, FOG, Morphosis, etc... Doesn't matter if they're in Germany, France, UK, Netherlands, Italy, Sweden, or USA - it takes more time to create exceptional work.
Mar 22, 21 10:53 am ·
·
square.
this question also depends on how you define top- the definition you're using leans more towards celebrity/popularity. there's also another definition that might tend more towards quality, and in that case there are plenty of firms (at least here in nyc) that do top quality design work and have normal office hours. within our particular sector, we are one of the "top" design firms in nyc and have very healthy working hours.
in other words, i don't think it's a coincidence that the celebrity/starchitect firms have the worst working conditions.
Mar 22, 21 11:33 am ·
·
archanonymous
I define "top" as offices that produce projects which have the capacity to make their way into the architecture canon and redefine how we think about and teach architecture, building typologies, or construction technology.
then i think there are many other offices that could be added to your list, which is a small slice, and have something closer to the typical 40 hour week.
i just very much question the assumption that great architecture unequivocally requires 60 hour weeks.
Mar 22, 21 12:25 pm ·
·
archanonymous
Oh yes, my "list" was merely representative.
I do think there are regional firms and smaller firms doing work that rises to this level. But again, I want to know what firms are doing work like this and sticking to the 40 hour week?
I wouldn't call Trahan or Dattner or Lake Flato or Olson Kundig "starchitects" but they do some work that rises to this level. However I know they also don't stick to 40 hour weeks in these offices.
Mar 22, 21 12:29 pm ·
·
square.
i think also yes, a lot firms probably go between 40-45. typical of salaried work. to me the difference is when it's the norm to approach or exceed 50 hours.
Mar 22, 21 12:46 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
oh square, yes the eager beaver phenomenon probably originated from the US, but they take it to another level in Asia. We worked with an office in Korea, and it was routine to see emails from them at 2-3am THEIR time, while they were having a meeting! Apparently some of their employees had accomodations in the office building...
If you don’t have ownership stake in the company there’s no reason to be pulling more than 8 hours. Sure there may be a deadline here and there that requires a little push. However, egregious overtime for rank and file employees on the regular is a sign of piss poor organizational management. If that many people are consistently overworked it’s time to hire more people and or rethink how time is being expended for project work.
^ this. those like code need to realize in many ways they are means to an end for their partners, the very people who will get all of the credit for the work- like i said, one should do their work well, but anything past 40 hours (excluding the occasional deadline) is money and effort you are giving to your boss instead of yourself.
Mar 22, 21 9:02 am ·
·
geezertect
If the employees are dumb enough to work overtime for free, don't blame the firm for taking advantage. Why buy something if you can get it for free?
If it was simply a matter of intelligence, I'd agree with you geezer. The issue is that this is firm culture in many places. Moves the issue past simple intelligence and more into employment ethics.
problem with your assesment geezer is the bosses have much more leverage (they don't need you in order to purchase their basic needs, where as the opposite is much truer for the employee- without that job good luck paying for rent and buying food.) this leaves the employee much more susceptible to pressure and exploitation, which results with some of the behavior we've seen on this thread.
that being said, i do agree that in one sense employees should realize that they have more agency and can push back against the pressure. but it should be recognized it's an uphill battle, and not always easy.
I don't know square. The bosses need their employees to make the firm work. If a boss thinks that their employees work for them and not the other way around then you're going to have shitty firm culture. As for unpaid overtime - no way. I don't do it without a good reason and a managers lack of planning is NOT a good reason.
Speaking as an owner / manager / whatever, I can say that working overtime, for free, is terrible. Please don't. It likely means that there's a problem with management not being realistic about expectations. When you work extra hours (and worse, don't bill your time appropriately), it can set up expectations that this is what you're willing to work, and the work will not stop coming because now you've put yourself in that situation. And if you're working off-the-clock, that can really mess with billing. We used to have a PM who needed to micro manage everything, and on a larger job he put in something like an extra 3,000 hours over the course of the project. But he never told ownership about it so we didn't bill for it - that's a loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue for the company. You're not doing anybody any favours by working overtime, unless your firm is set up to take advantage of its staff. Just don't.
