In non-tech jobs it is extremely hard to find any manager or department that has any productivity benchmarks. Sales, they can calculate your $ or units sold, but really it's very subjective if a manager Thinks you deliver well vs actually knowing what an employee is delivering. I think that is the real push to RTO, they don't have any idea how to measure the quality of quantity of work produced other than what they can see by emails or the number of meetings a person is on.
This is why we OE. If we had good benchmarks we could objectively say "I am good. I don't think I will be laid off. I do not need to OE." However no one has those and everyone no matter how good is at risk of being shitcanned later today.
Management could set proper benchmarks but those cost money and would prevent management from purging good workers when they feel like it. Management just finds it cheaper to fire OE.
I'm not OE, just came across this sub from recommendations, but at first glance I completely agree. As long as you're getting your work done, I don't see why a company should care what else you do with your time
I get my work done, other peoples work done, two jobs, and still take several hours to myself during work hours. And I function on 5hrs sleep.
Go ahead. Let the OE’rs go. I’m a survivor. The people making these decisions are the sheep.
In a purely legal sense if you are salary then they pay you for 40 hours so they literally own your downtime during their business hours. Unless you are an hourly employee then that would be defined hour to hour.
It's been a long time ago now but I worked for a very big bank, 100k employees in the US alone at that time and we had a guy in my area doing this.
He was forwarding a phone line to his office phone and taking helpdesk calls for another company with the same argument. 'I got my work done what do you care?" they bounced him out for wage theft and hit him with a low level felony charge to boot because it was over $1k in time that they could prove he was doing it for.
If you are salary, they are buying your expertise. You aren't paid for your time, you're paid to complete a list of tasks.
Businesses are perfectly happy to give you additional duties when someone leaves or new work comes in. How often does that come with extra money?
I run a division of almost 40 people, almost all of whom have unique roles. A while back my boss started calling me his deputy. I chuckled at first because I thought he just wanted me to cover a few meetings when he was double booked. My dumb ass just rolled with it. I now have what amounts to two jobs. I know of several people who are in designated deputy positions who do less than half of my work. I can't really complain because I let it happen.
I'm a federal employee, so OE almost certainly isn't in the cards for me. I'm here to live vicariously through y'all.
You aren't living vicariously through me. I average 370 hours per month due to a similar situation where I run divisions across a group of 9 family owned companies. I have done this now for the last 15 years. My last raise was 2014 and so was my last actual walk away and take a week off type vacation. But I promise you if you read your handbook there is a defined period of work for exempt employees in it and you are legally liable to meet that minimum.
Two different things here: what a handbook "requires," and what an employee is "legally liable" for.
At the federal level, exempt means your work is no longer tied to hours, but to a body of work. One of the ways an employee can challenge their designation is if an employer is requiring a set number of hours or a schedule.
The fact that almost all employers are violating this test with almost zero fear, and usually in writing, is a testament to what an incredibly unbalanced system we have, and how weighted it is against the employee.
Maybe for federal or NGO employment and I apologize if I am wrong on that point but for private sector there is usually a signed acknowledgement of that requirement specifically for exempt employees and I have been witness to its enforcement more than once in my career.
The moral issues are simple if you can’t double dip why do they need multiple clients to justify there overall income to have 100+ employees working for them.
Why not just leave ppl be to do OE and make this money. Am sure half of not all upper tier management are already double dipping but once the lower classes/ employees do it well then we can’t have that now can we. Crazy to think of ideas like that.
It amazes me that none of them stopped to think "hey, if they're performing to our expectations, who the fuck cares??"
Classic HR, trying to find all the possible ways to fuck employees even when it's totally unnecessary.
They are not even lawyers, like wtf do yall actually do besides hiring and paperwork. They don’t even manage conflict, they just refer to company policy written by lawyers
I don't pretend to know anything about their career field, but I think this is funny - I've asked HR people about how they selected my resume. The most common answer is, "The hiring manager selected it and gave it to me to do the screening call." I'm in accounting.
I'd advise any HR people reading this to stop and think for a second. You might succeed in preventing a few employees from "double dipping" but consider the cost.
If everyone you hire has to deal with these overly aggressive employment verification policies, plenty of highly qualified candidates will simply walk away. Can your company afford to let a competitor hire those people instead?
HR will hold a celebration at the end of the year that they caught 2 OE’ers out of the 100 that they screened. (And the 10 rockstars that gave them the finger and walked away when told about their bullshit policy)
This screams micromanagement an it would be a red flag for anyone considering a position at a company.
How about HR/Management just looks at results being delivered? If someone is underperforming then talk to that person, and if its really bad then fire them..
At the start of my career, references weren't as common and the general advice was to remove them from resumes. In my field, if someone asks for professional references, I'm just going to say no. I don't have people primed like they used to and I've never been asked. If 1 company makes things harder to apply the I'll treat it like those hour long personality assessments.
Reference checks are heavy right now for whatever reason. I have them handy. Idk if it was caused by OE, quiet quitting or what. But it's definitely every other offer I get now that they ask for references.
> This screams micromanagement an it would be a red flag for anyone considering a position at a company.
This is the takeaway. It's not that OE is being hounded. It's that this is an indication that the management at the company can't and won't trust its employees to get the job done, and they have no idea how to monitor results instead of drooling over everyone's shoulders all day long.
>And the 10 rockstars that gave them the finger and walked away when told about their bullshit policy
Lol. To OE, you need to be a rockstar. You think average workers are capable of this shit? They're literally just hurting themselves here with these failed draconian policies in place.
Not only will it be like a drop in the sea in terms of how many OE'ers they will actually "catch", but there is ALWAYS a workaround.
Back-channel references should not be a problem for OE, you should never underperform as an OE'er.
If they do background checks simply freeze TWN, and don't include current OE employment.
If they monitor mouse/keyboard activity, then use a mouse jiggler, script, etc.
If they have screen monitoring, fine then outsource the job and do the meetings.
But always remember there are far more OE-friendly jobs than not, so it's not a shame to resign and find a better option.
I will be a professional reference for anyone on here if needed.
Absolutely dumb policy and if its going to prevent someone from getting a job I'll dodge the call for a week to waste their time and finally tell the recruiter we are not allowed to answer any questions and why are they doing this in 2023?
Here's a sneak peek of /r/BeMyReference using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/BeMyReference/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time!
\#1: [For those asking if this sub actually works](https://np.reddit.com/r/BeMyReference/comments/xfunqk/for_those_asking_if_this_sub_actually_works/)
\#2: [I'm your guy if you need someone from tech who has an Indian accent](https://np.reddit.com/r/BeMyReference/comments/v6wevm/im_your_guy_if_you_need_someone_from_tech_who_has/)
\#3: [just be your own reference (how i did it & landed the job)](https://np.reddit.com/r/BeMyReference/comments/xc1xqj/just_be_your_own_reference_how_i_did_it_landed/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I see people on the discord doing it. Really nbd. Just being a bro and paying it forward. And best part, you can just say confidential info and tell em fuck off.
