[HN Gopher] The absolute worst scenario happened
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The absolute worst scenario happened
        
       Author : logronoide
       Score  : 525 points
       Date   : 2021-03-22 11:43 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.reddit.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.reddit.com)
        
       | undefined1 wrote:
       | good idea in that thread:
       | 
       | If you don't have a backup of your zone files, a good way to
       | quickly pick up the main domains being used would be to turn on
       | logging for your DNS server and output into a log collector. That
       | way you can quickly build queries on which IPs are asking for
       | which FQDNs and start rebuilding a list of your lost zones and
       | can maybe do some guess-work on which IPs those FQDNs were likely
       | to resolve to.
       | 
       | I would expect irregular or extremely infrequent processes that
       | use specific FQDNs will pop up from time to time as errors/failed
       | processes and should prime IT teams on what to look out for.
       | 
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/ma4mwl/the_absolu...
        
       | shireboy wrote:
       | On a personal level, this may be a little self centered, but I
       | use cases like this to put my own problems in perspective.
       | Recently I had to troubleshoot lots of IT issues during a winter
       | storm. It was a bad outage for the organization during high load
       | important scenario. I distinctly remember thinking during the
       | thick of it "this is bad, but imagine being the poor engineers in
       | TX responsible for the power grid." This helped me not panic and
       | focus on the problem at hand.
       | 
       | I feel like this ability to step back and not take a problem more
       | seriously than necessary can be an asset. In this case, it's
       | pretty bad, but "at least people aren't in immediate danger of
       | their life." Think it to yourself, but probably not best to share
       | with others until after the problem is mitigated ;)
        
       | simonw wrote:
       | So many beautiful details if you search for more comments by the
       | original author of the post:
       | 
       | "The company that built this ERP solution went bankrupt 6 years
       | ago, and we don't have the source code. It uses PostgreSQL and
       | MySQL, and also has a built-in key-value database for which none
       | of us has any credentials. We don't have the source code for this
       | software (it's built in C and delivered to us as compiled
       | packages..)."
        
         | matwood wrote:
         | Extremely poor planning/lawyering on the companies part. When
         | larger entities deal with smaller entities, it's common to have
         | a source code escrow as part of the agreement which grants the
         | purchasing company rights to the source code in the event of
         | this exact situation.
         | 
         | Obviously we all know that source code alone isn't enough, but
         | it is something to start from.
         | 
         | If the ERP solution was not SaaS and installed on site, the
         | purchasing companies IT should have gotten credentials as part
         | of the contract. Again, normal type stuff when buying software
         | from smaller companies that have somewhat higher risk of going
         | out of business.
        
       | chmod600 wrote:
       | There would be a lot of value in independent organizations that
       | can evaluate engineering practices. Non-technical businesses
       | could just ask if you have cert XYZ before paying you.
       | 
       | It wouldn't have to get into the weeds too much. I mean really
       | basic stuff like finding documents and following them to restore
       | a backup or release a new version or fix a simple bug injected in
       | the system.
        
       | ReptileMan wrote:
       | No keyboard found, press f1 to continue type of situation.
        
       | gist wrote:
       | > So, everything is fucked. We have (had) a custom DNS system
       | built into our custom ERP software (don't ask). It had an
       | integration to our old (bind) nameservers, which was stragith up
       | awful and we've been trying to replace it for years. Well, on
       | Friday it all broke down. All domain information was wiped out
       | and records became null. Our company's domain is down, as well as
       | our customer domains (we're a medium-sized MSP). Every person who
       | knew how the custom DNS system worked has left the company years
       | ago.
       | 
       | Unclear why HN wastes time on this type of 'story' with no
       | attribution and scant details. (I have expertise in this area
       | let's say).
       | 
       | To start this implies that they have not added a customer or made
       | a change in several years by this statement:
       | 
       | "Every person who knew how the custom DNS system worked has left
       | the company years ago."
       | 
       | This also contradicts:
       | 
       | "and we've been trying to replace it for years"
        
       | xchaotic wrote:
       | has anyone figured out who the company is by now? Surely there
       | must be some reports of the outage by now?
        
         | viraptor wrote:
         | There's a small chance it's just a made up story for fun. If
         | not, some outlets should pick it up soon.
        
           | the_duke wrote:
           | Not necessarily, there are many small companies in this
           | space.
           | 
           | But knowing Reddit, I'd give this a solid 50/50 chance of
           | being fake.
        
         | avaldeso wrote:
         | > Surely there must be some reports of the outage by now?
         | 
         | Not everyone is AWS. There's a lot of obscure software
         | providers nobody cares when they're down.
        
       | WJW wrote:
       | That is an amazing story. Who knew that putting everything in a
       | database without backups was risky?
        
         | PeterisP wrote:
         | They explicitly mention that they have backups, but that the
         | "backups are fucked", whatever that means.
         | 
         | Ransomware scenarios come to mind, where the attackers will
         | look for and actively destroy the backups you have if they are
         | remotely accessible with e.g. AD admin credentials, and only
         | trigger the ransomware when the backups are gone. If you have
         | offsite backups in some cloud system, that helps you against
         | natural disasters but not against malicious activity. The need
         | for backups that are not just offsite but also offline is
         | somewhat recent and very, very many companies do not have them.
        
           | fuzzy2 wrote:
           | They backups are probably fine (as in "the data is in there")
           | but there may be no plans on how to restore them. Or they may
           | be incomplete.
           | 
           | I doubt any external factors are to blame.
        
         | brailsafe wrote:
         | Didn't they only say that their backups are fucked, but not
         | that they didn't try to make them? I've definitely run into
         | situations where the business is only willing to pay for the
         | most rudimentary conception of a backup strategy, and then it
         | turned out to have been subject to corruption.
        
           | M2Ys4U wrote:
           | They said they knew they haven't been able to restore backups
           | for 2 years. Which is another way of saying that they don't
           | have backups at all.
        
           | ewindal wrote:
           | Backups were extant, but inaccessible, and non-functional due
           | to causing a kernel panic when applied. [1]
           | 
           | [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/ma4mwl/the_abs
           | olu...
        
           | pedrovhb wrote:
           | Can't find it now, but I've often seen a phrase to the effect
           | of "If you don't regularly test that you can restore from
           | backups, then you don't actually have backups", and it seems
           | to ring quite true here.
        
             | regularfry wrote:
             | It's up there with "unless you test power supply failover,
             | don't rely on that generator to save you".
             | 
             | I know of one case where power failed, the "24 hour"
             | generators kicked in, power company says "We'll need 12
             | hours" and the outage happened 6 hours later when they ran
             | out of oil.
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | I contracted at one place for a bit where they shut
               | _everything_ down in each of their data centres once a
               | year and power everything back up.
               | 
               | When I was there this didn't go too well and they
               | couldn't get one their data centres online again -
               | failover to their other centres did work though. This was
               | ~20 years ago in the finance sector.
        
               | grumple wrote:
               | That sounds like their testing worked out for them.
               | Better than a random failure.
        
               | myself248 wrote:
               | Yup. Have the problem when all the right people are awake
               | and on-site to handle it.
               | 
               | I was in a building when someone inadvertently powered
               | off the wrong equipment, which had been running for
               | several years, and several of the power supplies failed
               | to come back up. It was 1+1 redundant though, so we could
               | quickly shuffle packs around to bring it back up without
               | redundancy. Then, jogging through the building and asking
               | if anyone had spares, we found a field tech in the
               | lunchroom who had a pile of stuff in his van. Whole thing
               | was back to 100% in less than an hour, and we let the
               | beancounters sort out the field spares being used for
               | office equipment.
               | 
               | If that same failure had happened during the overnight
               | maintenance window (when volatile work was supposed to be
               | performed), there certainly wouldn't have been the same
               | resources around.
        
             | arethuza wrote:
             | I'd go one step further - actually restore the databases
             | and check that you can bring up the relevant applications
             | that use those databases.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | kodah wrote:
       | I'm a systems engineer and a software engineer. A couple tips
       | that are relevant to this story:
       | 
       | 1. Applications do not need DNS servers, ever. Hosting platforms
       | do. The way I read this is that it's some odd form of split
       | horizon where one DNS server seems to replicate to larger DNS
       | servers, yet the single server is what carries most of the
       | critical information.
       | 
       | 2. State should be transferred from where you gather input to
       | where it becomes actionable by an eventually consistent process.
       | ie: If you store your customer CNAMEs in ERP, then something like
       | webhooks to a service that maintains the state in machine
       | readable form should verify, accept/deny, and do something with
       | that change (like update DNS).
       | 
       | 3. Customer systems and core/critical systems should be separate.
       | The fact that critical contact systems for employees were not
       | separate from
       | 
       | 4. Have a DR plan and artificially enact it at cadence, doing so
       | even in a sterile environment is better than nothing. Successful
       | DR's in production are best. If the first time you live test your
       | DR strategy is when all is lost, then all is most likely lost and
       | at best you have a lot of hours of work ahead of you.
       | 
       | 5. The holy grail is replayable audit frameworks. This could mean
       | capturing diffs but it can be as simple as logging the current
       | state of a given $thing and sending it to an off-local system.
        
       | protomyth wrote:
       | Well, it looks like someone better track down the people who knew
       | how it worked and offer some serious cash.
       | 
       | The only actual backup is one that has been tested. With the cost
       | of hardware, buy 2 or have an agreement with your vendor to have
       | a machine ready to receive a backup.
        
         | sethammons wrote:
         | > The only actual backup is one that has [recently] been tested
        
       | ExcavateGrandMa wrote:
       | There is always a solution...
       | 
       | but don't redo the same errors :)
        
       | erikstarck wrote:
       | This reminds me of when the Danish mega-corp Maersk was attacked
       | by ransomware and had all of their computers locked and decrypted
       | with no access.
       | 
       | All computers except one, which due to a power failure had been
       | offline the whole time.
       | 
       | This computer had the critical DNS information needed to restore
       | the network.
       | 
       | Only problem: it was in Africa, in a country that required Visa
       | which would take weeks to apply for and receive. So someone from
       | the African office had to bring the hard drive to an airport that
       | someone from the London office could travel to and pick up the
       | critical hard drive, then bring it on a plane back to London.
       | 
       | A sweaty and nervous trip, I can imagine.
       | 
       | Whole story here: https://www.wired.com/story/notpetya-
       | cyberattack-ukraine-rus...
        
         | driton wrote:
         | Sounds very interesting, but the story seems to be behind a
         | paywall. I found some other articles[0][1] related to the
         | incident, however none of them seem to mention the flying of a
         | hard drive across continents.
         | 
         | 0: https://www.zdnet.com/article/ransomware-the-key-lesson-
         | maer...
         | 
         | 1: https://portswigger.net/daily-swig/when-the-screens-went-
         | bla...
        
           | erikstarck wrote:
           | Sorry about the paywalled article. Here's a summary of the
           | same article:
           | https://www.chrislouie.net/blog/2018/9/10/better-to-be-
           | lucky...
        
           | Eremotherium wrote:
           | Or if you want the story as a podcast I can wholeheartedly
           | recommend this episode (and the podcast in its entirety) of
           | Darknet Diaries:
           | 
           | https://darknetdiaries.com/episode/54/
        
             | pro_zac wrote:
             | Seconded! Great story and amazing podcast.
        
           | flobosg wrote:
           | There's a capture in the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive
           | .org/web/20180822190926/https://www.wired...
        
         | yabones wrote:
         | Not just DNS, it was their entire Active Directory Global
         | Catalog. If it weren't for that server, they would have needed
         | to re-create their entire user database, all of their endpoint
         | & server management policies, and it would have been almost
         | impossible to safely restore their Exchange email database.
         | They got very _very_ lucky.
        
       | hef19898 wrote:
       | And that is why I choose to host "my company" at the big names:
       | homepage directly with Wordpress instead of a smaller local
       | provider, office directly with MS and so on.
       | 
       | Because, even there might be cheaper solutions, at least I can be
       | sure to have a huge org in place to make sure stuff is up. And to
       | find ways to get stuff back up and running in case something goes
       | south. I value that peace of mind a lot.
        
       | mikewarot wrote:
       | As a system administrator, I never, EVER encrypted data at rest.
       | Stupid policy I know, but encrypted stuff tends to be
       | unrecoverable when you need it.
       | 
       | I had an Exchange Server that had issues, and I didn't have
       | enough hardware to try a backup, I kept telling management... it
       | died, and I was able to recover most, but not all of it.
       | 
       | Shortly thereafter they outsourced IT, and I assume the new crew
       | was able to get the resources to actually fix it.
        
       | Nextgrid wrote:
       | This doesn't sound _that_ bad. Unless I'm misunderstanding
       | something, the ERP was used as a source of truth for DNS records,
       | and that mechanism broke. There's no indication of actual data
       | loss so it should still be in the ERP DB, and it's a matter of
       | reverse-engineering how it was all put together and then extract
       | the data into a zone file (or into a managed DNS service such as
       | Route 53) at least for the core domains which should at least
       | bring their internal services back online and allow them to
       | proceed further.
        
         | rebuilder wrote:
         | From a reply the poster made in that thread:
         | 
         | "So, we have backups on an encrypted drive, which we can't
         | access (authentication is done via our custom ERP software,
         | which is down as well - in hindsight, a very bad idea). And the
         | backups don't work. We can rebuild the DNS servers from
         | scratch, and the records are probably still safely stored
         | somewhere inone of the 3 different databases our ERP software
         | uses, but we don't have an authentication key or the scripts
         | used to pull the DNS domain / record information from the ERP
         | system anymore. The API's are undocumented, and there's only
         | one key that can access those records."
         | 
         | Elsewhere, they say that two years ago, they found they were
         | unable to restore from backups...
        
           | raverbashing wrote:
           | I'd say if it was such a house of cards, my best bet is that
           | this security chain is full of holes. Maybe the ERP used a
           | fixed password, which can be guessed/bruteforced.
        
             | mysterydip wrote:
             | honestly, "password" would be my first guess.
        
               | jiggawatts wrote:
               | Oh come now, there are password complexity policies in
               | place in any modern software! Try: password123.
        
               | fctorial wrote:
               | Need capital letters and symbols:
               | 
               | Password@123
        
               | abruzzi wrote:
               | it doesn't sound like modern software. At my current
               | employer (to remain unnamed) when I started there were a
               | bunch of MS-SQL servers with an SA password of <blank>
               | (i.e. no password). It took a long time to fix that
               | because we had hundreds of local installs of the client
               | app that had SA/<blank> in the app config file (yes, they
               | were setup to access as system administrator), so fixing
               | it meant reconfiguring hundreds of local installs. (at
               | the time we didn't have a mechanism for automating it.)
               | We still have "enterprise" software that does no password
               | rules, and would happily allow a blank password.
        