in a way i agree chad, but the boss, if needed, can do the work themselves (thinking of small arch offices). and i don't mean to downplay the contribution the workers make, just that in a traditional work setting, the employee is in much more need of the job than the boss is in need of the individual, specific worker. generally a boss can fire someone and have other employees to take care of things, whereas that one employee who was fired is stressing a lot more.
square, I agree with Chad that your assessment of the employer leverage over the employees needs some tweaking. Employers still need their employees, but I think the difference is that the employers usually have an easier time finding new employees than employees have finding a new employer. Add to that the Stockholm syndrome effect of the current workforce, and people's comments on threads like this that make it seem like someone who cares about architecture should be willing to sacrifice whatever in order to get a project published in Arch Record or win an AIA award and it's a downward spiral in favor of the employer. Not to mention usually the people running and owning the firms are friends with everyone else running and owning firms in town so word spreads about employees not willing to put in the extra time (whether it is asked for or not). This is all cultural (mostly thinking in terms of firm culture).
To me that's more of what leverage the employer has over their employees. In theory, collective bargaining of employees via a union would help address this imbalance. I'm not suggesting (yet) it's where the industry needs to go, but it's something I've been thinking more and more about lately.
Edit: I see now your reply and do also agree that in the right circumstances an employer could do the work themselves, but I'd guess that's a pretty small share of the cases overall.
bowling_ball, that's nice to hear from the perspective of an owner / manager / whatever. The industry needs more people like you speaking up. I found out somewhat accidentally the other day that a PM on a project has been adjusting the hours I submit on my timesheet so it looks like I've been working less hours than I've actually logged on his project. I don't know where those hours are going to, or what they are being logged as instead, but he's artificially trying to make the hours worked fit his estimate or work plan because he's failed at managing the project properly.
Mar 22, 21 1:29 pm ·
·
square.
i don't think it needs tweaking, it's just a difference of opinion/perspective.
and yes, collective bargaining in some fashion would absolutely help this situation. there have been some semi-successful attempts in the past (in new york architects bargained with engineers and others). the difficulty is the organizing, especially in an industry that really values the independent small business.
The Eager beavers are a symptom of work life unbalance at the firm. The big irony in this is the more hours you put in, beyond a reasonable work day, the less productive you are, the more mistakes are made and the more you get stuck on things that are not important at the expenses of other more critical items.
However, for the Zoom calls I think it is OK for the early arrivals to have a moment to socialize as this would happen in an office setting on the way to a meeting or just in the regular day to day, In the physically distant world we are living in a few minutes to socializes is probably harmless if not beneficial. I do think the late night and weekend emails and the expectation of a response at those times is a little nuts.
Another thing I’ve noticed about the “Eager Beaver” phenomenon, as called out by some here is that “shit flows from the top to the bottom”.
The work culture in some places is such that everyone enforces such behavior from top to bottom.
And this transcends to the service offered to the client, wherein every whim and demand is expected to be met with utmost enthusiasm and with zero pushback concerning the betterment of employees.
There are some people who are just excited and loving what they are doing, and are committed at the highest level. If you respect their talents, pay them well and treat them well, these people will tend to put in long hours because they love it. It’s not always about stroking the boss.
Mar 23, 21 11:07 am ·
·
square.
sure, but if these people are in management, for example, it exerts a downward pressure for everyone to perform at this level, unless explicitly stated. i think it's a ridiculous expectation that at a job, where you don't have ownership stake, you should be "committed to the highest level" (again, to me this is very different than showing up and working hard, doing good work).
if someone personally feels "committed," fine on them, but the majority of workers shouldn't be compelled to be dedicated to a cause; architecture is still a business, not a nonprofit with a mission.
I feel like this is pretty hard to deal away with in a starchitect office. There will always be someone willing to suffer for the art. I think where the efforts should be focused is where the passion = work excuse is used in a strip mall factory.
I think it's now a new normal from the pandemic and WFH that from here-on, we will need to be more more flexible and available. I get e-mails on Sundays, Saturdays, late at night, and if I don't respond, I get gigged for it the following day. "didn't you get my Slack message?, the client is fumming, they need those revisions right away" Our responsiveness is brought up in staff meetings and our reviews.