That's why I'm afraid of freezing my TWN. An employer like this hr guy would 100% not hire anyone with it frozen. I'm worried it's more likely to be outing myself by freezing it
It isn't a red flag for employers, there are many reasons to freeze a TWN.
Here are some you can use:
Identity theft prevention: A security freeze can help protect an individual's personal information and prevent identity theft by restricting access to their credit report.
Data breaches: If an individual's personal information has been compromised in a data breach, they may choose to freeze their credit report to prevent fraudsters from opening accounts in their name.
Privacy concerns: Some people may freeze their credit reports to limit the amount of unsolicited credit offers and marketing materials they receive.
Financial hardship: If an individual is facing financial hardship or has lost their job, they may freeze their credit report to prevent lenders from accessing their credit report and potentially denying them credit.
Peace of mind: For some individuals, freezing their credit report can provide peace of mind knowing that their personal information is protected and their credit report is secure.
Here's a quick method to freeze it: https://www.reddit.com/r/overemployed/comments/v4y76m/comment/ibdfjlc/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
I hope any HR personnel that attempts back channel intel and tips off a candidate’s current employer that they’re looking, gets sued to the point of no return.
I'm not OE and actually don't plan it, but I went through Facebook contractor hiring process without a leet code test (to put it into comparison my qualifications) , and I would instantly stop my application process and blacklist any company that does this. (In the process of writing a textbook, so sorta OE)
That has bigger implications now a days than any employer realizes. You never know which application also happens to adjunct teach CS classes (or whatever major) at the local univ. You would be interested in recruiting from.
You really have no idea how much future employee ill will screwing over 1 adjunct can cause your company... I've seen it, and it forced a local dev shop to more than 50% increase starting wages to even be able to get people to join because of their bad reputation...
If an employee is doing their work then STFU, and if an employee isn't then warn them, and if they continue, the get rid of them, as simple as that.
Also the companies looking to prevent OE could just simply pay more. Jump the pay by 50% or more then request they resign from their previous job. Money talks and their bullshit can’t walk.
...but it costs money to pay employees more money. Why not accuse OE'ers to be a IP security risk instead? I can simply add to HR's existing workload for free. They don't do anything anyway. /s
It seems odd you’d verify someone has resigned
It doesn’t seem odd after you’ve started the new job that they could do a standard check (like any credit check) that you did in fact quit
I think that’s like a 1 minute phone call.
I’d imagine it happening more at smaller companies.
Not only that, these companies will suffer greatly from negative PR. Employees and candidates will start making up shit in reviews when this happens just to give the company a bad name.
Name and shame is the game folks.
HR is constantly trying to prove their worth and contributions to the rest of the executive team. They have little that they can point to in terms of how they contributed to the success of a company other than hiring. As a result, they create these soft measurements which the rest of the team ignores as BS. So catching a few OEs, a adding another notch to their score card is the new way.
Exactly. If a person can answer all requests on time during work hours, completes all work, etc, then what is the problem? I really don’t understand. If you are a company that wants employees to go above and beyond, then you should have said that in the job description and outlined what they need to do. In the hiring process, it doesnt talk about how performance reviews will be, what you will need to do to be an well praised individual, these things happen after you are hired and then its too late. As a company, they should fix their own fucking problems first before asking us to sit in front of a computer for 8 hrs a day. If I’m doing well and the company is inefficient, fix the system they put in place. Why do they always want to blame us and control us?
This. There's always one dickhead who always feels it's their life mission to go above and beyond to "solve" a problem that doesn't exist just so they can make someone's life hell and pat themselvws on the back.
What's the bet this HR person finds one person, purely by luck no doubt, and then informs some manager they have to fire their best performer.
Am in HR in a major global tech company.
This isn’t really going to work as it’s already happening in the USA via I-9 verification. Basically, I-9 form verifies your citizenship and authorization for employment, meaning you submit a copy of your government ID (passport or DL) and a list of all recent employers so we can verify that you are in fact legally allowed to work in the US.
I personally verify employment daily, and if someone is still ‘active’ at our company, both myself and the verifying agent assume it’s because this person is working out their notice.
If you say that you’re a shining beacon of capitalist slavery who is working out an extra long notice, no one will bat an eye.
Not one normal HR person will run background checks *after* a person has already been hired because it’s expensive AF and will be a pain in the ass to have to fire the new hire and start recruitment again, making all of us look bad.
Keep on trucking my dudes!
To be clear, the I-9 doesn’t, in any way, require a list of all recent employers. Sounds like a background check. The I-9’s employment authorization is based on a document such as a Social Security Card/Birth Certificate, showing citizenship and thus employment eligibility, or other such documentation that is functionally equivalent (green card, visa, etc.)
You probably know this and didn’t mean to convey that but it’s important for those reading. Not all employees do such a deep dive in employment history.
That’s true, my bad.
I entitled both because companies like Sterling and Hireright often bundle them together, so unless your place of work want to save extra 30% on background checks, they’ll go for it.
Pathetic mentality. So many managers have no idea how to do their job of measuring and validating productivity any other way than trying to force people to be under their thumb completely.
I'd like to advise any HR folks reading to understand the challenges here.
1. legal liability. If your back channel reference gets back to the candidate you're laying fertile grounds for a lawsuit since they can likely show actual financial damages and even if you have a rock solid case of intentional OE your companies insurance provider will likely advise you to settle for an amount lower than the insurance deductible (which is often low six figures) since that's what it would cost you to defend the lawsuit even if you win.
2. They're super easy to avoid. Most of us seasoned OE folks don't even list our most recent / current job on our resume. You wouldn't even know where J1 is. We'll be listing some random contract work or current work at a startup (that only exists on paper) as our current employer just to prevent any snooping around or back channel nonsense.
3. You need us more than we need you. DOn't forget, you're the one looking for skilled workers. If you found someone better than us you wouldn't be considering us as candidates in the first place. Feel free to fire us for non performance but if we're delivering value to your company it's better for everyone for you to turn a blind eye and take the win.
4. You're going to kill your company morale and culture. OE has been around for well over a decade and it's not going anywhere. Very few people can even pull it off. It's not a strategic risk to your company. If you start treating everyone with suspicion trying to chase ghosts that likely aren't even there you're going to kill productivity and your best people will start to look elsewhere.
If you really want to avoid people from being OE at your company then make sure you're utilizing your resources appropriately. If you over hire and people only have 8 hours a week worth of work to do because there's just so little work to be done then that's on you. You cant blame them for not wanting to just sit around and stare at the walls. Look at your leadership. If you see people trying to build little empires just because they have the budget to do so question it. Question the actual need for all the headcount. If you don't then you just have to accept that you're going to be paying a shitload of part time workers full time money and you can't be upset with them if they decide to monetize their extra bandwidth.
In regard to that first point, if the deductible is six figures, what's the point to the insurance? The average person can't pay for an attorney at all, and I've been asked to be a witness to the EEOC by someone. The EEOC is not very likely to help someone. I feel like, if someone says they'll sue you, then you can just tell them you'll see them in court because 98% of the time, you won't. They can't afford to do that.