               | yrgulation wrote:
               | Oh please, even such a crappy place knows better.
               | 
               | Its Password123. Adding capital letters makes it more
               | secure.
        
               | neogodless wrote:
               | But hackers might be expecting capital letters, so
               | disallowing them from passwords is more secure!
        
           | ansible wrote:
           | > _Elsewhere, they say that two years ago, they found they
           | were unable to restore from backups..._
           | 
           | So their business actually failed a couple years ago, and
           | they have only noticed this month.
        
             | ptero wrote:
             | That isn't the failure of the business; backup failure is a
             | screwup of the IT, which I think is not that uncommon.
             | 
             | But the fact that after this event the management did not
             | get it fixed (and requested that IT demo it, three times,
             | with no failures) is an existential failure.
        
             | lupire wrote:
             | They noticed 2 years ago, and the ship sank below the water
             | line this month.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | They were already dead 2 years ago, the body just didn't
               | realize it and kept moving until last Friday...
        
             | hackeraccount wrote:
             | Basically Wile E. Coyote running in the air.
        
             | koonsolo wrote:
             | The technical people noticed, left, and they had to hire
             | new ones who didn't know yet. Now the new ones also know.
        
         | arethuza wrote:
         | I guess if you are in the business of selling services that
         | include custom domains that isn't _quite_ as crazy as it
         | initially sounds...
         | 
         | You are, of course, assuming they have a backup and the backup
         | can actually be restored and that the restore contains the
         | required information.
        
           | WJW wrote:
           | It does say in the original post that:
           | 
           | > Our backups are fucked.
           | 
           | So I assume that they have already tried and they didn't
           | work.
        
             | arethuza wrote:
             | Early in my career (>30 years) ago I nuked a companies
             | salary database (a missing $ in a shell script moved
             | everything to the file i)
             | 
             | No problem they said - we have backups. They had three
             | tapes.
             | 
             | First tape failed.
             | 
             | Second tape failed.
             | 
             | Third tape worked.
             | 
             | In retrospect that was a useful, if rather stressful,
             | lesson.
        
               | lupire wrote:
               | > nuked a companies _salary_ database
               | 
               | > a missing _$_
               | 
               | Bravo!
        
               | artursapek wrote:
               | >a missing $ in a shell script moved everything to the
               | file i
               | 
               | I've always had anxiety when running a shell script, this
               | is a perfect example of why
        
               | noisy_boy wrote:
               | I always wrap the actual cp/mv/rm etc in echo first
               | before actually running it e.g. running echo "mv $src i"
               | first would have immediately highlighted the problem
               | visually.
        
               | ansible wrote:
               | It is also helpful to have at least two tape drives, and
               | check the backup tapes against _both_.
               | 
               | Early in my career, we had a storm that caused an
               | electrical surge. In spite of the power protection, it
               | damaged the tape drive on the main server (unknown to us
               | at the time). The entire rest of the system (CPU, RAM,
               | hard drives (RLL!)) were fine.
               | 
               | Listening to the backups being run, I noticed it sounded
               | a little different. Eventually I determined that the tape
               | drive (old QIC, maybe 40MB capacity?) worked, but it
               | would not switch tracks when reading / writing. So the
               | backup ran, but it just overwrite the same track rather
               | than write to subsequent tracks.
               | 
               | A short backup / restore wouldn't have caught the
               | problem, it was necessary to try to read the whole backup
               | to see. This wasn't caught for a while, so all the
               | backups were mostly useless.
        
         | pc86 wrote:
         | > > All domain information was wiped out and records became
         | null.
         | 
         | > > Every person who knew how the custom DNS system worked has
         | left the company years ago. Our backups are fucked. Our records
         | are wiped from all domain servers out there.
         | 
         | Sure sounds like the data is lost to me.
        
           | buro9 wrote:
           | To me it sounds like those people who left can command a very
           | high day rate to help with the immediate aftermath. A high
           | enough rate that even if they are doing hours elsewhere some
           | will be tempted to sign in after their work hours to help
           | out.
           | 
           | A company does not just stop existing or being able to
           | function, deleting DNS records didn't empty the bank account
           | or the ability of the accountants to be directed to pay
           | someone... there are lots of options.
        
             | goatinaboat wrote:
             | _To me it sounds like those people who left can command a
             | very high day rate to help with the immediate aftermath_
             | 
             | Those people are probably employed somewhere else and would
             | need very significant incentives. More than likely their
             | current employers would take a dim view of them freelancing
             | to help a competitor, so: enough to take a year off or even
             | to retire on. Basically the idea of hiring back former
             | employees as consultants is a non-starter.
        
         | IgorPartola wrote:
         | We don't know that the records are still in the database. This
         | could be a matter of ON DELETE CASCADE followed by a delete of
         | what looked like innocent data and then boom it's all gone.
         | Then the integration updates bind which helpfully erases all
         | records and then once there are no domain names to talk to
         | everything is down.
         | 
         | I would be looking at the Internet Archive and Whois too figure
         | out some basic domains and what the registrars are and go from
         | there but of course depends on what business they are in and
         | what their domain names were doing.
        
         | ragnese wrote:
         | Yeah, the poster didn't make totally clear whether all of their
         | _business_ records are totally gone, but it does sound like
         | that 's the case. The ERP was very likely the source of truth
         | for everything- including employee information that the poster
         | says is gone (can't send SMS to remote employees).
         | 
         | So, it _probably_ is that bad...
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | Nextgrid wrote:
           | Nothing in his post suggests the ERP's DB is gone, merely
           | that the mechanism which populates DNS records from the ERP
           | has broken down, which probably has ripple effects on
           | everything else as their internal DNS is broken and services
           | can't talk to each other.
           | 
           | But the data should still be there, and it's a matter of
           | reverse-engineering how to go from "ERP DB" to "DNS zone
           | file".
        
             | ragnese wrote:
             | Okay, fair enough. I probably skimmed the post too quickly.
        
             | Semaphor wrote:
             | > Skimmed through the MySQL and Postgres databases, no
             | signs of anything domain-related. I'm betting it's all
             | stored in the custom integrated [and encrypted] KV
             | database..
             | 
             | -- https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/ma4mwl/the_ab
             | solu...
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | If the system is old (going by other replies, introduced
               | in a deal 20 years ago), maybe they'll be able to brute-
               | force the encryption...
        
               | michaelt wrote:
               | Encryption being 20 years old doesn't mean it's easy to
               | break, given that AES is 23 years old :)
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | It doesn't, but in my experience, the ciphers and key
               | sizes commonly used were often not future-proof :). This
               | rests on the assumption that nobody updated the
               | keys/encryption components in 20 years - which I think is
               | quite possible with such internal enterprise deployment.
        
         | Mauricebranagh wrote:
         | I did something similar for a customer of ours who was a major
         | UK cinema chain - they had had a falling out with some small
         | company that had built an online booking system.
         | 
         | Highlights:
         | 
         | 1 Bookings where made at individual cinemas
         | 
         | 2 The network was a packet radio system that blocked :-) only
         | Transaction could be in flight (Leicester square had two
         | channels)
         | 
         | 3 Core of system was Perl running on three windows NT machines
         | which manipulated a shonky screen based system (Pacer Cats)
         | 
         | 4 Trying to sell tickets online for Phantom menace system
         | crashed at midnight (when tickets went on sale) we made 1
         | transaction at 6am
         | 
         | % And no credentials so I had to research how to crack NT - I
         | did consider setting up or fleet of a dozen or so of our suns
         | as a cluster to crack NT, but not sure if the internal security
         | would have liked that (aka secret squirrels and the bit that
         | Bruce Shenier worked for
        
           | Nextgrid wrote:
           | I'd love to read a detailed write-up about this. Why packet
           | radio - what was the real-time requirement and why couldn't
           | it be fulfilled by an internet connection (I understand
           | internet was primitive back then, but ISDN should've been
           | able to give you enough bandwidth?).
        
         | batch12 wrote:
         | I agree. My first reaction was, "I think I could fix this".
         | Worst case this may be be proceeded by a forensic recovery of
         | the data. This doesn't seem impossible at all unless there is
         | some other factor at play like ransomware/physical damage.
        
       | tw04 wrote:
       | I actually don't see any issue that isn't simply a matter of
       | money.
       | 
       | Everything they list that's an issue seems to revolve around the
       | fact that the employees with domain knowledge for the system have
       | left the company.
       | 
       | Reach out to them and hire them on as contractors. If they left
       | under bad terms because the business was a bunch of dicks, expect
       | to pay 10x market rate. If this is truly "fix this or the
       | business is out of business" - then it shouldn't be a tough
       | decision to make.
        
         | geoduck14 wrote:
         | Let's not forget about the Mythical Man Month. Sure, specific
         | people amd money can fix the problem, but we can't just assume
         | that throwing people and money can fix this.
         | 
         | I would anticipate a mix of: the people who know where the
         | right bodies are buried, the right incentive (yes, that
         | includes money), but also people to look over the entire
         | program, a designer to make sure it is designed correctly, an
         | organized person to make sure it is properly documented, and
         | someone to make sure it is adhered to in the future.
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | Even if you open a checkbook wide, there's no guarantee that
         | someone remembers the specifics of some kludgy system they
         | worked on years ago. And if things are really snafu-d, there's
         | no guarantee that even someone who does have domain knowledge
         | can recover things.
        
           | WJW wrote:
           | And, of course, there's the scenario where the people with
           | domain knowledge are already dead. Money won't help in that
           | case.
        
         | Accujack wrote:
         | It's slightly more complicated than that, depending on how much
         | time has passed since the creators of the system left, but
         | you're correct in general.
         | 
         | Usually, since admitting that they were stupid to let all the
         | knowledge of the system walk out the door requires more
         | emotional and intellectual flexibility than managers who let
         | this sort of thing happen possess, the biggest obstacle isn't
         | even the money... it's getting the managers to admit they're
         | idiots.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | Coworker used to have a boss who literally said where she
           | could hear: "Lose a monkey, get a new monkey."
        
           | at_a_remove wrote:
           | Yes. I had an ancient system where the holders of domain
           | knowledge kept either dying or retiring, one by one. I was
           | frantic, but nobody listened to me. The system began to fail
           | on the day I announced my departure. I would later find that
           | one of the previous architects had reached out to my manager
           | to offer assistance, but this was never made known to us. It
           | wouldn't have even _cost_ anything.
           | 
           | Anything but pride, I guess.
        
           | criddell wrote:
           | The person who started the thread added this comment:
           | 
           | > The company that built this ERP solution went bankrupt 6
           | years ago, and we don't have the source code. It uses
           | PostgreSQL and MySQL, and also has a built-in key-value
           | database for which none of us has any credentials. We don't
           | have the source code for this software (it's built in C and
           | delivered to us as compiled packages..).
           | 
           | Sounds like finding their old employees wouldn't help. They
           | need to find old employees of the company that wrote the
           | system and hope they kept a copy of the source code.
        
         | omgJustTest wrote:
         | If business not make money, close business. Business make
         | money, big boat of money.
         | 
         | Engineers not make money.
        
         | temp8964 wrote:
         | What if they lost contact information of their former
         | employees?
        
         | drclau wrote:
         | Not really related to the subject of the article, but your
         | comment reminds me of employers in Romania complaining they
         | can't find people to hire, while they offer small salaries and
         | people just leave the country for better paying jobs abroad.
         | The solution to their problem is really simple: make better
         | offers.
        
           | psychlops wrote:
           | You've just described the US H1-B visa program.
        
           | asdfman123 wrote:
           | Well, the problem is this: it might not make economic sense
           | for those specific companies to hire people at a higher rate.
           | 
           | Companies aren't going to say "I guess we're inefficient and
           | should just die." They're going to fight to survive and
           | thrive, which is what you're seeing.
           | 
           | Then again, some companies ARE just cheap. You never know.
        
             | phkahler wrote:
             | I was at a hotel with crappy service and asked about the
             | problems with house keeping. The manager told me everyone
             | in town (Traverse City MI) was trying to bring in
             | foreigners to do housekeeping because they couldn't get
             | local labor.
             | 
             | They said the standard is 30 minutes per room per day. I
             | figure at a very generous $50 per hour (100k / year) it
             | should run $25 to have my room taken care of. Now that
             | doesnt cover the shared costs - doing laundry, cleaning the
             | pool, front desk, etc... but my room was something like
             | $150 per night. How the fuck can they not find people to
             | clean rooms?
             | 
             | Answer: they're too cheap to pay a decent wage. But why? My
             | suspicion is that all these places are actually leveraged
             | far too much and paying rent/interest/dividends so much
             | they can barely operate.
             | 
             | I suspect low interest rates and other incentives to
             | "stimulate" economies are actually causing these problems.
        
               | cortesoft wrote:
               | If they weren't leveraged that much, some other company
               | would pay more for the property by being leveraged that
               | much.
        
               | zebnyc wrote:
               | The service industry might be labor intensive but is
               | hardly the only cost for the owner(s). What about
               | mortgage payments, marketing, integrating with third
               | parties (expedia), gas & electricity, general maintenance
               | / accounting / security etc. I am sure there are hundreds
               | of other costs that I have no visibility into
        
               | thitcanh wrote:
               | You make no sense. No one will pay $25 to clean a single
               | room in a hotel. Just because your room is $150 it
               | doesn't mean that "there's plenty to pay everyone
               | 100k/year.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | I assume the cost of a room cleaning (including costs
               | other than direct labor) is closer to $5. That's about
               | what hotels will often give you in some sort of funny
               | money to skip a cleaning.
        
           | NewLogic wrote:
           | The exact same thing is happening in Australia in regards to
           | farmers and fruit picking labour. With international borders
           | shut they are unable to exploit foreign workers and complain
           | that young adults are refusing to relocate for $5 an hour
           | hard labour jobs.
        
             | kolbe wrote:
             | Farming is low margin. Farmers don't get to set the price
             | of their products, and they aren't handed billions in
             | capital to burn through or 1000x multiples on their profit
             | in the public markets. When most businesses say they can't
             | hire someone and the reason is because they don't pay
             | enough, the underlying cause of their low pay is usually
             | because that's what the company can afford.
             | 
             | Sure, farmers could pay $10/hr, but unless your Doritos
             | were $10 a bag, they'd lose money.
        