That's only a new normal if you accept it and dont find a better employer. Dont accept that, you sound like a really knowledgable and experienced staff member code. You deserve to be valued and utilized in an environment where you can unplug.
this just sounds horrible, i'm not sure why you put yourself through this. and the worst part is your project a sense that "this is how it is," when everyone reading this should absolutely understand that the complete opposite is true- there are so many better places to work out there.
trust me, i am one to critically examine and understand that the boss is generally more responsible for bad working conditions, but sometimes you just need to take some action and gtfo.
A lot of it is driven by the clients who are driven by the investors, the pandemic caused recession created pressure on projects, many got put on hold, and others had their schedules shortened to match reduced budgets - projects on weekend, the GC sends out RFIs and needs an immediate response. I look for better jobs on Linkedin, go to Zoom interviews, but there are just too many applicants.
You keep posting up stuff like this and trying to say it's normal. I think that you're only working for these shitty firms because for whatever reasons it's the only work you can find. Because of that you're trying to make your situation seem normal despite EVERYONE telling you it's not.
Seriously, shoot me a PM. The firm I'm at is looking to hire. If you're willing to relocate to CO then maybe we can get you in a better office as no person should have to endure what you're going through.
When the economy improves, then these types of developer paranoid pressure driven situations should ease up like they did in 2012 after the last recession, then again - Right now, everyone is under the gun
Mar 23, 21 1:33 pm ·
·
SneakyPete
I feel no gun. I get my work done, I live my life. I tell my boss when what is being asked is too much and we should push back on the client. They appreciate my candor.
Same here. We work with plenty of developers. Maybe we're just lucky and don't get the paranoid ones who put us under the gun. To that point though, if your office can only find work with these types of paranoid developers, maybe there needs to be some realignment of the type of work you go after. I'm also ok with firms like this who can't seem to make it work otherwise going under.
I'm like SP and EA. I simply tell the developers what they're asking for isn't realistic and if they want that schedule then the fee will be much higher.
Well, I guess thats what the powers-that-be at many workplaces do. Charge the client an arm and a leg for running at crazy schedules. But the employess dont see jack-shit out of it
I've never run into a firm that does that. Most developers balk at the increase in fee to meet their unreasonable schedule. Just to be clear - I increase the fee typically between 35% - 50% for each remaining phase in the contract when a developer wants to shorten the schedule.
Instead of collective bargaining would it not be better to get a salaried employee overtime law in the works? Something along the lines of overtime is permitted but cannot exceed x amount for more than a pay period. I keep hearing what code is saying about the job market being difficult but then everyone still employed is working 50-60 weeks (I shut my laptop and say fuck it at 9 hours no matter what but definitely not everyone) but essentially that means not only are people getting abused but workload that could be picked up by unemployed and creating more pay is not. Could help the economy has a whole and not just industry specific.
I see your point. I have to ask the question though if you think a legislative solution would be achievable in today's political climate as opposed to a union? Seeing news articles about amazon workers unionizing and seeing news articles about the lack of bipartisanship in DC ... I'm not really holding onto hope that the legislative solution would come through.
I've maybe done those types of hours a dozen times in the past 15 years.
Mar 23, 21 2:14 pm ·
·
archanonymous
Absolutely, this would be the correct solution to it, and easy legislation to pass.
Mar 23, 21 2:28 pm ·
·
archanonymous
I'd rather see a legislative solution, since I'm not really holding on to hope that all the best architects will decide to run their firms like a mediocre firm in a mid-tier market.
i'm pretty skeptical that any major labor reforms, even if eventually passed through legislation, can come without organizing from the bottom up, which would include union pressure.
Mar 23, 21 2:49 pm ·
·
archi_dude
EA totally agree but wouldn't you also be seeking legislation to unionize a profession? And this legislative option would essentially be stimulus without a price tag. Instead of heres money, we hope you invest in employees and not bonuses and buy backs its, you have to invest in employees, why dont you use all that cash on the sidelines right now. Do I believe that would happen? No, should it, yes.
Too many “eager beavers” at the office
There are too many of said creatures around these days, especially during the pandemic and after furloughs.
Suggestions to handle these pests? Help please!
Let them wait those 8 long minutes because that's the time you scheduled the meeting, tell them to send an email instead of calling you all the time or just don't pick up, and make clear that you only report on progress if there's something to report.
hey, beavers are noble and sacred animals.
Guess you never heard of zombeavers...here's a link to a documentary about them:
Too much 'How I met Your Mother' Non!
they're not busy enough and desperate to be useful. give them some of your work.