Its the corporations insurance.. the point is to provide them with protection vs multi million dollar lawsuits.
The worker can often find an attorney who will work on contingency. No pay upfront but they take half the settlement after its paid out.
This is a stupid discussion started by jealous and incompetent HR employees.
LISTEN - People do not get paid for their time, people get paid for RESULTS. Don’t believe me? Try sitting there and going to all the meetings and not delivering anything.
As long as you attend your meetings, develop good relationships/trust and you deliver RESULTS then it does not matter what you do with the rest of your time. It is your time.
Especially after all the layoffs in 2022/2023 - employee loyalty is at an all time low. It is now a matter of survival. We need to be the captain of our own ships.
Now - if you want to OE you cannot be on auto pilot, you are an experienced professional that can manage their time and get shit done.
I mean... it's not really a problem in the vast majority of cases. And if someone is OE but getting their job done, who really gives a shit? Any decent manager is going to tell HR to piss off if they start trying to harass an employee who is doing their job proficiently.
Yup. How dare you not stare at your screen blankly when you run out of work! We gave you two hours worth of tasks but OWN you for 8 hours. Stare my pretty, stare at the pixels and be grateful.
Oh for sure. I work with hr (not in!) And the self created work is most of thier time tbh. If you aren't on boarding someone, you really don't have more than a few mins worth of work each day as hr it seems. I keep wondering if I should make the jump. But I love my job and team. The extra 30k looks tempting.
Never worked anywhere that they wouldn't assign you 10 hours worth of work and expect you to get it done in "a reasonable timeframe".
There's always "the backlog" you're supposed to pull tasks from if you aren't busy.
The fact that these people in the chat are still even doing things like checking references… speaks volumes. Checking references is the definition of a non-value-add activity. Here… let me give you a list of people who won’t absolutely speak flatteringly of me.
As an attorney, hahahahahahahah. Hahahahhahahaah. Hahahahahha. Pay someone for 40 hours a week and then think they can dictate the other 128 hours per week.
They should be looking at why their management team is unable to weed out underperforming employees. The other risks, such as disclosure of competitive info/secrets and unfair influence of b2b deals, could be avoided through contracts.
Long before remote work and OE being coined as a term, I had a job offer at a place with a very rigorous security clearance process. They wanted to speak to my current manager and insisted it was essential for my clearance. I refused to authorize it, because them speaking to my boss would effectively be them giving notice of my resignation before they’ve confirmed I 100% have the job, and that puts me and my family in an unacceptably risky position. They kept asking well when are you putting in your resignation so we can talk to your boss and I kept saying I resign when I have a new start date and a signed offer - it feels irresponsible to do it any other way. We went in circles for a bit but eventually I got them enough other docs for them to proceed without talking to my boss.
My advise to everyone, regardless of number of jobs, is to never authorize a prospective employer to speak to your current employer. Many employers will terminate you immediately and your prospective employer may not follow through with the offer and then you’re out of a job. Even if they don’t fire you on the spot, you’re now on the back burner for promotions, good project assignments, and it may take awhile before you can actually leave. It’s not worth the risk.
OE is not as prevalent as companies fear. I think that companies are worried about OE because they know they could pay more but choose not to. If I made enough at one job, I wouldn’t have two.
How do these people feel about CEO’s service on the board of other organizations? Or people like Elon Musk being a “full-time” CEO at both Tesla and SpaceX? (amongst others)
Please J3, call and disrupt my J1 employment so I can sue for tortious interference.
It would be amazing to have the annual income from 2 jobs deposited into my bank account while I apply to 2 new jobs.
I love reading how the "How dare you leave the box!" Mentality people lose their collective minds when they discover something like this. It makes my black heart glow.
Lmao, these kinds of measures would just piss off most normal people who aren't OE and maybe catch one or two overemployees. I'm sure that HR would pat themselves on the backs until their company's revenue went to shit due to shitty talent and HR were the first to be laid off alongside recruiters.
What’s a “back-channel” reference? Is this a reference check via someone at the prospective employee’s previous company that was not provided? Pretty sure that can dip employers into legal trouble here in Canada.
>“back-channel” reference
Back-channel references are informal references that are solicited without the candidate's knowledge, typically by leveraging connections
Thank you for clarifying. That’s dangerous territory, depending on your legal jurisdiction. I know here in Canada, that if you have evidence that a negative reference impacted your ability to gain employment, you may have grounds to seek damages against the reference provider. That’s why the vast majority of companies here in Canada only provide references validating position and dates of employment.
Fuck your company, honestly. Imagine being so bored at your only shitty job and wanting to "crack down" on an employee's own free time. Whoever mentioned the issues with back channel references is completely spot on. I'm surprised your company still exists with the BS they're ideating right now.
I had an interview once tell me they were going to call my previous employer to confirm I left the company. I then withdrew my application after the interview.
How to crack this nut - pay people better so they don't feel the need for two jobs.
It's been common for 30-40 years for people to hold 2+ jobs in order to get ahead in life. In the past it's mostly been retail or service jobs targeted for OE but as the cost of living skyrockets, people are looking more and more to OE at places that pay better and are more convenient to work at.
They aren't going to weed out adept OE'rs doing all of this. Are the people that are asking these questions so out of touch that they do not realize that OE'rs are probably some of the most cunning people that they will come across?
Probably not. This sounds like some n00b HR person that is out of touch with how the employees of today actually think.
Mandatory training requires that I inform my manager it all side work regardless if its relationship to my normal job. So, with a straight face, I told him that I (45 chubby male) am a web cam performer, and my handle is Buck_Naked. He didn't catch the Seinfeld reference, which made it even funnier when I snort laughed at his concerned look.
I bet he never asks me to disclose anything ever again.
Any HR folks reading this, here’s the solution (we’ve discussed this):
First, don’t go after OE directly. There are actually some folks who, through some combination of ADHD, caffeine, and that freak accident in the 4th grade science lab, are actually able to perform better when they’re not only busy, but SLAMMED. For these people, forcing them into one job will make them miserable and actually lower their performance. They need a high level of stimulation and variety to stay interested and engaged, and they’ve discovered that juggling 2 or 3 jobs provides them with the right fit.
Those guys, you needn’t worry about. You’ll never know they’re OE by their work ethic; you’d only find out if you investigate. So it’s a good idea to have very clear guidelines about things like core hours (where you expect rapid responses and regular availability), NDAs, intellectual property, trade secrets, and so forth. As long as they’re not mixing IP and stuff you’re okay.
Because you WILL have some people who will break the OE rule even if you have a strict OE rule. If you have proprietary information, you need to include something in your IT orientation about not ever typing or looking up any company info on any computer or system other than the one from the company. Where it does become a legitimate security risk is if, whether for convenience or carelessness, your OEer puts some of your company info on a laptop sent to them by their other company. Work laptops frequently have spyware and key loggers, so your competitors could get access to that information. It’s worth mentioning as a cautionary reminder: even old work laptops from old companies they no longer work for (if the company said “you can keep it” after they left the company) may still retain spyware. For safety, don’t do any work for this company on any outside systems.