               | CydeWeys wrote:
               | People have to eat food. Food in aggregate has one of the
               | most inelastic demand curves imaginable. If the price
               | rises because the production costs increase, people will
               | still buy food. They might buy _different_ food, and you
               | 'll see a decrease in acreage given over to labor-
               | intensive crops, but that's just the free market at work.
        
               | smnrchrds wrote:
               | The thing is, if farmers in Australia increase wages and
               | thus their product becomes more expensive, the product on
               | supermarket shelves will not become more expensive.
               | Rather, supermarkets will import food from another
               | country. Food is, with few exceptions, a commodity. The
               | producer does not set the price of the commodity, the
               | market does.
               | 
               | I am telling this as an engineer working in the Canada's
               | oil and gas sector. Since 2014, salaries in our sector
               | have decreased and firms are struggling. "Just raise the
               | price of oil" is not an actionable advice. The price of
               | oil is not ours to set. It's the market's
        
               | Symbiote wrote:
               | The EU sets fairly high tariffs on food imports, since
               | food security means we must maintain local food
               | production.
               | 
               | Australia does not use this approach, and instead seems
               | to have pushed other countries to eliminate their own
               | tariffs for the TPP.
        
               | smnrchrds wrote:
               | What tariff does is that it moves the price point at
               | which the retailers switch to imports a bit higher.
               | Tariff does not eliminate the ceiling. There still would
               | be a ceiling on price, determined by international
               | commodity price + X% tariff.
        
               | freeone3000 wrote:
               | So the tariff needs to be high enough to be absolutely
               | ruinous. See, for example, Canada's tariff on dairy.
               | Since Canada runs a cartel on dairy producers, Canada
               | does set the domestic price of milk at $4/gal. This is
               | incompatible with the US subsidy model, where it prices
               | out to around $1.50 a gallon -- so there's a 270% tariff
               | on dairy imports. The great thing about numbers is
               | there's always a bigger one.
        
               | smnrchrds wrote:
               | Yes, you can do that. It's not something the farmers
               | strapped for workers can do, but the government certainly
               | can. It would not be particularly popular in most
               | political climates, so passing such laws in democracies
               | are always difficult. But as the Canada example shows,
               | not impossible.
        
               | ksec wrote:
               | It just shows most people working in Tech Industry, and
               | specifically software ( or web ) development ( as oppose
               | to Tech / software within Oil Industry or any other
               | industry ) have absolutely zero idea on market or
               | commodity trading.
        
               | zentiggr wrote:
               | So.... reduce production, and supply/demand curves should
               | get you back financially on track?
               | 
               | Of course, you might get pilloried for the artificial
               | scarcity, but hey... nobody ever likes the capitalist :)
        
               | smnrchrds wrote:
               | We reduce production, US, Russia, and Saudi Arabia would
               | be more than happy to fill the gap. Actually Saudi Arabia
               | prefers prices that are lower than the strike point for
               | non-traditional oil, so it can get rid of competition
               | from likes of Canada. How should we convince Russia and
               | Saudi Arabia to take a hit to their exports in order to
               | help us out, when we cannot even convince our biggest
               | ally, the US?
        
               | wing-_-nuts wrote:
               | I consider food security a national security issue.
               | Produce is one of the few areas where I would consider a
               | tarif justified. Every country should be able to feed
               | it's citizens with the food grown there, or they risk
               | hunger when cut off by war or natural disaster.
        
               | smnrchrds wrote:
               | And countries do that, but for a few strategic ones, not
               | everything. Canada produces lots of wheat and dairy and
               | maple syrup. It even has a strategic maple syrup reserve.
               | But it does not produce a lot of citrus fruits or
               | pistachios or dates. It may be possible for US to produce
               | everything within the country--it is a gigantic country
               | and has just about every climate there is. But it would
               | be an ecological disaster if countries without those
               | attributes do the same. Think of all the heating required
               | to produce warm-climate fruits in Canada.
        
               | wing-_-nuts wrote:
               | Oh! One of my favorite ag articles talked about the
               | challenges of growing oranges in russia!
               | 
               | https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2020/04/fruit-trenches-
               | culti...
               | 
               | You're absolutely right that perhaps not everything
               | should be grown everywhere, but I strongly believe that a
               | country should have a local source of all the calories
               | and vitamins / minerals they need. In Canada, for
               | example, maybe they encourage farmers to grow greens,
               | brocolli or potatoes instead of citrus for vitamin c, but
               | they absolutely need a source.
        
               | csomar wrote:
               | Apples and Oranges. If you include global supply, then
               | you have to increase salaries "globally". We all (I
               | assume) should know that demand/supply set the price.
               | 
               | But imported products don't fly right into the country.
               | There is customs, and denying/tariffing them is a policy
               | that countries are very actively using. So at the end of
               | the day, it's a political decision.
               | 
               | Edit: On the other hand, if you are exporting stuff (oil
               | for Canada), then you can't really do that for the
               | external market. Might explain why the government will
               | let some sectors run with illegals (to remain
               | competitive); the alternative being their ultimate
               | demise.
        
               | smnrchrds wrote:
               | If you ban import X from a country, the country will
               | likely ban import Y from your country in retaliation.
               | Sometimes the net effect would still be in your favour,
               | but often times it would not be. Do you know why American
               | brands dominate the US truck market? It started with a
               | tariff on American chicken by some European countries and
               | it quickly snowballed into much more [0][1].
               | 
               | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax
               | 
               | [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/01/25/5116635
               | 27/epis...
        
               | WJW wrote:
               | ...yes? The alternative to farmers is not harvesting
               | their crops at all, since with the borders closed foreign
               | labor is not available.
               | 
               | If nobody wants to buy $10 doritos, that means the
               | product can't exist in a market without cheap labor.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | antihero wrote:
               | Well perhaps that's the problem of the market. That it
               | can't particularly function to enrich some people without
               | gross levels of exploitation.
        
               | kipchak wrote:
               | To me it always seemed a bit similar to justifications
               | used for the "peculiar institution" - the system can't
               | exist without slavery, therefore slavery must exist. The
               | benefits of cheaper labor was well appreciated; Carnegie
               | called immigration "the golden stream which flows into
               | the country every year."[1]
               | 
               | [1]https://www.ebooksread.com/authors-eng/andrew-
               | carnegie/trium...
        
               | ihsw wrote:
               | Being paid $5/hour farming in Australia vs $0.50/hour
               | assembling shoes in Malaysia. Wow, such exploitation.
               | 
               | "Exploitation" is a relative term, some people would
               | rather be exploited in the countryside of a first-world
               | nation rather than the countryside of their homeland.
        
               | antihero wrote:
               | Yes, they are both exploitation and they are both evil.
        
               | ihsw wrote:
               | In any case, people should have the freedom to choose.
        
               | jacobolus wrote:
               | Which is more exploitative, working for $5/hour in
               | agriculture in a wealthy country, 50C//hour in an urban
               | factory in a poor country, or $1/day in a rural peasant
               | village somewhere or having no work at all?
               | 
               | It's all relative.
        
               | riskable wrote:
               | That's a bit like asking, "Which is worse? A shot to the
               | head or an overdose of morphine?" Either way the person's
               | going to die.
        
               | thrower123 wrote:
               | Doritos aren't going to get more expensive, because like
               | all the real staple crops, corn is completely mechanized,
               | and you have one guy driving an air-conditioned tractor
               | or combine, following GPS-plotted courses.
        
               | relaxing wrote:
               | True! Except it's not just doritos, it's everything you
               | eat.
               | 
               | And it's not just cheap labor, it's labor exploited under
               | pain of deportation.
        
               | csomar wrote:
               | > Farmers don't get to set the price of their products
               | 
               | Actually farmers could set _any_ price if they colluded
               | to manipulate the market. People will buy food at _any_
               | price and _everyday_.
        
               | clipradiowallet wrote:
               | This is offset by imported food. If 100% of American
               | farmers colluded to fix prices, they'd have their lunch
               | eaten(hah) by food importers. Obviously not everything is
               | importable(eg rice), but there is more to the market than
               | the American farmers.
        
               | raffraffraff wrote:
               | The reason I buy expensive eggs, milk and cheese is that
               | I know that the supermarkets fuck over the farmers. I
               | never buy the supermarket brand, unless it's the last one
               | on the shelf. The price difference is sometimes 1.5x but
               | unless you're really "broke" broke, you don't notice the
               | difference. It's a few cents a week.
        
               | kbelder wrote:
               | I always buy the supermarket brand, even though I can
               | easily afford more. It's not because I want to save a few
               | pennies on each purchase; it's helping to drive prices
               | down on all overpriced goods, helping out those really in
               | need.
               | 
               | Same reason I avoid organic whenever possible. We don't
               | need boutique food.
        
               | cammikebrown wrote:
               | I agree much of the "benefits" of organic food are not
               | really true or meaningful, but I do try and buy local
               | when I can.
        
               | solarkraft wrote:
               | Good idea, but how do you know the extra money is
               | properly passed on?
        
               | knightofmars wrote:
               | While, like most things in life, it's not a guarantee,
               | doing basic research about the farms and the cooperatives
               | that produce the goods will provide some insight. Almost
               | anything is better than a CAFO (Concentrated animal
               | feeding operation).
        
               | skykooler wrote:
               | Sure, but they'd lose less money than if they didn't hire
               | anyone and couldn't sell their crops at all.
        
               | SilasX wrote:
               | Not sure that's the best example to use, since food costs
               | are a trivial fraction of the retail price of a bag of
               | Doritos, and harvesting labor is a trivial fraction of
               | the price of food.
               | 
               | Edit: that was just based on my general memory of non-
               | perishable food economics. But I googled it and found
               | this (sorry, quora) from someone who would know, a 2 oz
               | bag of potato chips costs 15 cents to produce and bring
               | to (retail) market. Of that, a fraction is potato prices.
               | 
               | https://www.quora.com/How-much-does-a-bag-of-57g-of-Lays-
               | act...
               | 
               | Edit: fix Verizon math.
        
             | scruple wrote:
             | > complain that young adults are refusing to relocate for
             | $5 an hour hard labour jobs.
             | 
             | USD $5/hour is what I earned as a teenager working the
             | fields by hand (picking corn, beans, and fruit for sale
             | same-day at the farmers small stands throughout the area)
             | in the early 1990s... That's insane. Is that USD $5 or AD?
        
               | ballenf wrote:
               | I think people will one day demand higher pay for desk
               | jobs over outdoor work. Looking back on my early life,
               | the hard outdoor work was incredibly valuable to me. Desk
               | jobs sometimes were soul-sucking, depression inducing.
               | Not always and my dev work now is desk work that doesn't
               | suck.
               | 
               | Now, outdoor work with a high injury rate is a different
               | story.
        
             | AdmiralGinge wrote:
             | Sounds like exactly the same problem British farmers are
             | having post-Brexit with things like fruit-picking, they're
             | scratching their heads wondering why British workers aren't
             | keen on having half their wages taken for "rent" to live
             | six people to a crappy caravan on-site and do backbreaking
             | labour day in day out. Their only choices are to improve
             | their wages, conditions, both, or go bankrupt.
        
             | wing-_-nuts wrote:
             | Here in america farmers hire illegals to harvest crops,
             | claiming that no american would do the work. This has
             | always struck me as a _really_ terrible excuse. I 'm sorry,
             | you can't simply break the law because you'd have to pay an
             | american $20 / hr to do the work. Sure, it means that your
             | tomatoes are more expensive, but also, now there's a hell
             | of an incentive to apply automation to the problem yes? If
             | you don't like the law, maybe pressure your representatives
             | to reform immigration instead of just hoping everyone turns
             | a blind eye to your exploitation.
        
               | FireBeyond wrote:
               | A couple of years ago, a serial offender food producer
               | was raided, multiple times. 600+ undocumented workers
               | were found, and all spoke of management knowing their
               | status.
               | 
               | The workers were detained, deported, and so on.
               | 
               | After several raids, not so much as a misdemeanor was
               | levied against a single person, nor a fine to the company
               | in general.
        
               | Animats wrote:
               | See Postville Raid [1] That was in 2008. The company
               | owners were some prominent Jews, and the political
               | fallout was so severe that immigration raids pretty much
               | stopped after that.
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postville_raid
        
               | aaron-santos wrote:
               | Kind of makes me think, what's the point when these laws
               | aren't actually enforced?
        
               | abxytg wrote:
               | The point is to punish and cause pain to the immigrants.
               | Regardless of the original justification of a system, the
               | point of a system is what it does or will do. That is
               | what this system does and will do unless changed.
        
               | HarryHirsch wrote:
               | "For my friends, everything. For my enemies, the law."
               | Getulio Vargas had it all worked out.
        
               | Animats wrote:
               | About half of US hired farmworkers are illegal
               | immigrants, says the U.S. Department of Agriculture.[1]
               | It was only 12% in 1991, but passed 50% by 2000.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/farm-
               | labor
        
               | greeneggs wrote:
               | Of course it isn't that simple. If your farm's tomatoes
               | are more expensive than your neighbors' tomatoes, then
               | nobody will buy them. You'll quickly go bankrupt.
               | 
               | It is also difficult because of the two tiers of labor. A
               | farmer will try increasing wages by $1/hour, and still
               | struggle to find enough workers. Wages would probably
               | have to be doubled before new workers--Americans--would
               | start to enter the industry.
        
               | jandrese wrote:
               | This is the reason tariffs exist. You levy a fee that
               | makes the imported food cost as much as food picked using
               | domestic labor.
        
               | mixedCase wrote:
               | Or, you know, you let unprofitable endeavors be
               | substituted by profitable ones, and you just import food
               | from different places where it is profitable. Just make
               | sure not to wage war with them all. That's always an
               | alternative to subsidies and tariffs, but it's not as
               | politically useful.
        
               | jandrese wrote:
               | This is how the US gave up its ability to manufacture so
               | many goods.
        
               | lisper wrote:
               | > reform immigration
               | 
               | That's easier said than done. The problem is that in
               | order to reform immigration you have to do one of two
               | things:
               | 
               | 1. Start treating people fairly, with the result being
               | higher food prices, which will make some of your
               | constituents very unhhappy
               | 
               | 2. Codify the current class structure into law so that
               | you can continue to exploit cheap labor legally. The
               | optics on that are really bad.
               | 
               | Exploiting people off the books is the path of least
               | resistance for everyone, including the workers
               | (manifestly so, or they wouldn't risk life and limb to be
               | here).
        
               | colinmhayes wrote:
               | If farmers paid enough to get Americans to do seasonal
               | farm labor their produce would cost twice as much as
               | central/south American produce and they would immediately
               | go out of business as everyone buys cheap imported fruit.
        