This
Be an energy vampire--suck up their enthusiasm until they are hollow shells of a human. It will keep you young. I'm 143 years old, looking for a young helper...
Are you my boss?
drives me nuts. but yes, best to ignore and not reinforce such behavior in anyway. i force myself to turn off email after work and do not look at it until 9am. in other words, don't play the game.
I used to work in an "always on" office - it would go late at night, everynight, and if we didn't answer the call right way, we got "giged" for it by the COO, 3 strikes and "game over" The Amazon of architecture if you will
Im sure you got paid as much as the amazon folks do ... not
what is "giged"?
"Giged", Army for upbraided, sounded, slammed
It's "gigged" and is an acronym.
Or rather, "gig" is an acronym
In a former life, I worked with the Airforce and Army, they have thousands of official and unofficial acronyms that change with each war
"Eager Beavers" should be a welcome sign in an industry. That means the person is genuinely inspired in their work and is "eager" and motivated to grow and succeed.
^eager beaver
as opposed to those who "retire while on active duty"
Eager beavers in this case, as I interpreted it, are the people who show up too early not because they can't wait to get started but to make others look bad, that want to know exactly what everyone else is working on but keep their own cards to their chest to claim all the credit. They are motivated to grow and succeed but are only able to at the expense of others...
seriously, it's the "eager beavers" usually those fresh out of school or those that are experienced but accomplished that drive the office.
Yall are hilarious. I am an engineer and have met a few "downers" like that around the office: got stuck in the rat race and never found their passion in life. I know mine, and that's why I am here. I'm trying to keep it light, but I just had to respond to this one. =) xoxo @code amen brother.
That's weird. I thought the entire profession was eager beavers and I was just some surf bum who'd gotten lost. At least theres one other out there, let the revolution begin!
i think there's some conflating going on here with "being a good employee" and "overachieving to the point of annoyance by showing up way too early to meetings or sending emails at 9pm."
do the first, not the second.
with the Covid induced recession and numerous layoffs in architecture, many are pushing for advantage to avoid being layed off. Many are working later and later, sending out Slack's, E-mail at 10pm. And nobody wants to be the one who "didn't get the e-mail" about a revision
sounds like you're in a toxic environment. it's been the complete opposite at our office- everyone is trying to understand that there has been added stress in life, and management has encouraged everyone to end days early when they need to, go on a walk etc, and not send electronic communications past business hours.
I think the "Amazonian" always on work culture is permeating many other industries
You have forgo work/life balance and be self motivated to do architecture, it comes with the game, it's not for 9 - 5ers
Nope
E_A, xenakis is the poster person for architectural stockholm syndrome
It's really disappointing that there are people that 1) actually think that being taken advantage of in your workplace is not only ok, but how it should be, 2) feel like they need to convince others of this so they continually spout this nonsense for anyone to read, and 3) read it and think it checks out.
"No. No man. Shit no man!"
mmmm. I see both sides of it.
Doing big things requires big effort, but it should be more of the institutional/ organizational/ collective effort of firms, not the "kill yourself for the project" effort that many architecture offices ask individual employees to substitute for the former.
That said, architecture still isn't a 9-5 job. There aren't many other undertakings in our current civilization more long-lasting or durable (nor impactful to our environment) than buildings, and I think the effort that goes into them should reflect that.
Most knowledge work is not 9-5. That said, it doesn't excuse us from believing time equals effort, or that effort equals quality. They do not.
If your institutional / organizational / collective effort can’t happen in a 9-5 window ... you probably need a better institution with better organization that is better able to manage collective effort. You want to make a long-lasting durable impact on your environment? Pay your employees a decent wage and tell them to go home at 5 and spend time with their families (or whatever version of that applies to your particular situation).
in countries with stronger labor laws, buildings still get built when architects work 40 hours or less in a week. and often they're better.
all of this has less to do with architecture specifically, and more to do with the new myth of "work as passion" or "love your work" that has come to replace many of the other social beliefs and systems that were more prevalent during the 20th century. (there is also plenty of longer histories such as weber's "the protestant work ethic"). sure, architecture has its own way of selling the myth, but it stems from the same source.
this is uniquely american, and the sooner you realize feeling the need to work more than 40 hours a week is something you can have a different disposition towards, the sooner you'll be free- free to do what is personally meaningful in your own free time, not what is meaningful for you boss.