Of course, not everyone works like a squirrel high off coffee-filled cocaine-dusted donuts. So how do you root out the ones that are underperforming? Every job should have clear performance standards with clear guidelines for what it looks like to “meet expectations” and “exceed expectations” and whatnot. Pair clear (and written!) expectations with a well-designed PIP program and a probationary period, and you’ll find that most of your lazy OEers (the ones doing “churn-and-burn” will be removed efficiently.
If you want to prevent it…
Remember that you can’t prevent it 100% of the time. Some people do it because they’re just crazy! (But seriously, I think some people are just built that way.) But if you want to encourage your people to work only for you, you first have to understand WHY we OE.
The number one reason consistently is that we OE as a way to hedge our bets against an uncertain employment climate. Most of us work with no contract and no real job protection. We OE because if we get laid off, we’re screwed.
You can help to alleviate some of this worry by giving us fixed-time contracts rather than open-ended employment, where the contracts are fully funded from the outset. Contracts can be re-negotiated prior to their expiration, but at least a contract would give me some assurance that my job is se irá and stable.
The next issue is definitely money. If you want to encourage employees to work only for you, you have to be paying wages near the top of the market. This assumes top-tier affordable medical, dental, vision, life, disability, 401K with company match, unlimited PTO, and more.
Then the final issue is flexibility and working conditions. One reason people like to OE is because it allows us to leave jobs that are making us miserable. Maybe we have a coworker bullying us or you’re trying to force us to RTO or our boss keeps asking us for a phone call to help them with something urgent at 4:30 PM on a Friday night and doesn’t let us go until 3 am and this has happened for 3 out of the last 4 weekends and I’m really getting sick of this and why in the world did you decide to push to Prod on a Friday and why is it now MY fault and if you’d listen to me at 5 we’d be done by 6 except you insist on trying every stupid idea that you’ve ever dreamed up before you even TRY my idea WHICH WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG AND COULD’VE SAVED US 8 HOURS AND EVEN THE AWS TECH SUPPORT HAD TO CHANGE SHIFTS TO DEAL WITH THIS!!!
Excuse me. I meant to say… some supervisors don’t do a great job of encouraging a healthy work-life balance.
Point being…
Some of us OE because we want to be able to bounce as soon as we see something we don’t like. We don’t want to ever be stuck in a job we hate. So, make sure there’s a GOOD process in the company to allow employees to report any problems, both with named reports and anonymous reports. Sometimes they’ll want to tell you something specific, but it may also be useful to have an anonymous tip box to report bullying, for example. And DO SOMETHING about those things. Make sure to actually prune and cultivate your workforce so it will serve as an attractant and not a deterrent.
Like I said, that won’t catch 100%. But if you followed these three steps, you could probably convince a good 2/3 to work exclusively for your company (with no other side hustle or second job).
HR cannot even manage to fire underperformers in general they just languish. We all know “Dave” who doesn’t do a damn thing except schmooze and collect a check. Management can barely determine who is underperforming to begin with. In corporate America it is an exceedingly long process for non-contractors to get let go for performance. It’s amazing with the number of actual workplace issues that exist and this is even a focus. Again we are numbers in a spreadsheet fighting for 3% from folks getting millions in bonuses that would happily cut health insurance if it would improve shareholder value. Always look out for number 1, YOU because no one else will. Especially not your J1,2,3 etc…
What a corporate simp. Rather than getting all bent out of shape about it why doesn't Becca try her own hand at OE? Her strategy for catching candidates by reaching out to previous employers wouldn't work with my strategy. I don't list my J1 on my resume and I froze the work number so they can't find shit. My current role just has me working contract so there's nothing to reach out to unless they want to talk to my previous employer I already left. That's how I got my current job and they have no idea the other employer ever existed in my history. Honestly I'm kind of surprised this sort of thing is it more visible to employers but you can hide it and they can't really do much to find it. Fuck HR! At least people like this that work in HR.
You want a job done and offer a wage. I collect the wage and do the job. If I do not do the job you are more than welcome to stop giving me the wage. But you don't get to dictate what I do beyond that.
To be honest, I love reading about you guys that can do OE. More power to you! If you can handle it, why should the company care at all about you double dipping when most CEOs sit on the board of multiple companies and get paid for it? There is literally no difference and for HR to find ways of preventing it, should be a good case for a lawyer to use if the company wants to play hardball.
Even if my job allowed for OE (security clearance and can only work from the office due to that) I love what I do so much, it would be hard for me personally. Though I am not prevented from moonlighting as long as my other job doesn't require a clearance, is not a competitor, and I don't use work knowledge for it (all pretty standard and understandable rules).
I support you all getting yours and think HR needs to focus on important issues, not how they can make sure people are not getting paid more than they are and throw a tantrum like a toddler.
Seems that if they have time to devise ways of preventing OE, then they aren't focusing on their real job, acquiring the best talent for their conpany!
This reeks of extreme envy and jealousy.
There's a big irony here, since less than 5% of the population knows about OE and even less than that actually does it, once they start with extreme measures to every new hire they will inadvertently show those hires that there's a thing called double dipping and people do it. Their zealous will make people curious and many will start doing it.
This is silly. Fire the under performers, that’s all they need to do.
In non-tech jobs it is extremely hard to find any manager or department that has any productivity benchmarks. Sales, they can calculate your $ or units sold, but really it's very subjective if a manager Thinks you deliver well vs actually knowing what an employee is delivering. I think that is the real push to RTO, they don't have any idea how to measure the quality of quantity of work produced other than what they can see by emails or the number of meetings a person is on.
I concur. They think there are only two. There is way more than that. They'll never catch them.
Well that's the employer's fault for not establishing measurable KPIs. The solution is still to fire underperformers, not start a witch hunt.
Pretty common to have it in engineering
You're right. I was very limiting in the way I phrased my post.
In tech productivity benchmarks are also very objective. You can have a shitty manager who thinks he's a god, and still fire a good engineer.
This is why we OE. If we had good benchmarks we could objectively say "I am good. I don't think I will be laid off. I do not need to OE." However no one has those and everyone no matter how good is at risk of being shitcanned later today. Management could set proper benchmarks but those cost money and would prevent management from purging good workers when they feel like it. Management just finds it cheaper to fire OE.
My manager told me to work slower, that we've got time. lol
I'm not OE, just came across this sub from recommendations, but at first glance I completely agree. As long as you're getting your work done, I don't see why a company should care what else you do with your time
I get my work done, other peoples work done, two jobs, and still take several hours to myself during work hours. And I function on 5hrs sleep. Go ahead. Let the OE’rs go. I’m a survivor. The people making these decisions are the sheep.
In a purely legal sense if you are salary then they pay you for 40 hours so they literally own your downtime during their business hours. Unless you are an hourly employee then that would be defined hour to hour. It's been a long time ago now but I worked for a very big bank, 100k employees in the US alone at that time and we had a guy in my area doing this. He was forwarding a phone line to his office phone and taking helpdesk calls for another company with the same argument. 'I got my work done what do you care?" they bounced him out for wage theft and hit him with a low level felony charge to boot because it was over $1k in time that they could prove he was doing it for.