               | nitrogen wrote:
               | A labor-protectionist strategy has to be paired with a
               | goods-protectionist strategy (tariffs or bans on
               | imports).
        
               | freen wrote:
               | Sounds like they don't have a business, and should shut
               | down.
        
               | rjmunro wrote:
               | You can fix this with import duties. If the country you
               | are importing from doesn't have good labor laws, you
               | charge them 100% extra.
        
               | colinmhayes wrote:
               | People get really pissed off when food gets more
               | expensive. Politicians realize that and will therefore
               | never pass legislation that would cause such drastic
               | price increases on food.
        
               | wing-_-nuts wrote:
               | If they enforced the laws already on the books, they'd
               | _have_ to pass new laws to fix things. I see that as a
               | net positive. If you selectively enforce against illegal
               | immigrants, well, that 's very much a 'rules for thee,
               | not for me' situation isn't it?
        
               | pg_bot wrote:
               | Now everyone is poorer.
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | _Here in america farmers hire illegals to harvest crops,
               | claiming that no american would do the work_
               | 
               | This is a political talking point that has been repeated
               | so often that people believe it is true.
               | 
               | During the recession of 2008, there were stores on local
               | TV news in many places showing unemployed Americans
               | waiting in long lines for the opportunity do do those
               | jobs that the politicians kept saying no American wanted
               | to do for those wages. Meatpacking plants, especially,
               | had more than enough Americans to choose from who were
               | willing to work for low wages.
               | 
               | Because these things happened in "flyover" states, they
               | were only very rarely shown on television on the coasts,
               | and so the meme stuck.
               | 
               | A similar oft-repeated lie is that American farmers are
               | all a bunch of Republican hillbillies who hate brown
               | immigrants.
               | 
               | Around 2010, I attended a conference in Seattle for
               | farmers in the Pacific Northwest. The main topic of
               | discussion was how to increase legal immigration from
               | Mexico so that they could have more farmworkers to pick
               | the cherries and apples and mint and whatnot. These
               | people were talking about goals of making people from
               | Mexico and Latin America U.S. citizens in staggering
               | numbers.
               | 
               | The more you actually go places and do things and meet
               | people and talk to them, the more you realize that the
               | words coming out of the political organizations on the
               | coasts are mostly for their own benefit, and do not
               | reflect reality.
        
               | fredophile wrote:
               | I don't think your points really contradict your first
               | statement. First, people tend to drop their standards on
               | the type of work they're willing to do and pay they'll
               | accept when they're desperate. In 2008 a lot of people
               | needed a job. Any job was better than no job. I'm not
               | surprised that jobs that would normally be unpopular had
               | lines of people applying at that time.
               | 
               | Your second point about farmers trying to increase legal
               | immigration in 2010 clearly indicates most Americans
               | won't regularly do this work for the wages being offered.
               | Why else would farmers be looking to hire immigrant
               | workers just 2 years after locals were lining up to get
               | these jobs?
               | 
               | While it would be nice if there was a way to get enough
               | immigrants working legally to fill those jobs that
               | doesn't seem to have happened. Short of another large
               | economic downturn I don't see Americans working those
               | jobs either. That leaves people who are working in the US
               | illegally to fill the gap.
        
               | jbroson wrote:
               | My somewhat educated guess is that these farmers in the
               | PNW don't share the same politics as farmers in the rural
               | south or midwest.
               | 
               | That and Republicans have grown way more hostile to
               | immigration since 2010, so it's an interesting anecdote
               | but not sure how well it translates across the US, where
               | polling shows farmers are overwhelmingly Republican who
               | tend also tend to hate immigration legal or not.
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | _My somewhat educated guess is that these farmers in the
               | PNW don 't share the same politics as farmers in the
               | rural south or midwest_
               | 
               | When you say it's an "educated" guess, educated how? It
               | only seems to reflect the usual bigotry that comes out of
               | the coasts.
               | 
               |  _polling shows farmers are overwhelmingly Republican who
               | tend also tend to hate immigration legal or not_
               | 
               | If you're going to make a statement that sweeping, you
               | really should back it up with credible sources.
        
               | enriquec wrote:
               | "where polling shows farmers are overwhelmingly
               | Republican who tend also tend to hate immigration legal
               | or not."
               | 
               | source?
        
           | Verdex wrote:
           | At college I had a professor who I worked for who grew up in
           | Romania. Apparently the song that kids had back in the day
           | was: "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us."
        
           | intrasight wrote:
           | That is, of course, the solution everywhere that companies
           | complain about not being able to hire skilled employees. Fund
           | it and they will come.
        
             | smnrchrds wrote:
             | This kinda sounds like saying "why are poor countries poor?
             | Can't they just pay everyone more and then they won't be
             | poor?" I get what you are saying but I don't think this
             | will work if the problem is country-wide. You can't just
             | magically increase everyone's wages in a country.
        
               | intrasight wrote:
               | 1. The problem isn't country wide. 2. Don't have to
               | increase everyone's - just those with a "shortage".
               | Companies want a market economy - except when it comes to
               | salaries.
        
               | smnrchrds wrote:
               | > _1. The problem isn 't country wide_
               | 
               | Sorry, I though I was on the Romania subthread.
        
           | k3oni wrote:
           | Ha, I know this all too well(2000-2006) and it's strange to
           | see/hear it's still happening now.
        
           | vbezhenar wrote:
           | https://youtu.be/-Jh0EN1De4Q
           | 
           | sorry for pun. But that's not always a solution. Sometimes
           | employer is greedy. Sometimes his business just does not
           | allow to pay enough salary.
        
           | filleduchaos wrote:
           | > The solution to their problem is really simple: make better
           | offers.
           | 
           | That's certainly a _simple_ solution.
           | 
           | The problem with simple solutions is that they are near
           | guaranteed to not actually be feasible or realistic.
        
             | alecbz wrote:
             | If it's literally this or the company folds, that seems
             | realistic.
        
             | yrgulation wrote:
             | Unrelated to the initial post.
             | 
             | > The problem with simple solutions is that they are near
             | guaranteed to not actually be feasible or realistic.
             | 
             | This. There is no amount of money anyone sane can be given
             | to stay in Romania. Most recently i've read they
             | (hospitals) were tying covid patients to their beds.
             | 
             | Couldn't help but comment on this as some of things i
             | discovered are shocking for an eu member country (or any
             | country for that matter), such as EU leading human
             | trafficking, police corruption, collapsing health care, and
             | the list goes on.
             | 
             | But sure, the simple solution is to give people money, not
             | the constant abuse taking place at work and outside that
             | makes people want to flee that place.
        
               | fishtacos wrote:
               | That's every poor country in existence. Not everyone has
               | the same mindset as you, however. Provided with basic
               | incentives, many, if not most, would not want to leave
               | family, friends, common culture, etc, just for a wealthy
               | life - they just want basic stability.
               | 
               | Companies paying more (offering more at least) would
               | begin to slow this domino effect, which raises standards
               | of living and provides more funding for the government to
               | provide services and ultimately pressure for increases in
               | quality of life by the voting public. Everyone wins.
               | 
               | Ultimately not everyone can emigrate - it's an
               | impossibility. The brain drain will continue to be real,
               | so it's incumbent upon these companies hiring to raise
               | their wages and retain talent.
        
               | yrgulation wrote:
               | Agreed - my statement is in regards to "simple
               | solutions".
        
               | fishtacos wrote:
               | That was my point. The simplest solutions are sometimes
               | the most effective, as well. Incentivizing brain power to
               | remain the country via pay increases seems like the most
               | basic approach one can take, considering the GP was
               | talking about Romanian studios complaining they can't
               | find/hold talent and they are competing with the rest of
               | the EU.
        
               | notahacker wrote:
               | The simplest solutions are the most effective, until you
               | realise it isn't at all simple to match the 200-500% pay
               | increase they're emigrating for.
        
               | [deleted]
        
         | joezydeco wrote:
         | _then it shouldn 't be a tough decision to make_
         | 
         | You'll continually be amazed at the human tendency to double
         | down instead of admitting a mistake.
        
           | m463 wrote:
           | They could also hire expensive consultants (who will just
           | call up the ex-employee, and _listen_. maybe to laughter.)
        
         | throwthescene wrote:
         | Throwaway purely so that I can comment. I've had this happen
         | before.
         | 
         | Years ago I left a rather awful company - I left on great terms
         | with my boss, though I hated the company. I was the last person
         | who knew how to release X product. While I documented
         | everything, after I left, the wiki lost its mind, backups
         | apparently weren't a thing, and the director of IT moved to
         | Bermuda.
         | 
         | Fast forward 6 months.. a contractual obligation existed to
         | release the software. They still hadn't successfully built (yup
         | autoconf, make and friends), let alone know where to build it.
         | I got the call you always dream about, 30 days prior to the
         | release being due.
         | 
         | My boss asked me to do him a favour - I reminded him that I
         | quit due to a lack of promotion and raises. He asked what I
         | want, and I asked for 125K, which clearly he scoffed at. Then I
         | reminded him that it was a 10M deal they'd signed, because we
         | had an all hands. The CEO got involved and screamed at me for
         | 'torpedoing the company'. I walked out and calmly informed them
         | both along the way the price was now 250K, non negotiable.
         | 
         | I ignored every single mail (and legal letter) sent me way.
         | With 10 days left, they agreed. I had the company deposit a
         | cheque in escrow with lawyers of my choosing. We signed
         | contracts, and I did my thing. Four days of work. It was well
         | worth it.
         | 
         | Dougie, if you're reading this I hope your cringing.
        
           | deevolution wrote:
           | Absolute chad badassery
        
           | rolobio wrote:
           | Why a check with your lawyers? Why not just deposit into your
           | personal account?
        
             | ghgdynb1 wrote:
             | The idea is that you want a trusted third party because
             | either of the two adversarial parties could screw the other
             | over.
             | 
             | The company could say: we're going to pay you 125 and you
             | could sue us and spend 60k and two years or just settle for
             | that, after he's already done the work.
             | 
             | The guy could demand the payment directly to his account
             | and then not deliver, and the firm would be in the same
             | situation.
             | 
             | By depositing the funds in escrow, they're making sure that
             | the money is there and in the hands of people whose only
             | incentive is to give it to the correct party upon
             | fulfillment of the contract.
        
             | dqpb wrote:
             | It went into an escrow account, presumably until he
             | completed the work
        
             | bityard wrote:
             | Look up what "escrow" is. When 1/4 million dollars is on
             | the line, you don't take the company's word that they'll
             | pay you afterward, and they don't take your word for it
             | that you'll actually deliver the service.
        
               | Aloha wrote:
               | 1/8th of a million.
        
               | brobinson wrote:
               | Last time I checked, $250,000 was 1/4 of one million
               | dollars.
        
               | Aloha wrote:
               | Oops, I missed the last part of the paragraph where he
               | raised the price.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | andyv wrote:
             | With the check held in escrow, it makes cheating harder.
             | 
             | The contractor knows that the money has been paid by the
             | company and won't be withheld after the job is done.
             | 
             | The company knows that the contractor doesn't have the
             | money until the job is done.
        
           | acejam wrote:
           | This is my dream. Is that bad?
        
           | m-p-3 wrote:
           | Damn, I'd pay a good part of my mortgage in 4 days with that.
           | You played your cards well.
        
             | toyg wrote:
             | "A good part"? Lol, I'd pay it all and have enough spare to
             | buy a midrange car...
        
           | OneLeggedCat wrote:
           | This is the most beautiful thing I've read today. Thank you.
        
           | tofuahdude wrote:
           | I love this with all my heart. You did exactly the right
           | thing at every step.
        
             | ycombinete wrote:
             | Funnily enough it made me sick to my stomach. I manage a
             | small company and the idea of being extorted in such a
             | blase and psychopathic fashion terrifies me to even think
             | about.
        
               | DubiousPusher wrote:
               | This is not extortion. The company made choices that left
               | significant leverage in the hands of another business.
               | That business correctly perceived the value of the
               | services it could render and priced them accordingly.
               | 
               | This is exactly the free market at work regarding labor.
               | Have a problem with the free market if you like, many of
               | us do but do not accuse this poster of criminal action
               | equivalent to a protection racket.
        
               | johnchristopher wrote:
               | What's the rationale for doubling the first price ? Why
               | is it a more fair price ?
        
               | DubiousPusher wrote:
               | The market answer to that is, the seller underpriced
               | their services to begin with, regardless of the personal
               | motivation for increasing the price.
               | 
               | To clarify, the market would likely not allow this
               | specific work to be sold at this price normally. But the
               | buyer wasn't just buying specific work they were buying
               | specific work to be completed by a specific date. The
               | work in isolation does not have this value but the work
               | completed by a certain day does. Companies use this
               | rationale all the time charging more for expedited
               | services.
               | 
               | It's especially common in construction and manufacturing
               | where costs double or even triple when expedited delivery
               | is required.
        
               | woofcat wrote:
               | How is it extortion? If you need 1 resource in the whole
               | world, the supply is 1. If your demand is great then you
               | get to pay the price.
               | 
               | This person left the company, and documented everything.
               | What should they do, come in and save the day for $15/hr?
        
               | 1123581321 wrote:
               | It's a fair fee for such valuable work done for an
               | apparently abusive, and possibly litigious, company.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | exikyut wrote:
               | "Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an
               | emergency on my par--wait did you say $250,000?"
               | 
               | If your company were in the hands of incompetents, but
               | still kept going _in spite of the incompetents_ because
               | it had gotten its foot wedged in the door or whatever,
               | and then fell apart in ways you could only scorn, how
               | would you view that sort of situation?
        
               | draw_down wrote:
               | God forbid engineers be paid for their work. Typical HN
        
               | leesalminen wrote:
               | I owned a small company. After selling it, and giving 2+
               | more years of my life for the new owners to figure out
               | how to replace me, they didn't. On my last day I told
               | them that if they ever needed anything my rate is
               | $5,000/day, non negotiable. It's kept them at bay for
               | now. I have no ethical qualms with my decision. It's
               | business.
        
               | rangerelf wrote:
               | > ...I manage a small company...
               | 
               | And you identify with this band of miscreants? That's
               | embarrassing.
        
               | zentiggr wrote:
               | Sounds like your best next step is to become an exemple
               | of software/infrastructure best practices - get
               | everything in the best backup/recovery solution you can,
               | document every detail any time an issue comes up, and
               | above all treat your people like the vaaluable assets
               | they can be.
               | 
               | You may be doing any of that already, since I don't know
               | anything about you except your one comment.
               | 
               | But the answer to your fear of exploitation is avoid
               | making people hate you/your environment enough to want to
               | protect themselves from it.
        