I'm really interested to hear about the top design firms in any country where the rank-and-file staff works 40 hours. Everything I've heard from friends and coworkers with direct experience is that it doesn't happen much - whether it is Benisch Arkitekten, OMA, NADAA, MVRDV, Kersale, Foster, Piano, FOG, Morphosis, etc... Doesn't matter if they're in Germany, France, UK, Netherlands, Italy, Sweden, or USA - it takes more time to create exceptional work.
this question also depends on how you define top- the definition you're using leans more towards celebrity/popularity. there's also another definition that might tend more towards quality, and in that case there are plenty of firms (at least here in nyc) that do top quality design work and have normal office hours. within our particular sector, we are one of the "top" design firms in nyc and have very healthy working hours.
in other words, i don't think it's a coincidence that the celebrity/starchitect firms have the worst working conditions.
I define "top" as offices that produce projects which have the capacity to make their way into the architecture canon and redefine how we think about and teach architecture, building typologies, or construction technology.
then i think there are many other offices that could be added to your list, which is a small slice, and have something closer to the typical 40 hour week.
i just very much question the assumption that great architecture unequivocally requires 60 hour weeks.
Oh yes, my "list" was merely representative.
I do think there are regional firms and smaller firms doing work that rises to this level. But again, I want to know what firms are doing work like this and sticking to the 40 hour week?
I wouldn't call Trahan or Dattner or Lake Flato or Olson Kundig "starchitects" but they do some work that rises to this level. However I know they also don't stick to 40 hour weeks in these offices.
i think also yes, a lot firms probably go between 40-45. typical of salaried work. to me the difference is when it's the norm to approach or exceed 50 hours.
oh square, yes the eager beaver phenomenon probably originated from the US, but they take it to another level in Asia. We worked with an office in Korea, and it was routine to see emails from them at 2-3am THEIR time, while they were having a meeting! Apparently some of their employees had accomodations in the office building...
wow, that's crazy- thumbs down for the next level workaholicsm
i'd kill for some eager beavers in my office.
Exactly, and why did we get into architecture? was it just to get a job?, work until 55 and retire to Pago Pago?
Maybe? Who wouldn't want to do that? (I have no idea what Pago Pago is)
Nobody gets into anything because of the 9 to 5
city in American Samoa
Brush up on 1960s era UBC, IIRC.
my problem is I don’t like working
^ this. those like code need to realize in many ways they are means to an end for their partners, the very people who will get all of the credit for the work- like i said, one should do their work well, but anything past 40 hours (excluding the occasional deadline) is money and effort you are giving to your boss instead of yourself.
If the employees are dumb enough to work overtime for free, don't blame the firm for taking advantage. Why buy something if you can get it for free?
If it was simply a matter of intelligence, I'd agree with you geezer. The issue is that this is firm culture in many places. Moves the issue past simple intelligence and more into employment ethics.
problem with your assesment geezer is the bosses have much more leverage (they don't need you in order to purchase their basic needs, where as the opposite is much truer for the employee- without that job good luck paying for rent and buying food.) this leaves the employee much more susceptible to pressure and exploitation, which results with some of the behavior we've seen on this thread.
that being said, i do agree that in one sense employees should realize that they have more agency and can push back against the pressure. but it should be recognized it's an uphill battle, and not always easy.
I don't know square. The bosses need their employees to make the firm work. If a boss thinks that their employees work for them and not the other way around then you're going to have shitty firm culture. As for unpaid overtime - no way. I don't do it without a good reason and a managers lack of planning is NOT a good reason.
Speaking as an owner / manager / whatever, I can say that working overtime, for free, is terrible. Please don't. It likely means that there's a problem with management not being realistic about expectations. When you work extra hours (and worse, don't bill your time appropriately), it can set up expectations that this is what you're willing to work, and the work will not stop coming because now you've put yourself in that situation. And if you're working off-the-clock, that can really mess with billing. We used to have a PM who needed to micro manage everything, and on a larger job he put in something like an extra 3,000 hours over the course of the project. But he never told ownership about it so we didn't bill for it - that's a loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue for the company. You're not doing anybody any favours by working overtime, unless your firm is set up to take advantage of its staff. Just don't.