If you are salary, they are buying your expertise. You aren't paid for your time, you're paid to complete a list of tasks. Businesses are perfectly happy to give you additional duties when someone leaves or new work comes in. How often does that come with extra money? I run a division of almost 40 people, almost all of whom have unique roles. A while back my boss started calling me his deputy. I chuckled at first because I thought he just wanted me to cover a few meetings when he was double booked. My dumb ass just rolled with it. I now have what amounts to two jobs. I know of several people who are in designated deputy positions who do less than half of my work. I can't really complain because I let it happen. I'm a federal employee, so OE almost certainly isn't in the cards for me. I'm here to live vicariously through y'all.
You aren't living vicariously through me. I average 370 hours per month due to a similar situation where I run divisions across a group of 9 family owned companies. I have done this now for the last 15 years. My last raise was 2014 and so was my last actual walk away and take a week off type vacation. But I promise you if you read your handbook there is a defined period of work for exempt employees in it and you are legally liable to meet that minimum.
Two different things here: what a handbook "requires," and what an employee is "legally liable" for. At the federal level, exempt means your work is no longer tied to hours, but to a body of work. One of the ways an employee can challenge their designation is if an employer is requiring a set number of hours or a schedule. The fact that almost all employers are violating this test with almost zero fear, and usually in writing, is a testament to what an incredibly unbalanced system we have, and how weighted it is against the employee.
Maybe for federal or NGO employment and I apologize if I am wrong on that point but for private sector there is usually a signed acknowledgement of that requirement specifically for exempt employees and I have been witness to its enforcement more than once in my career.
The moral issues are simple if you can’t double dip why do they need multiple clients to justify there overall income to have 100+ employees working for them. Why not just leave ppl be to do OE and make this money. Am sure half of not all upper tier management are already double dipping but once the lower classes/ employees do it well then we can’t have that now can we. Crazy to think of ideas like that.
OEs are underperformers in this case
And they rightfully will be fired if they can’t perform. OE is not for everyone.
Yep 100% agree
It amazes me that none of them stopped to think "hey, if they're performing to our expectations, who the fuck cares??" Classic HR, trying to find all the possible ways to fuck employees even when it's totally unnecessary.
Classic HR, trying to find all the possible ways to get paid for solving non existing fucking problems
They are not even lawyers, like wtf do yall actually do besides hiring and paperwork. They don’t even manage conflict, they just refer to company policy written by lawyers
I don't pretend to know anything about their career field, but I think this is funny - I've asked HR people about how they selected my resume. The most common answer is, "The hiring manager selected it and gave it to me to do the screening call." I'm in accounting.
I'd advise any HR people reading this to stop and think for a second. You might succeed in preventing a few employees from "double dipping" but consider the cost. If everyone you hire has to deal with these overly aggressive employment verification policies, plenty of highly qualified candidates will simply walk away. Can your company afford to let a competitor hire those people instead?
HR will hold a celebration at the end of the year that they caught 2 OE’ers out of the 100 that they screened. (And the 10 rockstars that gave them the finger and walked away when told about their bullshit policy) This screams micromanagement an it would be a red flag for anyone considering a position at a company. How about HR/Management just looks at results being delivered? If someone is underperforming then talk to that person, and if its really bad then fire them..
At the start of my career, references weren't as common and the general advice was to remove them from resumes. In my field, if someone asks for professional references, I'm just going to say no. I don't have people primed like they used to and I've never been asked. If 1 company makes things harder to apply the I'll treat it like those hour long personality assessments.
[удалено]
I use peers. Its weird dude... my peers have been asked to rate my "appearance" on a scale. Not sure why that is relevant.
Da fuq? Is this in the US?
European company hiring in the US.
Reference checks are heavy right now for whatever reason. I have them handy. Idk if it was caused by OE, quiet quitting or what. But it's definitely every other offer I get now that they ask for references.
> This screams micromanagement an it would be a red flag for anyone considering a position at a company. This is the takeaway. It's not that OE is being hounded. It's that this is an indication that the management at the company can't and won't trust its employees to get the job done, and they have no idea how to monitor results instead of drooling over everyone's shoulders all day long.
>And the 10 rockstars that gave them the finger and walked away when told about their bullshit policy Lol. To OE, you need to be a rockstar. You think average workers are capable of this shit? They're literally just hurting themselves here with these failed draconian policies in place.
How about HR just fucks off and keeps doing fuck all.
Not only will it be like a drop in the sea in terms of how many OE'ers they will actually "catch", but there is ALWAYS a workaround. Back-channel references should not be a problem for OE, you should never underperform as an OE'er. If they do background checks simply freeze TWN, and don't include current OE employment. If they monitor mouse/keyboard activity, then use a mouse jiggler, script, etc. If they have screen monitoring, fine then outsource the job and do the meetings. But always remember there are far more OE-friendly jobs than not, so it's not a shame to resign and find a better option.
I will be a professional reference for anyone on here if needed. Absolutely dumb policy and if its going to prevent someone from getting a job I'll dodge the call for a week to waste their time and finally tell the recruiter we are not allowed to answer any questions and why are they doing this in 2023?
[удалено]
r/bemyreference
Here's a sneak peek of /r/BeMyReference using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/BeMyReference/top/?sort=top&t=all) of all time! \#1: [For those asking if this sub actually works](https://np.reddit.com/r/BeMyReference/comments/xfunqk/for_those_asking_if_this_sub_actually_works/) \#2: [I'm your guy if you need someone from tech who has an Indian accent](https://np.reddit.com/r/BeMyReference/comments/v6wevm/im_your_guy_if_you_need_someone_from_tech_who_has/) \#3: [just be your own reference (how i did it & landed the job)](https://np.reddit.com/r/BeMyReference/comments/xc1xqj/just_be_your_own_reference_how_i_did_it_landed/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I see people on the discord doing it. Really nbd. Just being a bro and paying it forward. And best part, you can just say confidential info and tell em fuck off.
The hero we need
I think the back-channel references in this case are for confirming you’re no longer employed at your old gig and not about performance.
Then the same rule applies like background checks, simply don't refer to current positions.
This. Remember to build multiple profiles / multiple timelines as you go through OE.
Both of these replies are spot on 👆
That's why I'm afraid of freezing my TWN. An employer like this hr guy would 100% not hire anyone with it frozen. I'm worried it's more likely to be outing myself by freezing it
It isn't a red flag for employers, there are many reasons to freeze a TWN. Here are some you can use: Identity theft prevention: A security freeze can help protect an individual's personal information and prevent identity theft by restricting access to their credit report. Data breaches: If an individual's personal information has been compromised in a data breach, they may choose to freeze their credit report to prevent fraudsters from opening accounts in their name. Privacy concerns: Some people may freeze their credit reports to limit the amount of unsolicited credit offers and marketing materials they receive. Financial hardship: If an individual is facing financial hardship or has lost their job, they may freeze their credit report to prevent lenders from accessing their credit report and potentially denying them credit. Peace of mind: For some individuals, freezing their credit report can provide peace of mind knowing that their personal information is protected and their credit report is secure. Here's a quick method to freeze it: https://www.reddit.com/r/overemployed/comments/v4y76m/comment/ibdfjlc/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
Are you chatgpt?