               | sufehmi wrote:
               | "extorted"
               | 
               | This is pure slander
               | 
               | The company can avoid this if they only care to maintain
               | the documentation / wiki left behind by said person
               | 
               | When they failed to do even just basic proper operations,
               | it's their own fault.
               | 
               | I'm a business owner and a consultant, and I too charge
               | more for these kind of asshole clients, because of the
               | extra stress.
               | 
               | But nowadays I just try to avoid them, it's just too
               | damaging for your own sanity. Their kind of stupidity,
               | self-entitlement, and ignorance is on a completely
               | different level.
        
               | dctoedt wrote:
               | > _This is pure slander_
               | 
               | <pedantry>It's libel (written) not slander (oral);
               | "defamation" is the generic noun. </pedantry>
        
               | doodpants wrote:
               | Does libel magically turn into slander if a blind person
               | uses a screen reader? Asking for a friend. ;-)
        
               | gota wrote:
               | Your comment made me curious and I checked - it is not
               | the physical channel that matters, it is whether the
               | media is _transient_ or not.
               | 
               | It seems that paying to skywrite (you know, small plane
               | making artificial clouds) could be slander but not libel
        
               | dctoedt wrote:
               | > _whether the media is _transient_ or not_
               | 
               | Citation? By that light, a DVD containing defamatory
               | speech would be libelous, but that's generally not how
               | courts see it.
               | 
               | From the (highly-influential) U.S. Court of Appeals for
               | the Second Circuit, summarizing New York law (which is
               | quite typical): "Defamation, consisting of the twin torts
               | of libel and slander, is the invasion of the interest in
               | a reputation and good name. Generally, spoken defamatory
               | words are slander; written defamatory words are libel.
               | Libel is a method of defamation expressed in writing or
               | print." [0]
               | 
               | https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=601727562995
               | 661...
        
               | emayljames wrote:
               | What about the other way, subtitles.
        
               | yowlingcat wrote:
               | The idea of /you/ mismanaging your company in such a
               | "blase and psychopathic fashion" is more what should
               | terrify you. Remember, /you/ manage a small company, not
               | the person you hire. If you end up in such a mismanaged
               | position, the manager who let it get there is you, not
               | the employee.
        
               | burnte wrote:
               | Then treat your employees better and adhere to best
               | practices and you won't be subject to such "extortion".
               | Once we have elft yoru company, especailly if it was
               | because we were treated poorly, we are under NO
               | compulsion to help you for free. If the idea of paying
               | 1.25% of the value of a deal to make sure the deal
               | happens seems excessive, you're greedy, and that's why
               | his price went to 2.5%.
        
               | BlargMcLarg wrote:
               | Business is business. The right to fire people, deny them
               | raises and form binding contracts in regards to their
               | work comes at a price. GP did not act malicious, rather,
               | they acted in the same self-interest most bosses, CEOs
               | and companies act while trying to stand on the moral high
               | ground.
               | 
               | Coding standards, documentation requirements, meetings
               | and code reviews exist for a reason, too. It's not like
               | companies are defenseless.
        
               | snerbles wrote:
               | The employee documented everything, but said
               | documentation was not backed up by the company.
               | Furthermore, the company did not train or hire an
               | adequate replacement for said employee for _six months_.
               | 
               | This is a gross failure of leadership at the company, and
               | the former employee has every right to negotiate
               | compensation for the inconvenience of having to work for
               | them again.
        
               | whatever1 wrote:
               | Thinking about business continuity is literally your job.
               | Not your engineers' job.
        
               | OneLeggedCat wrote:
               | Hopefully you wouldn't mismanage your own company and
               | treat your employees like shit. Probably you are a better
               | person than that, and can avoid this ever happening to
               | you.
        
               | vagrantJin wrote:
               | I see and understand your sentiment but, in my rather
               | insignificant few years in the workforce - carrots,
               | dipped in vanilla chocolate and honey, generally tend to
               | work better than the stick.
               | 
               | The company could have apologised, and do a lot more ego
               | stroking before asking a favour which they can pay for
               | and maybe throw in an all expenses paid weekend with the
               | SO as a thank you. Not only will you get goodwill but
               | future problems are going to be significantly cheaper to
               | solve. Even if you have a bad break up - as a business
               | owner you should understand the value of mending bridges.
               | It's cheaper than losing sleep at night and losing your
               | steak dinner to a bad stomach.
        
               | bitcharmer wrote:
               | Extortion? Wow, you have no idea what you're talking
               | about. Good luck with that attitude.
        
               | acheron wrote:
               | You're terrified that you might treat your employees so
               | badly that you would need to pay a lot to resolve a
               | situation? Seems like that's entirely within your
               | control.
        
               | thrower123 wrote:
               | In this situation, you could always just tell the former
               | employer to take a flying fuck at a rolling donut, and
               | not respond to them.
               | 
               | That's probably what they deserve, if they come asking
               | for a favor and then start getting abusive.
        
               | klibertp wrote:
               | I think this is just flamebait. Uses emotionally charged
               | words without any other substance. Both the comment and
               | responses to it (including this one) add nothing to the
               | discussion.
        
               | heterodoxxed wrote:
               | Have you tried learning to code?
        
               | Judgmentality wrote:
               | > Funnily enough it made me sick to my stomach.
               | 
               | That an overworked employee who had already left the
               | company would stick up for himself? Or that a company
               | would go to such efforts to try to manipulate a former
               | employee?
               | 
               | I realize my tone doesn't hide my feelings, but even if
               | we disagree I'd still be curious to hear more.
        
               | ycombinete wrote:
               | My apologies, I edited my comment as you were typing I
               | think. I added some more.
        
               | marktangotango wrote:
               | IMO your edit didn't help and you're not getting a lot of
               | sympathy. The point wasn't that the employee is
               | psychopathic as you say, but that management was
               | incompetent by not ensuring a transfer of knowledge and
               | validating before the employee left. You as the buinsess
               | owner should plan for people to not be available and no
               | one person can derail a $10M contract. This is also
               | called the "bus factor".
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_factor
        
               | jschwartzi wrote:
               | Also yelling at someone who is the only person who can
               | solve your problem is not a good negotiating strategy,
               | especially when it reminds them of why they left.
               | 
               | Walking away from a toxic situation is not
               | "psychopathic." It's common sense and if we all did it
               | more then the psychopaths who expect us to stick around
               | through it all would finally learn how to treat other
               | people with respect. It's a job, not a marriage.
        
               | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
               | > yelling at someone who is the only person who can solve
               | your problem is not a good negotiating strategy
               | 
               | Sadly, I've seen this. Not first hand, but it happened to
               | a friend and I have no reason to doubt his version of the
               | story.
        
               | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
               | Consider that you are only hearing one side of the story
               | and taking it entirely at face value.
        
               | hharlequin wrote:
               | I think enough of us have been on the same side of this
               | story that we feel fairly comfortable taking it at face
               | value, even if we're only applying it to said personal
               | experience in a wishful fashion.
        
               | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
               | Yeah, HN at it's finest I suppose. He's like you, he says
               | what you want to hear, therefore you believe him. No need
               | to consider the possibility that maybe there might
               | actually be another point-of-view.
        
               | cogman10 wrote:
               | I mean... what could the other side of the story actually
               | be?
               | 
               | "We tried to hire back an employee to build something
               | that we didn't train or try and figure out ourselves and
               | a deadline forced us to pay a large lump sum to that
               | employee".
               | 
               | No matter how you slice it, that's really shitty planning
               | on the businesses side. They should have spent the time
               | and money learning how to maintain their shit. By not
               | doing it, they paid a huge price.
        
               | gambiting wrote:
               | I imagine if it came down to it they could try to pin it
               | on him and say he didn't provide documentation he said he
               | did, and that's why this entire 10M project now can't be
               | delivered.
               | 
               | Luckily for him they decided it's easier to just pay the
               | fee.
        
               | cogman10 wrote:
               | Even if he was a shitty employee that doesn't obligate
               | him to work for a price favorable to the company. Hell,
               | they could have fired him for not documenting shit.
               | 
               | Because here's the thing, even with how weak US labor
               | laws are, one thing they don't allow is for a company to
               | come back and sue your for incompetence. So long as they
               | didn't go out of their way to sabotage things, they are
               | free and clear.
        
               | notyourday wrote:
               | That won't work in most reasonable countries. A company
               | that is no longer employs someone cannot make that person
               | work. In the situations similar to the ones that are
               | being described, the time is not on the side of the
               | company - they have a dead line, a former employees does
               | not.
        
               | sideshowb wrote:
               | Op says he did provide documentation but they lost it
               | (and hadn't been backing up) after he left
        
               | gambiting wrote:
               | Of course, but that wouldn't stop them from saying
               | otherwise, suing and binding him in prelonged and
               | expensive legal battle, would it?
        
               | bananabreakfast wrote:
               | sure it does. the company would have to prove malicious
               | intent beyond a reasonable doubt and not leaving adequate
               | documentation absolutely does not meet that requirement.
        
               | ptero wrote:
               | This seems absolutely unrealistic to me. Can you find a
               | precedent? A single precedent of the company suing an
               | engineer (individual contributor, not a manager) for
               | quality of work after he left? I think if they tried they
               | would have been laughed out of court; and out of all
               | their future contracts, too.
        
               | derefr wrote:
               | We're talking about who's morally in the wrong here, not
               | whether it's a good idea to do this.
        
               | notyourday wrote:
               | Lawsuits come with discovery. Discovery is a terrible
               | thing for a plaintiff that lies in the lawsuit.
        
               | nimih wrote:
               | Even if they did "pin it on him," why should he care,
               | exactly? Seems to me like he had no obligations here,
               | contractual, ethical, or otherwise.
        
               | gambiting wrote:
               | Well because if he was taken to court that costs time and
               | money, even if ultimately the lawsuit fails, no?
        
               | Bud wrote:
               | You seem very confused about what "extortion" means, and
               | also about what "psychopathic" means. So I'd suggest
               | starting there.
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | That's not extortion, simply hard-nosed commercial
               | negotiation.
        
               | tcoff91 wrote:
               | The fact that you'd refer to this as extortion makes me
               | sick. The management/capital class loves the free market
               | except for when it applies to labor, then suddenly it's
               | extortion when supply and demand don't work in your
               | favor.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | Yea, this is one of those "I want to believe" stories! It's
             | practically engineer-porn. Everyone who has quit a shitty
             | employer whose technology was a house of cards resting on
             | the point of a needle is cheering OP on. We all have that
             | fantasy that the house will finally fall over, the company
             | will have its comeuppance, and we're the one person in the
             | world with the knowledge to fix it.
        
           | kstrauser wrote:
           | Hell. Yes. That's absolutely beautiful, and ethically
           | completely correct.
           | 
           | I have bosses at previous companies that I'd help for free
           | today because they were good to me and we parted on friendly
           | terms. One boss helped me move my house once, and I'm not
           | about to charge him to fix some random issue.
           | 
           | I have other bosses whom I'd require a cleared wire transfer
           | of money before I'd lift a pinky to help them, because they
           | were not nice people and I don't want to associate with them
           | or assist them with anything. If someone in this camp
           | approached me, I'd have a story just like yours afterward.
        
           | SteveNuts wrote:
           | What did their legal letters try to pin on you? Did they try
           | to say you were somehow legally required to help them?
        
             | throwthescene wrote:
             | The letters stated that I had a contractual obligation to
             | assist. But I noticed at the top they were stamped 'without
             | prejudice'. I asked my friend what that meant, and he said
             | that technically it's not a legal letter - so I ignored
             | them.
             | 
             | For a while, I made it game to light the various
             | communications on fire in interesting ways, but it got
             | boring.
        
               | egorfine wrote:
               | > I had a contractual obligation to assist
               | 
               | Did they have a legal reason to think so?
        
         | blunte wrote:
         | Yes. And after the boat is righted, fire every exec from IT
         | Director upward through CEO.
         | 
         | That last part may not be necessary though, as customers will
         | jump ship and the company will probably sink anyway.
        
           | Nextgrid wrote:
           | > customers will jump ship and the company will probably sink
           | anyway.
           | 
           | Depends, they might have a captive market or a customer base
           | that's non technical and doesn't understand how bad this is.
           | 
           | If their systems are like this, chances are their offering
           | isn't anything groundbreaking and the competition already
           | provides a better service for possibly even cheaper, so the
           | customers who are willing to jump ship would've done so long
           | ago and the fact they're still in business suggests they have
           | a complacent customer base that's likely to stick to them
           | even despite this incident.
           | 
           | The same reason this technical debt was left unchecked for
           | ages applies to customers. The task of migrating to another
           | provider will most likely rot forever in a Jira board
           | somewhere and they will keep paying their bill in the
           | meantime.
        
         | JKCalhoun wrote:
         | Is there another industry where a few employees with "domain
         | knowledge" can sink a company?
         | 
         | Asking because, while, yes, throwing money at the problem might
         | be a solution, I think the obvious _bigger_ issue is how does
         | one allow themselves to get into this situation?
         | 
         | Or rather, how does one _avoid_ getting into this situation.
         | Because it seems to me that the software industry of late has
         | become so mired in esoteric layers of abstraction that this
         | feels less like an outlier scenario for a mismanaged company
         | but more like an inevitable one for many otherwise well managed
         | companies in the industry.
        
           | hunter-2 wrote:
           | >Is there another industry where a few employees with "domain
           | knowledge" can sink a company?
           | 
           | I guess any company where leadership got there without
           | progress on the technical side. Law firm partners get there
           | after being lawyers. Consultant partners get there after
           | consulting.
           | 
           | But if you are the CEO of an IT company without ever having
           | to code, then you may never know the things you must take
           | care to prevent a washout.
        
           | foobiekr wrote:
           | There are a LOT of industries with this problem. Specialist
           | stuff like military shipbuilding is an example, but also
           | things like precision ball bearings. Knowledge gets lost all
           | the time and old timers have to be brought back in after the
           | fact. Or the technology is just lost and a replacement has to
           | be reinvented (famously, the production of tamper material
           | for the US thermonuclear nuclear weapons).
        
