Hacker News Reader

Comment by mfrommil | Hacker News Reader

There's such a strong negative connotation to "burning out" in the article. If an employee puts in a solid 2-3 years and delivers great results for a company, "burns out", and then moves on to a new role or company, is that really that bad?

The company (in this case, Amazon) got great results from its employee, the employee had a good experience (and can leverage it to get a promotion, internally or externally).

I guess it depends on what employees are looking for in their career - to be the best they can be, or live a laid back lifestyle.

edit agree with the comments... this is a too simplified black/white comment. completely agree that finding the right balance between work/non-work on an individual basis is important.

View on HN

"I guess it depends on what employees are looking for in their career - to be the best they can be, or live a laid back lifestyle."

You're not being the best when you burn out. You're killing yourself and your productivity with it. We have decades of research concluding that productivity falls when you're overworked.

"The company (in this case, Amazon) got great results from its employee, the employee had a good experience"

The employee does not have a good experience when they're working themselves to exhaustion.

"If an employee puts in a solid 2-3 years and delivers great results for a company, "burns out", and then moves on to a new role or company, is that really that bad?"

Yes, because companies shouldn't have to work their employees to the bone to extract value from them. A long time ago, we decided that it's cruel, and created labor laws. Where have you been?

I think what is missing from the discussion so far is german work ethic. I am in awe of it. During work hours, people work. That's it. But when they are off, they are off. This strikes me as balance.

There is a BBC documentary called "How to make a German". I highly recommend watching it. After I watched it, I changed my own personal working style to be more efficient. It shocked me how much a difference it made. Since I am posting on HN during work hours, I can't say I'm doing it perfectly :p

>Yes, because companies shouldn't have to work their employees to the bone to extract value from them. A long time ago, we decided that it's cruel, and created labor laws. Where have you been?

Who is 'we'? You're wearing clothes and using a computer and probably exclusively using products that were made in nation-states that have virtually no labor laws. Where were you when globalization happened?

Regardless of moralizing in Western countries, you have decided it is not cruel to work employees to the bone and discard them when they break. You decided that when you bought the shirt you're wearing and the computer you're using.

Whether or not the status quo is right is one question; but you are wrong about what it is.

They have lots of crazy labour laws in poor places. What makes you think they haven't?

My comment was about the west. It's tragic that such poor working conditions exist in developing nations. But that should not excuse western companies when they over work their employees, as the original commenter implied.

Why not? Are people in the west somehow worth more than people in "developing nations"? (Besides their dollar value, obviously.)

If you're willing to condemn a Honduran to sweatshops, but not an American, that says something about you in more than one way.

I'm not willing to condemn a Honduran or anyone to sweatshops.

You seem to want to bring sweatshops to America to make things fair.

How bout we try to just end sweatshops instead.

So what clothes do you wear?

thrift store, motherfucker.

> I guess it depends on what employees are looking for in their career - to be the best they can be, or live a laid back lifestyle.

He could no longer see anything, even though their bedroom was covered with the bright light of a sunny day in spring. As if he knew it was time to go, he held his wife's hand tight. Mustering some energy out of nowhere, gasping for air, he said, "I love you." Before she could answer anything, or even acknowledge his sentiment with a stronger grasp of their hands, he added, "but I really wish we'd been better employees".

I think it's more a question of what someone wants out of life. If your job is your life, than that makes more sense. If you value things outside of whatever you do for money, then working to burnout is only going to harm those other aspects of your life and ultimately you.

I don't think it's unreasonable to put some grey space between being the best you can be and being laid back. Something like working reasonable hours, being thoroughly successful in your career, and still engaging in outside activities. I think that burning out=being the best you can be is pretty shortsighted.

Also, for the kind of employee this is about, "your job is your life" is unlikely to be true, at least not in the meaning that you imply. "Your jobs are your life", in some cases is appropriate, not because they enjoy their job, but because there's so little else.

There's such a strong negative connotation to "burning out" because it is a strongly negative thing.

There's a big difference between "burning out" and "eh, I'm getting kind of tired of this, I wonder what else is out there..."

I don't disagree with any of these comments... running employees into the ground for an extended period of time can't be good. Happy, motivated employees are crucial to the success of any company.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com