in a way i agree chad, but the boss, if needed, can do the work themselves (thinking of small arch offices). and i don't mean to downplay the contribution the workers make, just that in a traditional work setting, the employee is in much more need of the job than the boss is in need of the individual, specific worker. generally a boss can fire someone and have other employees to take care of things, whereas that one employee who was fired is stressing a lot more.
square, I agree with Chad that your assessment of the employer leverage over the employees needs some tweaking. Employers still need their employees, but I think the difference is that the employers usually have an easier time finding new employees than employees have finding a new employer. Add to that the Stockholm syndrome effect of the current workforce, and people's comments on threads like this that make it seem like someone who cares about architecture should be willing to sacrifice whatever in order to get a project published in Arch Record or win an AIA award and it's a downward spiral in favor of the employer. Not to mention usually the people running and owning the firms are friends with everyone else running and owning firms in town so word spreads about employees not willing to put in the extra time (whether it is asked for or not). This is all cultural (mostly thinking in terms of firm culture).
To me that's more of what leverage the employer has over their employees. In theory, collective bargaining of employees via a union would help address this imbalance. I'm not suggesting (yet) it's where the industry needs to go, but it's something I've been thinking more and more about lately.
Edit: I see now your reply and do also agree that in the right circumstances an employer could do the work themselves, but I'd guess that's a pretty small share of the cases overall.
bowling_ball, that's nice to hear from the perspective of an owner / manager / whatever. The industry needs more people like you speaking up. I found out somewhat accidentally the other day that a PM on a project has been adjusting the hours I submit on my timesheet so it looks like I've been working less hours than I've actually logged on his project. I don't know where those hours are going to, or what they are being logged as instead, but he's artificially trying to make the hours worked fit his estimate or work plan because he's failed at managing the project properly.
i don't think it needs tweaking, it's just a difference of opinion/perspective.
and yes, collective bargaining in some fashion would absolutely help this situation. there have been some semi-successful attempts in the past (in new york architects bargained with engineers and others). the difficulty is the organizing, especially in an industry that really values the independent small business.
Perhaps. Overall, I see we agree on more than we might disagree on. No need to get hung up on the minutiae.
I saw this on a walk along Fall Creek recently.
giving up half-way. typical newbie eager beaver...
you could do an internal survey and leak it to the press:
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56452494
please send the eager beavers over to my office.
The Eager beavers are a symptom of work life unbalance at the firm. The big irony in this is the more hours you put in, beyond a reasonable work day, the less productive you are, the more mistakes are made and the more you get stuck on things that are not important at the expenses of other more critical items.
However, for the Zoom calls I think it is OK for the early arrivals to have a moment to socialize as this would happen in an office setting on the way to a meeting or just in the regular day to day, In the physically distant world we are living in a few minutes to socializes is probably harmless if not beneficial. I do think the late night and weekend emails and the expectation of a response at those times is a little nuts.
Over and OUT
Peter N
The work culture in some places is such that everyone enforces such behavior from top to bottom.
And this transcends to the service offered to the client, wherein every whim and demand is expected to be met with utmost enthusiasm and with zero pushback concerning the betterment of employees.
There are some people who are just excited and loving what they are doing, and are committed at the highest level. If you respect their talents, pay them well and treat them well, these people will tend to put in long hours because they love it. It’s not always about stroking the boss.
sure, but if these people are in management, for example, it exerts a downward pressure for everyone to perform at this level, unless explicitly stated. i think it's a ridiculous expectation that at a job, where you don't have ownership stake, you should be "committed to the highest level" (again, to me this is very different than showing up and working hard, doing good work).
if someone personally feels "committed," fine on them, but the majority of workers shouldn't be compelled to be dedicated to a cause; architecture is still a business, not a nonprofit with a mission.
I feel like this is pretty hard to deal away with in a starchitect office. There will always be someone willing to suffer for the art. I think where the efforts should be focused is where the passion = work excuse is used in a strip mall factory.
Well, the eager beavers at my work THINK they are working for a Starchitect, all the while slaving away at a crap commercial firm.
I think it's now a new normal from the pandemic and WFH that from here-on, we will need to be more more flexible and available. I get e-mails on Sundays, Saturdays, late at night, and if I don't respond, I get gigged for it the following day. "didn't you get my Slack message?, the client is fumming, they need those revisions right away" Our responsiveness is brought up in staff meetings and our reviews.