             | shagie wrote:
             | The precision ball bearings thing reminded me of a news
             | item from a few years ago: https://www.washingtonpost.com/n
             | ews/worldviews/wp/2017/01/18...
             | 
             | The relevant part of the article:
             | 
             | > To anyone outside of the ballpoint pen manufacturing
             | world, it might seem hard to understand what, exactly, is
             | so surprising about this development. China already
             | produces 38 billion ballpoint pens a year, according to
             | China Daily, which is about 80 percent of all ballpoint
             | pens in the world. That's a lot of pens, but there was a
             | catch: China had long been unable to produce a high-quality
             | version of the most important part of the pen, its tip.
             | 
             | > The tip of a ballpoint pen is what makes it a ballpoint
             | pen. At the tip, a freely rotating ball is held in a small
             | socket which connects it to an ink reservoir that allows
             | the pen to write or draw lines. Manufacturing a ballpoint
             | pen tip that can write comfortably for a long period of
             | time requires high-precision machinery and precisely thin
             | steel, but for years China was unable to match those
             | crafted by foreign companies.
        
           | gregmac wrote:
           | At the highest level, this is a leadership issue. There's a
           | lack of someone at a sufficiently high level (eg: C-suite)
           | that properly understands technology, and that's probably
           | caused by the rest of the leadership team not understanding
           | their limitations.
           | 
           | At a lower level, it's allowing individuals to become
           | knowledge silos (or having a bus factor [1] of 1); lack of
           | documentation; not having+testing disaster recovery plans;
           | neglecting systems, code bases, and platforms; letting
           | technical debt accrue endlessly (or worse: not even realize
           | that's what you're doing).
           | 
           | How to avoid? Make sure there's a strong, competent
           | technology leader with a vested interest in the company
           | succeeding, and empower them to make the changes they need
           | to.
           | 
           | What should that person be doing? Making sure all the stuff I
           | just said doesn't happen.
           | 
           | [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_factor
        
           | ufmace wrote:
           | > Or rather, how does one avoid getting into this situation.
           | 
           | IMO, the problem is technical debt. Most likely, in the
           | majority of these cases, the engineers working on the system
           | knew perfectly well that it was a mess, was very difficult to
           | learn how to maintain, and many parts were dangerous to
           | modify. Most likely they told management multiple times that
           | this was a problem and what the consequences of it would be.
           | They would have refused to budget resources for improving it,
           | so everyone either saw the writing on the wall and quit, or
           | gutted it out and learned how to manage the system
           | eventually. Maybe the system limps along for a while longer,
           | but it's only getting worse and the knowledge needed to
           | maintain it more siloed and specialized. Eventually you lose
           | a key person, something breaks that nobody left can figure
           | out, or maybe the whole thing just implodes like the main
           | story here.
           | 
           | To avoid it, you must understand the pattern, hire good
           | technical people, and give them the resources needed to
           | improve the system in an orderly fashion.
        
           | ISL wrote:
           | > Or rather, how does one avoid getting into this situation.
           | 
           | Documentation?
        
             | giantrobot wrote:
             | The issue with "documentation" is there are _never_ enough
             | resources devoted to it at most companies. When given a
             | schedule it only covers the main project goal(s) and no
             | time for documentation or refactoring or any quality of
             | life improvements.
             | 
             | Significant documentation is also not something easily
             | written in slack time. With any non-trivial project good
             | documentation is a full time effort. It also needs to be
             | updated as the project evolves lest it become out of date
             | and incongruous with the behavior of the system.
             | 
             | There's dreams of in-line documentation but that's only
             | going to cover individual methods and classes and not
             | necessarily whole modules or major subsystems of a project.
             | It's also not going to necessarily cover in-line
             | documentation from other parts of a project in different
             | languages e.g. comments in config files.
             | 
             | There's lots of technical ways to _help_ documentation but
             | there 's no replacement for documentation being a high
             | level project goal with resources allotted to it.
        
               | flukus wrote:
               | It doesn't help that "Technical Writer" is now an
               | incredibly rare job title, it was one of the first in a
               | long line of specializations that were pushed on to
               | general developers. As you mentioned, they were never
               | allocated the extra time but also don't have the training
               | and experience that technical writers once did. It was
               | also a very poor target for outsourcing.
               | 
               | The specializations common on a team even 20 years ago
               | was much closure to the "Surgical Team" model from the
               | mythical man month than what we have today.
        
               | gregmac wrote:
               | Part of a way around this is broadening your definition
               | of "documentation".
               | 
               | For example, in code: good naming, simple structure, unit
               | tests, and useful comments all can count. A set of easy-
               | to-understand unit tests that cover real scenarios is
               | much better than even the greatest documentation ever
               | written.
               | 
               | A fully scripted build and ideally also deployment (CI/CD
               | pipeline) beats a checklist with tens of items that have
               | to manually followed.
               | 
               | An issue system with good descriptions of changes
               | (including why and what), reproduction steps, expected
               | outcomes, links to related issues, etc also can go a long
               | way.
               | 
               | All of this stuff has the side effect of making day-to-
               | day work simpler, overall, while actually just being a
               | part of that work.
        
               | giantrobot wrote:
               | > For example, in code: good naming, simple structure,
               | unit tests, and useful comments all can count. A set of
               | easy-to-understand unit tests that cover real scenarios
               | is much better than even the greatest documentation ever
               | written.
               | 
               | 1. Naming things is hard. It's a bit of a joke but good
               | descriptive yet usable naming is hard. It can get harder
               | after refactoring or adding in features you didn't expect
               | the last time you were in the module.
               | 
               | 2. Project structures start out simple. Then you need to
               | add some feature or fix some major issue with a due date
               | of last week. As a project gets bigger the simple
               | structure of yesterday might not serve the needs of
               | today. Resources for refactoring are usually somewhere
               | around the priority level of "Good Documentation".
               | 
               | 3. Comments need maintenance like explicit documentation.
               | Tight schedules lead to "# TODO add documentation here".
               | Then you get the assholes that believe comments or in-
               | line documentation is something you put in check in
               | notes.
               | 
               | 4. A "unit test" that covers a "real scenario" is not a
               | damned unit test. It's an integration test (or however
               | you label it) and it's not likely something your CI/CD
               | system can run on the regular. If a real scenario is
               | touching a production-load DB or something it's a big
               | deal to run the test. Tests like that need resources to
               | _run_ and non-trivial resources to _write_. You 're not
               | just making sure a method returns a float or throws an
               | error correctly.
               | 
               | I'm not saying your suggestions are _bad_ or shouldn 't
               | be used. The issue is management rarely sees any value
               | with documentation, tests, or even code cleanliness.
               | They're rarely incentivized to care about those things so
               | they don't. They get their bonus on feature checkboxes or
               | hitting a deadline. At the end of a project they'll
               | schedule a "documentation" sprint or some dumbass thing
               | that accomplished little useful output. It's worse when
               | you've got a "move fast break things" chanting moron
               | doing the scheduling.
        
             | rantwasp wrote:
             | nah. documentation only goes so far.
             | 
             | you handle this by having and exercising a disaster
             | recovery plan and having (and listening to) competent
             | people that would spot this issue in a jiffy.
        
               | foobiekr wrote:
               | This. I actually think just documentation is, well not
               | completely worthless but close to. Imagine telling
               | someone they could learn to weld airframes by reading.
               | Just no.
        
               | twobitshifter wrote:
               | For software, it's the maintenance task that's helped by
               | documentation not building. They still need to know how
               | to build but it's a lot easier with documentation. I know
               | that when we use software packages we all rely on the
               | documentation to understand how to use it and code our
               | desired behaviors. It's obvious that our own code can
               | benefit from documentation in the same way.
        
               | rantwasp wrote:
               | documentation is required but not sufficient. also,
               | documentation is usually outdated really fast if the
               | person maintaining the system leaves and/or does not care
        
         | viraptor wrote:
         | There's the possibility that those employees are happily
         | retired and don't care. Or they're just not available in many
         | ways.
         | 
         | I know of a hospital which is still refusing to migrate off of
         | a system which is not supported for a decade. Pay more money? 3
         | people worked on it: Adam had a stroke, Bob retired with enough
         | money, Charlie left the country.
        
           | notyourday wrote:
           | I bet if the hospital is to pay Bob/Charlie $1M for 6 months,
           | post tax to fix it they would gladly do it. Note: this does
           | not mean "We will pay you up to a million dollars, Net 90,
           | after an invoice is approved and signed off by fifteen
           | people". This means "We will wire a deposit of $250,000
           | today. The rest will be wired every month in 24 hours after
           | an invoice is issued"
           | 
           | The reality is company execs like to talk about fixing
           | problems with money but rarely are they actually willing to
           | fix a problem with money. In my career I dealt with the exact
           | three companies where execs decided to throw money at the
           | problem bypassing all the fiefdoms and bureaucracies created
           | to avoid rapidly solving problems using money in favor of
           | slow moving, don't step on Jackson the IT manager's toes,
           | approaches. All three solved their problems, destroying the
           | local fiefdoms in a process.
        
             | viraptor wrote:
             | For $1M they can get the new version of the same system
             | installed and likely get a step by step walkthrough of the
             | whole thing by any number of new engineers they want. Also
             | it's a public hospital - for a fraction of $1M they could
             | get people who's only job is to replicate that system
             | running around with pen and paper - they wouldn't have $1M
             | to just drop on a support issue the same day.
             | 
             | In context of this case - if they don't have money to fix
             | their backups
             | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26539988) they likely
             | couldn't drop lots of cash without a serious credit line.
        
               | tw04 wrote:
               | >For $1M they can get the new version of the same system
               | installed and likely get a step by step walkthrough of
               | the whole thing by any number of new engineers they want.
               | 
               | A new system isn't going to do them much good when they
               | don't even know who their customers are. I doubt any
               | customer is going to hang around for a year while you
               | rebuild your system from scratch, ignoring the fact that
               | if they're an MSP the customers may not even have their
               | own copy of the data.
               | 
               | All of that is ignoring the likely contractual
               | obligations they're likely under to maintain the data on
               | their systems.
               | 
               | >Also it's a public hospital - for a fraction of $1M they
               | could get people who's only job is to replicate that
               | system running around with pen and paper - they wouldn't
               | have $1M to just drop on a support issue the same day.
               | 
               | Hospital? He said they're an MSP on reddit:
               | 
               | >Yeah we're an awful MSP. I've been trying to find a new
               | job for quite some time.
               | 
               | https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/ma4mwl/the_abs
               | olu...
        
               | viraptor wrote:
               | > Hospital? He said they're an MSP on reddit:
               | 
               | This thread is about a different case.
        
               | notyourday wrote:
               | That's called priorities. I'm sure as every public
               | hospital it pays a lot money in salaries to those
               | protecting and growing their personal fiefdoms within the
               | hospital.
        
             | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
             | This modern-day feudalism with corporations is really the
             | root of the problem. Managers "patch" broken IT systems
             | with lots of manual labor to actively avoid pointing out
             | how some other manager's system is borked. They doom the
             | company to spend hundreds or even thousands of man hours a
             | year to work around these processes, refusing to allow it
             | to be fixed, keeping the "power" and influence of the
             | broken system with some other manager. They do this hoping
             | to curry favor for the sake of their career prospects.
             | 
             | After 25 years, I'm an expert at making small, efficient
             | software tools to fix local IT workflows. God knows, in the
             | Fortune 250's I've worked at, there are endless
             | opportunities. And, while I've written many solutions, I've
             | seen this political game of thrones thwart my efforts many
             | times. This is how you get the kind of 20-year legacy mess
             | described in the original post: People sacrificing long-
             | term success of the company for short-term success in their
             | careers.
             | 
             | I guess there are 2 kinds of people. Those that think this
             | is just how the world works, and find this to be a
             | perfectly-cromulent way of getting through it, and those,
             | like me, who find it odious. Luckily, I now work for people
             | like me. We do what we can.
        
               | notabee wrote:
               | This applies to similar problems in government as well.
               | Some people care, some just kick the can to whoever is
               | unfortunate enough to inherit the problem in 5-10 years.
               | If you get a few of the latter people in political power,
               | often the best thought out solutions are offered many
               | times and denied because of internal political wrangling.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | zikzak wrote:
             | I have personally turned down an offer very much like this.
             | I could have paid my (at the time) salary and benefits with
             | about 2 days work a week with the option to bill as much
             | time over that as I wanted as long as I agreed to work at
             | least 2 days a week on thier top issues.
             | 
             | The ERP system was a nightmare, though, and the company was
             | difficult to work with (key, long term employees). It was a
             | system I inherited, built out of garbage, that I tried to
             | improve. Before I left, I found a very experienced
             | contractor to take over, on-boarded him, and stayed as a
             | support resource for a couple months. Six months later,
             | he's retired and I'm getting panicked phone calls. I valued
             | (and still do) my current job far more, even though I would
             | probably have done better financially in the short term
             | with the alternative.
             | 
             | A few years ago, I heard they migrated to a new ERP at long
             | last.
        
           | plorkyeran wrote:
           | There's a pretty big gap between "happily retired with enough
           | money to not be worried" and having zero interest in ever
           | getting more money regardless of the rate. After a decade a
           | happily retired person who left amicably and didn't hate
           | their job might even enjoy a short-term contract if you can
           | isolate them from all the petty annoyances that come with a
           | normal job. Charlie leaving the country shouldn't be a
           | dealbreaker either unless you literally have tried to track
           | them down and couldn't.
           | 
           | If the long-gone ex-employees hated their employer and would
           | be happy to see if go out of business then you're in quite a
           | bit more trouble.
        
           | gregmac wrote:
           | I knew someone who was a specialist in doing calibrations on
           | some very specific industrial measurement equipment, much of
           | which was out-of-date but massively expensive to replace.
           | 
           | He had retired, but took another 12 or 18 month contract
           | flying around the country servicing these things. Apparently
           | they asked, and not wanting to do it he quoted what he
           | thought was an insane "go away and leave me alone" fee, but
           | then they said yes. (I have no idea what that fee was or what
           | multiplier he applied, though it definitely brings to mind
           | patio11's standard advice [1]).
           | 
           | [1] https://www.kalzumeus.com/2006/08/14/you-can-probably-
           | stand-...
        
       | IgorPartola wrote:
       | What exactly happens if you break a three month resignation
       | period? I don't advocate doing this in generally but as a
       | hypothetical exercise if this person just stopped showing up for
       | work, what exactly could the company do?
        
         | technics256 wrote:
         | Depends on local law. In this case the user is in Finland under
         | Finnish labor laws.
        
           | jusssi wrote:
           | I just checked for curiosity. The employer can sue for
           | damages they'll have to show.
           | 
           | But there's some additional factors here. If the employer
           | misses salary payments, then they're in breach of that
           | employment contract, and unless they can't fix the situation
           | really soon, that's grounds for immediate termination.
           | 
           | Also in Finland, salaries earned in a normal employment are
           | backed by the state for up to 3 months of missed payments
           | (the state will then try to collect from the employer). So
           | it's relatively safe for an employee to stick with a sinking
           | company. Just get that CV polished and start warming up the
           | network.
        