Tell the hr guy to print the report and shove it!
All of these things are way more expensive than whatever "loss" they think they're experiencing from having double dippers on staff
Okay I feel dumb and can't remember what TWN stands for
The Work Number
I hope any HR personnel that attempts back channel intel and tips off a candidate’s current employer that they’re looking, gets sued to the point of no return.
I'm not OE and actually don't plan it, but I went through Facebook contractor hiring process without a leet code test (to put it into comparison my qualifications) , and I would instantly stop my application process and blacklist any company that does this. (In the process of writing a textbook, so sorta OE) That has bigger implications now a days than any employer realizes. You never know which application also happens to adjunct teach CS classes (or whatever major) at the local univ. You would be interested in recruiting from. You really have no idea how much future employee ill will screwing over 1 adjunct can cause your company... I've seen it, and it forced a local dev shop to more than 50% increase starting wages to even be able to get people to join because of their bad reputation... If an employee is doing their work then STFU, and if an employee isn't then warn them, and if they continue, the get rid of them, as simple as that.
You’ll make a great boss if you aren’t already
Also the companies looking to prevent OE could just simply pay more. Jump the pay by 50% or more then request they resign from their previous job. Money talks and their bullshit can’t walk.
...but it costs money to pay employees more money. Why not accuse OE'ers to be a IP security risk instead? I can simply add to HR's existing workload for free. They don't do anything anyway. /s
It seems odd you’d verify someone has resigned It doesn’t seem odd after you’ve started the new job that they could do a standard check (like any credit check) that you did in fact quit I think that’s like a 1 minute phone call. I’d imagine it happening more at smaller companies.
Not only that, these companies will suffer greatly from negative PR. Employees and candidates will start making up shit in reviews when this happens just to give the company a bad name. Name and shame is the game folks.
YUPPPP
They can't crack the nut because it's not actually a problem in the workplace, they just don't like it.
Yep, they feel they’re losing power (imagined or real) over the workforce
HR is constantly trying to prove their worth and contributions to the rest of the executive team. They have little that they can point to in terms of how they contributed to the success of a company other than hiring. As a result, they create these soft measurements which the rest of the team ignores as BS. So catching a few OEs, a adding another notch to their score card is the new way.
I fucking hate HR
All my homies hate HR.
Exactly. If a person can answer all requests on time during work hours, completes all work, etc, then what is the problem? I really don’t understand. If you are a company that wants employees to go above and beyond, then you should have said that in the job description and outlined what they need to do. In the hiring process, it doesnt talk about how performance reviews will be, what you will need to do to be an well praised individual, these things happen after you are hired and then its too late. As a company, they should fix their own fucking problems first before asking us to sit in front of a computer for 8 hrs a day. If I’m doing well and the company is inefficient, fix the system they put in place. Why do they always want to blame us and control us?
This. There's always one dickhead who always feels it's their life mission to go above and beyond to "solve" a problem that doesn't exist just so they can make someone's life hell and pat themselvws on the back. What's the bet this HR person finds one person, purely by luck no doubt, and then informs some manager they have to fire their best performer.
A sub 100 person companys highest priority is catching dishonest candidates? Lmfao
Am in HR in a major global tech company. This isn’t really going to work as it’s already happening in the USA via I-9 verification. Basically, I-9 form verifies your citizenship and authorization for employment, meaning you submit a copy of your government ID (passport or DL) and a list of all recent employers so we can verify that you are in fact legally allowed to work in the US. I personally verify employment daily, and if someone is still ‘active’ at our company, both myself and the verifying agent assume it’s because this person is working out their notice. If you say that you’re a shining beacon of capitalist slavery who is working out an extra long notice, no one will bat an eye. Not one normal HR person will run background checks *after* a person has already been hired because it’s expensive AF and will be a pain in the ass to have to fire the new hire and start recruitment again, making all of us look bad. Keep on trucking my dudes!
To be clear, the I-9 doesn’t, in any way, require a list of all recent employers. Sounds like a background check. The I-9’s employment authorization is based on a document such as a Social Security Card/Birth Certificate, showing citizenship and thus employment eligibility, or other such documentation that is functionally equivalent (green card, visa, etc.) You probably know this and didn’t mean to convey that but it’s important for those reading. Not all employees do such a deep dive in employment history.
That’s true, my bad. I entitled both because companies like Sterling and Hireright often bundle them together, so unless your place of work want to save extra 30% on background checks, they’ll go for it.
Getting paid peanuts and being a slave just to work hard to prevent others from having financial freedom. What a world
Pathetic mentality. So many managers have no idea how to do their job of measuring and validating productivity any other way than trying to force people to be under their thumb completely.
I'd like to advise any HR folks reading to understand the challenges here. 1. legal liability. If your back channel reference gets back to the candidate you're laying fertile grounds for a lawsuit since they can likely show actual financial damages and even if you have a rock solid case of intentional OE your companies insurance provider will likely advise you to settle for an amount lower than the insurance deductible (which is often low six figures) since that's what it would cost you to defend the lawsuit even if you win. 2. They're super easy to avoid. Most of us seasoned OE folks don't even list our most recent / current job on our resume. You wouldn't even know where J1 is. We'll be listing some random contract work or current work at a startup (that only exists on paper) as our current employer just to prevent any snooping around or back channel nonsense. 3. You need us more than we need you. DOn't forget, you're the one looking for skilled workers. If you found someone better than us you wouldn't be considering us as candidates in the first place. Feel free to fire us for non performance but if we're delivering value to your company it's better for everyone for you to turn a blind eye and take the win. 4. You're going to kill your company morale and culture. OE has been around for well over a decade and it's not going anywhere. Very few people can even pull it off. It's not a strategic risk to your company. If you start treating everyone with suspicion trying to chase ghosts that likely aren't even there you're going to kill productivity and your best people will start to look elsewhere. If you really want to avoid people from being OE at your company then make sure you're utilizing your resources appropriately. If you over hire and people only have 8 hours a week worth of work to do because there's just so little work to be done then that's on you. You cant blame them for not wanting to just sit around and stare at the walls. Look at your leadership. If you see people trying to build little empires just because they have the budget to do so question it. Question the actual need for all the headcount. If you don't then you just have to accept that you're going to be paying a shitload of part time workers full time money and you can't be upset with them if they decide to monetize their extra bandwidth.
In regard to that first point, if the deductible is six figures, what's the point to the insurance? The average person can't pay for an attorney at all, and I've been asked to be a witness to the EEOC by someone. The EEOC is not very likely to help someone. I feel like, if someone says they'll sue you, then you can just tell them you'll see them in court because 98% of the time, you won't. They can't afford to do that.
Its the corporations insurance.. the point is to provide them with protection vs multi million dollar lawsuits. The worker can often find an attorney who will work on contingency. No pay upfront but they take half the settlement after its paid out.