Toxic environment. Time to find a better employer.
That's only a new normal if you accept it and dont find a better employer. Dont accept that, you sound like a really knowledgable and experienced staff member code. You deserve to be valued and utilized in an environment where you can unplug.
Time to find a better employer AGAIN.
this just sounds horrible, i'm not sure why you put yourself through this. and the worst part is your project a sense that "this is how it is," when everyone reading this should absolutely understand that the complete opposite is true- there are so many better places to work out there.
trust me, i am one to critically examine and understand that the boss is generally more responsible for bad working conditions, but sometimes you just need to take some action and gtfo.
GTFO sounds easier said than done, especially when you're more senior and more "specialized" at certain things.
agreed.. but this environment sounds downright abusive.
That is not, nor has it every been the 'norm'. Code - I think you keep working at shitty firms for some reason. I don't know why.
A lot of it is driven by the clients who are driven by the investors, the pandemic caused recession created pressure on projects, many got put on hold, and others had their schedules shortened to match reduced budgets - projects on weekend, the GC sends out RFIs and needs an immediate response. I look for better jobs on Linkedin, go to Zoom interviews, but there are just too many applicants.
You keep posting up stuff like this and trying to say it's normal. I think that you're only working for these shitty firms because for whatever reasons it's the only work you can find. Because of that you're trying to make your situation seem normal despite EVERYONE telling you it's not.
Seriously, shoot me a PM. The firm I'm at is looking to hire. If you're willing to relocate to CO then maybe we can get you in a better office as no person should have to endure what you're going through.
When the economy improves, then these types of developer paranoid pressure driven situations should ease up like they did in 2012 after the last recession, then again - Right now, everyone is under the gun
I feel no gun. I get my work done, I live my life. I tell my boss when what is being asked is too much and we should push back on the client. They appreciate my candor.
Same here. We work with plenty of developers. Maybe we're just lucky and don't get the paranoid ones who put us under the gun. To that point though, if your office can only find work with these types of paranoid developers, maybe there needs to be some realignment of the type of work you go after. I'm also ok with firms like this who can't seem to make it work otherwise going under.
I'm like SP and EA. I simply tell the developers what they're asking for isn't realistic and if they want that schedule then the fee will be much higher.
Well, I guess thats what the powers-that-be at many workplaces do. Charge the client an arm and a leg for running at crazy schedules. But the employess dont see jack-shit out of it
I've never run into a firm that does that. Most developers balk at the increase in fee to meet their unreasonable schedule. Just to be clear - I increase the fee typically between 35% - 50% for each remaining phase in the contract when a developer wants to shorten the schedule.
Instead of collective bargaining would it not be better to get a salaried employee overtime law in the works? Something along the lines of overtime is permitted but cannot exceed x amount for more than a pay period. I keep hearing what code is saying about the job market being difficult but then everyone still employed is working 50-60 weeks (I shut my laptop and say fuck it at 9 hours no matter what but definitely not everyone) but essentially that means not only are people getting abused but workload that could be picked up by unemployed and creating more pay is not. Could help the economy has a whole and not just industry specific.
I see your point. I have to ask the question though if you think a legislative solution would be achievable in today's political climate as opposed to a union? Seeing news articles about amazon workers unionizing and seeing news articles about the lack of bipartisanship in DC ... I'm not really holding onto hope that the legislative solution would come through.
I've maybe done those types of hours a dozen times in the past 15 years.
Absolutely, this would be the correct solution to it, and easy legislation to pass.
I'd rather see a legislative solution, since I'm not really holding on to hope that all the best architects will decide to run their firms like a mediocre firm in a mid-tier market.
i'm pretty skeptical that any major labor reforms, even if eventually passed through legislation, can come without organizing from the bottom up, which would include union pressure.
EA totally agree but wouldn't you also be seeking legislation to unionize a profession? And this legislative option would essentially be stimulus without a price tag. Instead of heres money, we hope you invest in employees and not bonuses and buy backs its, you have to invest in employees, why dont you use all that cash on the sidelines right now. Do I believe that would happen? No, should it, yes.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but we already have legislation allowing unions and collective bargaining called the National Labor Relations Act. No need to pass anything new to get it started, workers just need to organize and vote for it.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.