             | Ekaros wrote:
             | It seems to me that they can sue for 3 months salary. Or
             | the amount of days employee does not work. However in this
             | situation I would imagine they have more immediate concerns
             | so might not get around even to that.
        
         | danjac wrote:
         | Not sure what country the person works in. In addition it could
         | be a situation of a small town / tech backwater and word
         | getting around, regardless of the legal question, so quitting
         | out of contract could get you blacklisted.
         | 
         | Ultimately though a person could not show up for any reason at
         | all (e.g. hit by the proverbial bus) and you need to plan for
         | that. Sounds like a company that just flies by the seat of its
         | pants so they probably have that 3-month clause for that
         | reason.
        
           | michaelt wrote:
           | In terms of personal reputation, once you're in charge of
           | backups at a company that went bankrupt due to the failure of
           | their backups, I'm not sure it makes much difference to your
           | reputation whether you diligently work your notice period or
           | not...
        
         | hef19898 wrote:
         | Depends on the contract and jurisdiction. I had one contract
         | that stipulated a fixed penalty, which made any attempt of
         | ignoring notice periods a calculated risk (the fine wasn't
         | _that_ steep). In any other case, in Germany, I would expect a
         | law suite, incurring costs, stress and time, followed by some
         | kind of agreement between the two parties. As an employee, you
         | don 't necessarily have the time nor the money (there's
         | insurance for legal disputes like that so).
         | 
         | In that particular case, my experience tells me the guy won't
         | get _any_ credit for finding a solution, I would consider sick
         | leave. Burnout, whatever. Doesn 't have any monetary
         | consequences in Europe (at least no harsh ones), and Germany
         | covers up to 6 weeks of salary.
         | 
         | Any way, you can forget about getting goods references. Not
         | that would get them anyway, with an employer like that.
        
           | detaro wrote:
           | At least in Germany, while it's in principle possible to sue
           | the employee for damages, it is very difficult to succeed
           | with that if it isn't downright sabotage. You can't force the
           | employee to work, it quickly goes into negligence on your
           | part if you can't handle an employee going missing, ..., so
           | you'll probably not reach much more than the salary - and for
           | that just terminating the contract early would be easier,
           | either in agreement with the employee or one-sided after they
           | stopped showing up.
        
         | TrackerFF wrote:
         | Well, for one, your work references probably won't be the best.
         | 
         | Even if you're not responsible for the problem itself, leaving
         | your employer in the ditch, when there's a major outage - well,
         | it just doesn't look good (barring some scenario where your
         | employer is completely unreasonable - like not paying you).
         | 
         | It's kinda like a firefighter that decides to turn off the hose
         | and go home, in the middle of a raging fire. Who in their right
         | mind would want to hire him/her in the future?
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | In general, I agree.
           | 
           | But if they get in a situation where management is yelling at
           | them and demanding they work 20 hours a day until this is
           | fixed somehow and they have no idea how to. Management won't
           | bring in consultants, etc. That ship has already sailed.
        
             | dagw wrote:
             | _demanding they work 20 hours a day until this is fixed_
             | 
             | If your manager does that, you can say "No". They still
             | can't fire you without paying you your 3 month wages.
        
           | jjk166 wrote:
           | > It's kinda like a firefighter that decides to turn off the
           | hose and go home, in the middle of a raging fire. Who in
           | their right mind would want to hire him/her in the future?
           | 
           | The firefighter who recognizes when the building is about to
           | collapse and gets out of there is a good firefighter.
        
         | brailsafe wrote:
         | Was curious about that as well. I've never heard of such an
         | obsurd amount of time, and it seems doubtful it would hold up.
         | 
         | "You need to give us 3 months heads up no matter what, but
         | don't worry, we don't have to give you any if you oversleep for
         | a meeting."
        
           | nerbert wrote:
           | This isn't particularly crazy in Europe. It indeed goes both
           | ways.
        
             | ratww wrote:
             | In my experience it's also the same in Latin America, but
             | the notice period is normally of 1-2 months rather than 3-6
             | months.
        
           | ACS_Solver wrote:
           | Perfectly common in large parts of Europe. I also have a 3
           | months notice period, which is pretty much the standard here
           | in Sweden for tech workers or other highly-qualified
           | occupations. For very senior positions, 6 months isn't
           | unheard of.
           | 
           | It goes both ways of course, my employer is also bound by the
           | 3 month period in case they want to fire me.
        
             | wonderwonder wrote:
             | How does getting a new job work? You tell the new company
             | that you have to give 3 months notice? That's some long
             | term planning on the part of the hiring company.
        
               | ACS_Solver wrote:
               | Yes, but that's nothing unusual when the entire industry
               | expects that. The last time I changed jobs, I signed a
               | contract at the end of March, to start in August. That
               | was the three month notice period plus most people are on
               | vacation in July, so my new company would rather have me
               | in August.
               | 
               | There are contractor agencies filling the niche of
               | providing employees on short notice (and usually for a
               | short period), but generally having people begin 3 months
               | later is just something everyone expects and factors into
               | their processes.
               | 
               | The average length of time people spend at a single job
               | is also longer than in the US.
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | Can't speak for Sweden, but we do pretty much exactly
               | that with our India team. They have to give notice well
               | in advance, and so when we hire a new team member we have
               | to do so with the understanding that it will probably be
               | a few months before they join the team.
        
               | Leherenn wrote:
               | Yes exactly. Sometimes they ask you if you can negotiate
               | with your employer to shorten this period, which is often
               | the case.
               | 
               | Of course, they would rather it was shorter, but hiring
               | is already a multi-months long process in most cases, so
               | a few more months is inconvenient, but not the end of the
               | world. If you need someone now, you hire contractors.
        
               | hibbelig wrote:
               | Don't forget that the notice period applies to all
               | companies and all employees. So the whole culture expects
               | that, and works with the long lead times.
        
           | arethuza wrote:
           | I had a 6 month notice period in one role, 3 months isn't
           | uncommon for senior roles, in the UK at least.
        
             | xchaotic wrote:
             | while I agree that this is common in Europe, if the company
             | ceases to exist, what good is the 3 months notice for the
             | employee? If he/she has any options, I'd leave asap and not
             | worry about amicable terms with a soon to be non-existent
             | entity.
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | Fair point - in that case I suspect that would be highly
               | dependent on whether there are any assets remaining in
               | the company and how the local legal system treats
               | employees as creditors.
               | 
               | Mind you - if the company is going down the tubes they
               | are highly unlikely to enforce any job contracts.
        
             | PeterisP wrote:
             | What would be the practical consequences to the employee if
             | they break that notice period in UK, i.e. stop coming to
             | work (or, especially now with Covid, simply stop doing the
             | remote work) sooner than these 3 months have passed?
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | I suspect you _could_ be sued by your employer. Mind you
               | I 've never heard of anyone being sued in that way -
               | can't imagine it would be worth it for the employer
               | unless they could demonstrate a significant financial
               | loss.
        
               | pw201 wrote:
               | I investigated this once (while I was sitting around
               | doing not much during a 3 month notice period, funnily
               | enough). It's as you say, the breach of a contract is
               | something where the employer would have to sue you for
               | damages, and if you're sitting around not doing much,
               | it's going to be hard to argue that losing you has caused
               | them harm, much less enough to make it worth suing over.
               | 
               | I didn't break the contract anyway out of some
               | combination of feeling like it was breaking a promise and
               | the worry that Cambridge is a small town.
        
           | turbinerneiter wrote:
           | It goes both ways, the employer has to give the employee 3
           | months notice as well.
           | 
           | But this is for when both of them can't find a mutual
           | solution. You can always agree to terminate the contract
           | earlier, if both parties agree.
           | 
           | At least that is how it works in Germany.
        
             | puszczyk wrote:
             | Same in Poland -- after 2y on a permanent job contract the
             | leave is 3 months. It goes both ways. I can be shorter if
             | both parties agree.
        
               | yetihehe wrote:
               | Yes, if both parties agree, you can leave at once,
               | otherwise employer can sue you for damages or lost
               | profits (if damages are small, they don't bother) and you
               | don't have unemployment benefits.
        
         | matsemann wrote:
         | If the company is about to go insolvent it would probably be
         | happy about not having to pay for three months. Those three
         | months usually go both ways.
         | 
         | But I think it would be better to keep it above board. Present
         | it as a solution, kinda. Like, "we both want the same thing
         | here".
        
         | ajb wrote:
         | I guess it could be a problem in the US for COBRA (health
         | insurance continuation)? apart from that, if the company is
         | dead I guess there's little they can take away that you aren't
         | going to lose anyway.
         | 
         | [edited to add : not relevant, they're in Finland:
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/ma4mwl/the_absolu...
         | ]
        
           | elif wrote:
           | COBRA still applies if you leave voluntarily.
           | 
           | Source: left voluntarily
        
         | offtop5 wrote:
         | In America absolutely nothing happens. He might have some type
         | of agreement where he gets a severance payment upon
         | resignation, that would be forfeited. If I was him, assuming
         | upper management starts yelling or whatever, I would just
         | leave. Stress can kill you, and stressing over a job is
         | absolutely never worth it because if you die today , they'll
         | post a req for your position by the end of business.
         | 
         | It looks like they could probably sort something out, wouldn't
         | be a bad idea to call up any of the old vets who retired to see
         | if they could come down to the office and contract for a week
         | or so.
        
         | mnd999 wrote:
         | They could not pay you.
         | 
         | Or
         | 
         | If your contract is exclusive they can pay you and prevent you
         | from working for anywhere else (gardening leave).
         | 
         | You can't (at least in most countries) enforce the contract in
         | such a way that you force someone to work.
        
       | alistairSH wrote:
       | Tangent Alert! _I have a 3 months resignation period, so I can 't
       | even leave..._
       | 
       | Maybe it's my (US) American experience, but being unable to quit
       | a job strikes me as a terrible policy. This guy(gal?) is really
       | required to submit 3 months notice or face some sort of
       | repercussions (financial, I assume)?
       | 
       | Does this 3 month period apply in reverse (employer can't fire
       | employees without a full 3 month warning)?
       | 
       | Not that the American system (no cause firing/quitting with no
       | notice) is perfect, but 3 months? Yikes.
        
         | Eremotherium wrote:
         | At least in Germany this goes both ways. The period can also be
         | longer depending on your seniority. This is to give the company
         | time to find a proper replacement for you and allow for a
         | smoother handoff. Of course if both parties agree the grace
         | period can be skipped or shortened.
         | 
         | You usually don't get stuck with duds because there's a
         | probationary period of (max.) 6 months in the beginning in
         | which these protections are not in place.
         | 
         | Also (after the probationary period) the company needs a legal
         | reason to fire you. If they wanna fire you for incompetence
         | oder insubordination they need to have reprimanded you at least
         | once officially, in written form. Only after getting a 2nd
         | reprimand for the SAME THING can they act on it. Meaning if you
         | told the boss to go fuck themselves once and shown up drunk to
         | work once they wouldn't have legal grounds to fire you and if
         | they did you'd drag their ass to labour court and get some kind
         | of compensation.
        
           | littlecranky67 wrote:
           | I don't think it goes both ways. As an employee, your maximum
           | notice period is always 3 months - which is also the legal
           | minimum required period for employers. Now depending on your
           | position, your employer will probably even have longer period
           | (i.e. if covered by a union negotioted tarif). Additionally,
           | you can't even be fired at will - the employer always has to
           | give a reason. "Shrinking down" due to business requirements
           | would be a valid reason, but that would mean that the company
           | cannot fire you and hire someone else for the same position
           | as long as you got the formal qualification.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | acjacobson wrote:
           | There are certain things that you can outright be fired for -
           | such as stealing, I believe. I think that showing up drunk
           | for work might also be one of them?
        
             | Eremotherium wrote:
             | AFAIK showing up drunk isn't enough but if you fuck up (I
             | think that's the legal term) and say you drop the
             | production DB while drunk that you can be fired
             | immediately.
        
               | clipradiowallet wrote:
               | IANAL: In the US, doing something destructive [at work]
               | while intoxicated can be "gross negligence", which is
               | criminal if I remember correctly. Example... you show up
               | to work drunk, get in a forklift, and drive through a
               | wall causing damage.
        
             | jerven wrote:
             | There are more, and they are immediate. And nearly always
             | lead to a lawsuit, because it is only for grave errors in
             | judgement. i.e. theft, violence, endangering co-workers,
             | fraud, misrepresentations to the board and such. So when
             | this is triggered it is never a clean break. Lawsuits can
             | come from both sides as the reason for the firing is grave
             | and the argument doesn't end when a person was kicked out.
        
             | garmaine wrote:
             | Depends. Public employees in Bavaria are allowed to have up
             | to 2 liters of beer for lunch. Is that drunk?
        
             | lqet wrote:
             | > I think that showing up drunk for work might also be one
             | of them?
             | 
             | Yes. Also if you just refuse to do any work.
        
           | Mauricebranagh wrote:
           | Would not these count as gross misconduct?
        
         | dagw wrote:
         | 2-3 month notice in both directions is standard in most of
         | Europe.
        
         | tadzik_ wrote:
         | In Poland it scales over time: you start off with 2 weeks
         | notice (for both sides), after a year or so this jumps to one
         | month, and after 3 years it jumps to 3 months, or something
         | like that. I've seen people quit right before their 3 year
         | anniversary just so that they don't fall into the 3-months-
         | notice period.
         | 
         | I haven't worked much on regular job agreements (been
         | contracting or "contracting" most of my life), but generally if
         | you want to quit you go to your boss and say "hey, I wanna
         | quit" and you negotiate when, regardless of the default
         | requirements (which only come into play if either side doesn't
         | agree). There's no business in keeping an unproductive employee
         | around for 3 months.
        
           | K2L8M11N2 wrote:
           | What do you mean by "contracting" in quotes?
        
             | megous wrote:
             | When you're mostly indistinguishable from an employee,
             | except for the legal relationship.
        
             | sedeki wrote:
             | "Tax minimization" or worse, I suppose.
        