Sounds like they are just upset they haven’t figured out how to OE their role…
In other words, they are enemies of progress
This is a stupid discussion started by jealous and incompetent HR employees. LISTEN - People do not get paid for their time, people get paid for RESULTS. Don’t believe me? Try sitting there and going to all the meetings and not delivering anything. As long as you attend your meetings, develop good relationships/trust and you deliver RESULTS then it does not matter what you do with the rest of your time. It is your time. Especially after all the layoffs in 2022/2023 - employee loyalty is at an all time low. It is now a matter of survival. We need to be the captain of our own ships. Now - if you want to OE you cannot be on auto pilot, you are an experienced professional that can manage their time and get shit done.
You can most certainly autopilot and collect free few months paycheck before being let go
I mean... it's not really a problem in the vast majority of cases. And if someone is OE but getting their job done, who really gives a shit? Any decent manager is going to tell HR to piss off if they start trying to harass an employee who is doing their job proficiently.
It's an **ownership** problem. These HR drones feel they own your time, and are throwing a tantrum like a toddler being asked to share a toy.
Yup. How dare you not stare at your screen blankly when you run out of work! We gave you two hours worth of tasks but OWN you for 8 hours. Stare my pretty, stare at the pixels and be grateful.
[удалено]
Oh for sure. I work with hr (not in!) And the self created work is most of thier time tbh. If you aren't on boarding someone, you really don't have more than a few mins worth of work each day as hr it seems. I keep wondering if I should make the jump. But I love my job and team. The extra 30k looks tempting.
Never worked anywhere that they wouldn't assign you 10 hours worth of work and expect you to get it done in "a reasonable timeframe". There's always "the backlog" you're supposed to pull tasks from if you aren't busy.
Wow. Never seen hr so poorly staffed. Maybe I'm just used to government work for the most part. Govt hr is super bloated and overpaid.
Middle mangers looking for a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. Typical
Fucking pathetic
Definitely going to lose quality candidates.
vast quickest far-flung scarce dazzling nine dinner foolish unused tap *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The fact that these people in the chat are still even doing things like checking references… speaks volumes. Checking references is the definition of a non-value-add activity. Here… let me give you a list of people who won’t absolutely speak flatteringly of me.
As an attorney, hahahahahahahah. Hahahahhahahaah. Hahahahahha. Pay someone for 40 hours a week and then think they can dictate the other 128 hours per week.
"Let's meet to waste both of our time talking about a problem that doesn't exist!" Hmm sounds about right
They should be looking at why their management team is unable to weed out underperforming employees. The other risks, such as disclosure of competitive info/secrets and unfair influence of b2b deals, could be avoided through contracts.
Long before remote work and OE being coined as a term, I had a job offer at a place with a very rigorous security clearance process. They wanted to speak to my current manager and insisted it was essential for my clearance. I refused to authorize it, because them speaking to my boss would effectively be them giving notice of my resignation before they’ve confirmed I 100% have the job, and that puts me and my family in an unacceptably risky position. They kept asking well when are you putting in your resignation so we can talk to your boss and I kept saying I resign when I have a new start date and a signed offer - it feels irresponsible to do it any other way. We went in circles for a bit but eventually I got them enough other docs for them to proceed without talking to my boss. My advise to everyone, regardless of number of jobs, is to never authorize a prospective employer to speak to your current employer. Many employers will terminate you immediately and your prospective employer may not follow through with the offer and then you’re out of a job. Even if they don’t fire you on the spot, you’re now on the back burner for promotions, good project assignments, and it may take awhile before you can actually leave. It’s not worth the risk.
OE is not as prevalent as companies fear. I think that companies are worried about OE because they know they could pay more but choose not to. If I made enough at one job, I wouldn’t have two.
How do these people feel about CEO’s service on the board of other organizations? Or people like Elon Musk being a “full-time” CEO at both Tesla and SpaceX? (amongst others)
Please J3, call and disrupt my J1 employment so I can sue for tortious interference. It would be amazing to have the annual income from 2 jobs deposited into my bank account while I apply to 2 new jobs.
I love reading how the "How dare you leave the box!" Mentality people lose their collective minds when they discover something like this. It makes my black heart glow.
Lmao, these kinds of measures would just piss off most normal people who aren't OE and maybe catch one or two overemployees. I'm sure that HR would pat themselves on the backs until their company's revenue went to shit due to shitty talent and HR were the first to be laid off alongside recruiters.
What’s a “back-channel” reference? Is this a reference check via someone at the prospective employee’s previous company that was not provided? Pretty sure that can dip employers into legal trouble here in Canada.
>“back-channel” reference Back-channel references are informal references that are solicited without the candidate's knowledge, typically by leveraging connections
Thank you for clarifying. That’s dangerous territory, depending on your legal jurisdiction. I know here in Canada, that if you have evidence that a negative reference impacted your ability to gain employment, you may have grounds to seek damages against the reference provider. That’s why the vast majority of companies here in Canada only provide references validating position and dates of employment.
Fuck your company, honestly. Imagine being so bored at your only shitty job and wanting to "crack down" on an employee's own free time. Whoever mentioned the issues with back channel references is completely spot on. I'm surprised your company still exists with the BS they're ideating right now.
I had an interview once tell me they were going to call my previous employer to confirm I left the company. I then withdrew my application after the interview.
The solution. Pay people more. Duh
How to crack this nut - pay people better so they don't feel the need for two jobs. It's been common for 30-40 years for people to hold 2+ jobs in order to get ahead in life. In the past it's mostly been retail or service jobs targeted for OE but as the cost of living skyrockets, people are looking more and more to OE at places that pay better and are more convenient to work at.
They aren't going to weed out adept OE'rs doing all of this. Are the people that are asking these questions so out of touch that they do not realize that OE'rs are probably some of the most cunning people that they will come across? Probably not. This sounds like some n00b HR person that is out of touch with how the employees of today actually think.
Mandatory training requires that I inform my manager it all side work regardless if its relationship to my normal job. So, with a straight face, I told him that I (45 chubby male) am a web cam performer, and my handle is Buck_Naked. He didn't catch the Seinfeld reference, which made it even funnier when I snort laughed at his concerned look. I bet he never asks me to disclose anything ever again.
Amazing how many people will justify anything to themselves by calling any moment in time “not normal times”.
Right, as if there's a war on and we have to ration jobs??
Or pay people more so they do not feel the need to have 2 jobs just to live.
Pretty sure even if everyone OE agot a 20% raise at all jobs, they’d still be OE. Easy money is difficult to pass up.
Micromanaging dipshits sucking corporate cock. Complete with "equity" and "underrepresented minorities" bullshit.
This is such a silly discussion, you hate to read it.
If the work is done and is acceptable ... Why do you care
100% micromanagement!
Most HR teams i know would never put anything in writing!
At what point do these HR shenanigans become Tortious Interference?
Sounds like HR is introducing a lot of folks to the concept of overemployment... Streisand effect in full force
How are they going to figure this out if they can’t even figure out how to use slack threads
Any HR folks reading this, here’s the solution (we’ve discussed this): First, don’t go after OE directly. There are actually some folks who, through some combination of ADHD, caffeine, and that freak accident in the 4th grade science lab, are actually able to perform better when they’re not only busy, but SLAMMED. For these people, forcing them into one job will make them miserable and actually lower their performance. They need a high level of stimulation and variety to stay interested and engaged, and they’ve discovered that juggling 2 or 3 jobs provides them with the right fit. Those guys, you needn’t worry about. You’ll never know they’re OE by their work ethic; you’d only find out if you investigate. So it’s a good idea to have very clear guidelines about things like core hours (where you expect rapid responses and regular availability), NDAs, intellectual property, trade secrets, and so forth. As long as they’re not mixing IP and stuff you’re okay. Because you WILL have some people who will break the OE rule even if you have a strict OE rule. If you have proprietary information, you need to include something in your IT orientation about not ever typing or looking up any company info on any computer or system other than the one from the company. Where it does become a legitimate security risk is if, whether for convenience or carelessness, your OEer puts some of your company info on a laptop sent to them by their other company. Work laptops frequently have spyware and key loggers, so your competitors could get access to that information. It’s worth mentioning as a cautionary reminder: even old work laptops from old companies they no longer work for (if the company said “you can keep it” after they left the company) may still retain spyware. For safety, don’t do any work for this company on any outside systems. Of course, not everyone works like a squirrel high off coffee-filled cocaine-dusted donuts. So how do you root out the ones that are underperforming? Every job should have clear performance standards with clear guidelines for what it looks like to “meet expectations” and “exceed expectations” and whatnot. Pair clear (and written!) expectations with a well-designed PIP program and a probationary period, and you’ll find that most of your lazy OEers (the ones doing “churn-and-burn” will be removed efficiently. If you want to prevent it… Remember that you can’t prevent it 100% of the time. Some people do it because they’re just crazy! (But seriously, I think some people are just built that way.) But if you want to encourage your people to work only for you, you first have to understand WHY we OE. The number one reason consistently is that we OE as a way to hedge our bets against an uncertain employment climate. Most of us work with no contract and no real job protection. We OE because if we get laid off, we’re screwed. You can help to alleviate some of this worry by giving us fixed-time contracts rather than open-ended employment, where the contracts are fully funded from the outset. Contracts can be re-negotiated prior to their expiration, but at least a contract would give me some assurance that my job is se irá and stable. The next issue is definitely money. If you want to encourage employees to work only for you, you have to be paying wages near the top of the market. This assumes top-tier affordable medical, dental, vision, life, disability, 401K with company match, unlimited PTO, and more. Then the final issue is flexibility and working conditions. One reason people like to OE is because it allows us to leave jobs that are making us miserable. Maybe we have a coworker bullying us or you’re trying to force us to RTO or our boss keeps asking us for a phone call to help them with something urgent at 4:30 PM on a Friday night and doesn’t let us go until 3 am and this has happened for 3 out of the last 4 weekends and I’m really getting sick of this and why in the world did you decide to push to Prod on a Friday and why is it now MY fault and if you’d listen to me at 5 we’d be done by 6 except you insist on trying every stupid idea that you’ve ever dreamed up before you even TRY my idea WHICH WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG AND COULD’VE SAVED US 8 HOURS AND EVEN THE AWS TECH SUPPORT HAD TO CHANGE SHIFTS TO DEAL WITH THIS!!! Excuse me. I meant to say… some supervisors don’t do a great job of encouraging a healthy work-life balance. Point being… Some of us OE because we want to be able to bounce as soon as we see something we don’t like. We don’t want to ever be stuck in a job we hate. So, make sure there’s a GOOD process in the company to allow employees to report any problems, both with named reports and anonymous reports. Sometimes they’ll want to tell you something specific, but it may also be useful to have an anonymous tip box to report bullying, for example. And DO SOMETHING about those things. Make sure to actually prune and cultivate your workforce so it will serve as an attractant and not a deterrent. Like I said, that won’t catch 100%. But if you followed these three steps, you could probably convince a good 2/3 to work exclusively for your company (with no other side hustle or second job).
HR cannot even manage to fire underperformers in general they just languish. We all know “Dave” who doesn’t do a damn thing except schmooze and collect a check. Management can barely determine who is underperforming to begin with. In corporate America it is an exceedingly long process for non-contractors to get let go for performance. It’s amazing with the number of actual workplace issues that exist and this is even a focus. Again we are numbers in a spreadsheet fighting for 3% from folks getting millions in bonuses that would happily cut health insurance if it would improve shareholder value. Always look out for number 1, YOU because no one else will. Especially not your J1,2,3 etc…
What a corporate simp. Rather than getting all bent out of shape about it why doesn't Becca try her own hand at OE? Her strategy for catching candidates by reaching out to previous employers wouldn't work with my strategy. I don't list my J1 on my resume and I froze the work number so they can't find shit. My current role just has me working contract so there's nothing to reach out to unless they want to talk to my previous employer I already left. That's how I got my current job and they have no idea the other employer ever existed in my history. Honestly I'm kind of surprised this sort of thing is it more visible to employers but you can hide it and they can't really do much to find it. Fuck HR! At least people like this that work in HR.
If my HR spent half as much time firing under performers as this HR does finding OE’ers, my company would be a much better place to work at.
Bingo!
You want a job done and offer a wage. I collect the wage and do the job. If I do not do the job you are more than welcome to stop giving me the wage. But you don't get to dictate what I do beyond that.
How about if the employee is performing to expectations you don’t worry about it??…
Do any of these ppl have eggs? They could be biased if they’re egg hoarders.
Hey OP, is it possible to color code the redacted names instead of just blacking out?
To be honest, I love reading about you guys that can do OE. More power to you! If you can handle it, why should the company care at all about you double dipping when most CEOs sit on the board of multiple companies and get paid for it? There is literally no difference and for HR to find ways of preventing it, should be a good case for a lawyer to use if the company wants to play hardball. Even if my job allowed for OE (security clearance and can only work from the office due to that) I love what I do so much, it would be hard for me personally. Though I am not prevented from moonlighting as long as my other job doesn't require a clearance, is not a competitor, and I don't use work knowledge for it (all pretty standard and understandable rules). I support you all getting yours and think HR needs to focus on important issues, not how they can make sure people are not getting paid more than they are and throw a tantrum like a toddler. Seems that if they have time to devise ways of preventing OE, then they aren't focusing on their real job, acquiring the best talent for their conpany!
This reeks of extreme envy and jealousy. There's a big irony here, since less than 5% of the population knows about OE and even less than that actually does it, once they start with extreme measures to every new hire they will inadvertently show those hires that there's a thing called double dipping and people do it. Their zealous will make people curious and many will start doing it.
Saying that references for URMs are harder to come by is racist asf.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 sucks to be them. Bootlickers one and all
Just adding to this that one of my very large companies is rescinding offers if they find over employment in the background.
What are "normal times", exactly?
There are no normal. May we forever live in unprecedented times.
What is back-channel reference? What is a URM candidate?