         | fogihujy wrote:
         | > This guy(gal?) is really required to submit 3 months notice
         | or face some sort of repercussions (financial, I assume)?
         | 
         | In theory, the business could sue an ex-employee who just left
         | for damages caused by the breach of contract, but in the real
         | world it would be pretty much impossible to prove that the
         | damages were caused by the employee leaving. In most cases it's
         | simply considered a dick move, and you'll end up with a hole in
         | your CV as you won't ever get a decent reference if you just
         | get up and leave.
         | 
         | > Does this 3 month period apply in reverse (employer can't
         | fire employees without a full 3 month warning)?
         | 
         | Usually yes. And unlike the situation above, employees could
         | probably drag the employer to court for it, unless the employee
         | did something illegal or completely irresponsible during
         | working hours.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | I'm looking to leave my current job but if voluntarily leave in
         | my first year I have to surrender my signing bonus.
         | 
         | It's certainly a crushing feeling to be chained to a job. Even
         | worse are these stupid 2 weeks or unimaginable 3 months notice.
         | As everyone says- you'll never get notice you're being fired.
         | It'll be quick like a mob hit.
        
           | shagie wrote:
           | For many positions, the person isn't a positively
           | contributing member for three to six months. A positive ROI
           | on the expense of hiring them isn't realized until much
           | later. Having signing and relocation bonuses be paid back if
           | the person doesn't stay for a year is quite reasonable in
           | that context.
           | 
           | "We didn't pay for your relocation to X just so that you
           | could change jobs after a few months."
           | 
           | Two weeks notice is a courtesy.
           | 
           | The much maligned PIP is often a hint that you're going to be
           | let go. Rarely is there a "you're being let go today, pack
           | your desk" unless there is cause (the one time I saw it was
           | because someone was using their desktop support credentials
           | to snoop on the CIO's computer - that one they weren't even
           | given the pack your desk) or the company is in trouble (and
           | in which case, things like the WARN period kick in).
        
           | Aeolun wrote:
           | > you'll never get notice you're being fired
           | 
           | In Europe you will. Or you'll be sent home with the
           | respective 3 months in salary anyway, but generally you work
           | your 3 months.
           | 
           | To be fair, I've never seen a notice period longer than a
           | month.
        
         | playing_colours wrote:
         | I guess US fire-at-will system should make contracting even
         | more attractive option for good engineers: you do not get any
         | social protection from being fired at any time unlike say
         | Germany. One solid benefit less to justify pay difference.
         | 
         | Is it the case?
        
           | Mauricebranagh wrote:
           | US contractors don't seem to be able to charge the premium I
           | would expect in the UK.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | Yes and no.
           | 
           | First of all, you get benefits as a full-time employee that
           | contractors don't get, like healthcare, disability insurance,
           | and paid time off. (This all mostly boils down to money of
           | course.)
           | 
           | Probably more importantly, yes, a company can in general
           | simply tell you your services are no longer needed one
           | morning. However, in reality, absent either company
           | downsizing or a documented performance issue, that is
           | unlikely to happen out of the blue. Whereas not renewing a
           | contract at the end of some project is commonplace.
           | 
           | Employee status vs. independent contractors is actually
           | something of a political football at the moment as
           | contractors include both the stereotypical gig economy
           | workers and freelance writers who want to freelance as well
           | as contractors of other sorts.
        
             | alistairSH wrote:
             | Health-care and other benefits would be priced into any
             | contractor's fees. IE, for a full-time job that paid $100k
             | + benefits, you'd need ~$160k on contract to make up for
             | the additional taxes, self-paid benefits, etc.
             | 
             | Looking at peers who struck out on their own, you can make
             | good money as a contractor, but you typically need to be
             | top of your profession and able to command massive fees.
             | And like any business owner, the pressure to always have
             | too much work usually ruins any chance at using the money
             | for longer, more extravagant vacations.
        
           | dghlsakjg wrote:
           | Not quite. If you are let go "without cause", meaning they
           | fire you for no fault of your own, you are entitled to
           | unemployment pay from the government. In my case it was
           | around $800/week for about 4 months while I looked for a new
           | position. It didn't replace my salary, but it was more than
           | enough to pay my bills.
           | 
           | Most large US companies also have a policy of not giving
           | references beyond answering if the person worked there for
           | the time claimed in the position claimed.
           | 
           | There are a number of benefits to full time employment that
           | good engineers appreciate. Healthcare (in the US), known
           | reliable income (this can be a big factor for financing a
           | house mortgage/car), various other benefits (I get massage
           | credit, dental, vision/glasses, acupuncture, physiotherapy).
           | The biggest for me is just avoiding the stress of feast or
           | famine, managing business/taxes, etc..
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | polote wrote:
         | > Does this 3 month period apply in reverse
         | 
         | Yes (in France at least) it is on both sides, unless both sides
         | agree to shorten it
         | 
         | > face some sort of repercussions (financial, I assume)?
         | 
         | I'm speaking for France. This is a tricky subject, you almost
         | can't get any repercussion. But it can sucks, like the employer
         | can refuse to fire you and suspend your contract, in the mean
         | time, you are not paid but are not allowed to work for someone
         | else.
        
         | CaptainZapp wrote:
         | > Does this 3 month period apply in reverse (employer can't
         | fire employees without a full 3 month warning)?
         | 
         | Of course.
         | 
         | Different notice periods for employers and employees would be
         | outright illegal in most of Europe.
        
           | detaro wrote:
           | > _Different notice periods for employers and employees would
           | be outright illegal in most of Europe._
           | 
           | AFAIK more common is "lower notice period for employers is
           | illegal".
        
             | CaptainZapp wrote:
             | I stand corrected.
             | 
             | See my comment below.
        
           | driton wrote:
           | I am in the Netherlands, and my current contract stipulates
           | that should they want to get rid of me, the company has to
           | notify me 4 months in advance, whereas should I want to
           | leave, I need to notify them 2 months in advance.
           | 
           | Do you have any sources on the legality of different notice
           | periods in Europe?
        
             | Aeolun wrote:
             | I guess it's more to the extend that the notice period from
             | company to employee cannot be less than employee to
             | company.
        
             | CaptainZapp wrote:
             | The legal situation in Switzerland would (probably) allow
             | for this. What it wouldn't allow is the reverse agreement.
             | I.e. you can be fired in 2 month, but have to give 4 month
             | notice.
             | 
             | There are three types of employment laws herearound:
             | 
             | - Statutes can be changed freely if both agree
             | 
             | - They can be changed only to the employees advantage. For
             | example: minimum vacation days are 20 days. A contract can
             | stipulate 30 days, but not 10, or 15 days
             | 
             | - Some statutes cannot be changed at all.
             | 
             | I can obviously not speak for all of Europe (plus INAL,
             | etc), but would assume that it's comparable in most of
             | Europe, or even more stringent in terms of employee
             | protection. Employee laws here are quite liberal compared
             | to other European countries.
        
               | jerven wrote:
               | Adding to this great comment.
               | 
               | Switzerland, default rules regarding termination (if I
               | recall correctly). * first month of work, 0 second notice
               | * rest of the first year of work, 1 month notice * second
               | year of work, 2 months notice * years after third, 3
               | months notice
               | 
               | Impossible to terminate: pregnant women, before and also
               | during the legal maternity leave. Common termination is
               | the day upon returning to the office.
               | 
               | Personnel called up for the army or civil defence. People
               | on a fixed contract.
               | 
               | Employer must give notice but may be without reasons.
               | Without reasons often leads to lawsuits, because
               | terminated will claim one of the illegal (discrimination
               | etc) reasons applies. Still cost of a lawsuit is normally
               | not prohibitive.
               | 
               | In case of critical financial issue termination maybe
               | shorter (mass-layoffs).
        
           | Symbiote wrote:
           | It's fairly common to have an X-month notice period to
           | resign, and a 2X or X+1-month period to be made redundant.
        
         | obedm wrote:
         | European here. Having 3 months written in your contract (and in
         | many countries by law, like France) is pretty common.
         | 
         | You can still quit if both parties agree. I've done it before.
         | 
         | The clause is there to avoid this type of scenario where a key
         | employee just says fuck it and leave.
         | 
         | It works both ways. So a company can say fuck it and fire you
         | just because they want to.
         | 
         | It's a fantastic system. It can be exploited, but usually works
         | really well for employees and it gives you a huge safety net
         | you can (usually) rely on.
        
           | mkl wrote:
           | > So a company can say fuck it and fire you
           | 
           | "Can't", right? Otherwise it sounds like American at-will
           | employment.
        
             | AnssiH wrote:
             | Right, missing "not".
             | 
             | The law mandates that the firing notice period cannot be
             | shorter than the resignation notice period.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | artursapek wrote:
           | > The clause is there to avoid this type of scenario where a
           | key employee just says fuck it and leave.
           | 
           | If they are at the "fuck it" point, what's going to force
           | them to be useful and productive during the forced 3 month
           | notice period?
        
             | foobiekr wrote:
             | The countries in Western Europe specifically are much much
             | smaller pools in the tech space than anything an American
             | could conceive. The reputational damage of getting to the
             | "fuck it" point and becoming a pain in the ass has a lot
             | more blow back when the pools of both workers and employers
             | are tiny even compared to a second or third tier US geo.
        
             | sangnoir wrote:
             | > If they are at the "fuck it" point, what's going to force
             | them to be useful and productive during the forced 3 month
             | notice period?
             | 
             | Nothing - beyond professionalism. It is common for
             | knowledge transfer to happen in this time, and any
             | outstanding vacation days are usually taken at this time.
             | 
             | There's a _huge_ cultural difference between US and Europe
             | (rest of world?) when it comes to going to work after
             | serving notice. It appears the employer /employee
             | relationship is more adversarial, so much so that the
             | employee is not trusted/expected to do the right thing
             | after being fired (or after they quit) - the whole
             | "immediately getting escorted out of the building by
             | security" is unheard of in Europe.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | unionpivo wrote:
             | It's not really a fuck it point (usualy).
             | 
             | If you reach that you just put in the notice, take whatever
             | vacations you have and then put in sick leave.
             | 
             | But 3 months notice is used for, so the company can hire a
             | replacement for you, and you can help train him, and
             | transfer knowledge.
             | 
             | A lot of people reading this site work in companies that
             | have huge teams, but most people in IT I know from EU
             | (where I live) are one or two person IT teams. 3 or 4
             | person team is considered almost medium sized.
             | 
             | In such situations you need yo hand of your task
             | responsibly.
             | 
             | And that the one thing that will get you burned, if you
             | leave your previous employer hanging.
        
         | mingusrude wrote:
         | In Sweden (don't know where this company is located) it's usual
         | with collective bargain agreement and if you've been employed
         | for along time (5+ years) it's not uncommon with 3 months
         | notice. It is usually accompanied by 6 months if your employer
         | wants to let you go (but it's not easy if you're the employer
         | to let people go). Most of the time, these periods are
         | negotiated when someone resigns though.
        
         | comeonseriously wrote:
         | In the US we have the similar crappy situations. No competes
         | come to mind. Healthcare tied to employment (what if you wanted
         | to start your own business?) is another.
        
         | Ekaros wrote:
         | For Finland 3 months is bit special, mine is 1 month and
         | previous job was 2 weeks(up to 5 years). From employer side
         | legal minimums are: under 1 year 2 weeks, under 5 years 1
         | month, under 8 years 2 months, under 8 years 4 months and over
         | 12 years 6 months.
         | 
         | Penalty from employee side seems to be monthly wage, so in this
         | case 3 month salary. Ofc, seeing how company is probably doing
         | I wouldn't be too worried of them coming after him...
        
         | ACS_Solver wrote:
         | In my EU-centric worldview, the US system of at-will
         | employment, and of two-week notices as the standard courtesy,
         | is crazy.
         | 
         | Three months is the typical notice period for tech workers and
         | other highly-skilled jobs. One month is the legal minimum in
         | Sweden, and certainly several other countries. Of course it
         | goes both ways, in fact it's even more difficult for the
         | employer to get rid of an employee. An employee doesn't need a
         | reason to resign, an employer needs a valid reason to fire an
         | employee, in addition to observing the notice period.
         | 
         | To complete the picture, it's necessary to say that probation
         | periods exist. Employees may be initially hired on probation
         | (typical for fresh graduates), which has a shorter notice
         | period, and either side may unilaterally decide not to continue
         | past probation. That is, an employer unhappy with a probation
         | employee doesn't need additional legal grounds to say "we're
         | not proceeding with full employment after the probation period
         | is over".
        
           | alistairSH wrote:
           | _In my EU-centric worldview, the US system of at-will
           | employment, and of two-week notices as the standard courtesy,
           | is crazy._
           | 
           | Oh, I agree. But 3 months seems crazy to me. If I have an
           | open position and it isn't filled in ~4-6 weeks, it often
           | gets given to some other team (on the basis that if I really
           | needed that position filled, I'd do so). I can't plan hiring
           | over that timeframe.
           | 
           | And when hiring employees in India, we've had them claim a
           | 2-month resignation period, but they just end up using that
           | time to find some other opportunity on the previous
           | employer's time. It's a real mess.
        
             | ACS_Solver wrote:
             | > Oh, I agree. But 3 months seems crazy to me. If I have an
             | open position and it isn't filled in ~4-6 weeks, it often
             | gets given to some other team (on the basis that if I
             | really needed that position filled, I'd do so). I can't
             | plan hiring over that timeframe.
             | 
             | If you're in a culture (locality + industry) where a
             | position can be filled in 4 weeks, that's one thing. If
             | you're in a culture where every experienced person has 3
             | months of notice, then nobody would take your inability to
             | fill a position within weeks to mean that you don't really
             | need it.
             | 
             | I have some experience with part-time contracting with US
             | customers. Seeing how quickly people can join or leave
             | there is certainly a culture shock!
        
               | foobiekr wrote:
               | Assuming that you're talking about senior people, who are
               | all employed, I don't see how this helps. Realistically
               | employee X resigns, and we find a replacement; that
               | replacement is working and needs to resign. Their end
               | dates are still serialized.
               | 
               | We have a bunch of employees in Europe and everyone
               | involved except the very marginal employees sees this
               | situation as strongly negative (and, in fact, an argument
               | to not hire in Europe at all).
        
               | Symbiote wrote:
               | Are those Europeans who don't value their rights fairly
               | young?
               | 
               | I don't need my 3 months now. They might be useful if my
               | employer axes a whole department. They're useful for
               | people with family commitments giving them less mobility.
        
             | 2rsf wrote:
             | Since the same base rules apply for everyone this usually
             | doesn't happen, plans are built accordingly and
             | recruitments take into consideration those time scales.
        
             | anyfoo wrote:
             | I had a "to the next quarter" period in my last job, and
             | when moving to the new job the deadline was missed, making
             | the contract valid for a whole quarter.
             | 
             | It wasn't a problem. I was on good terms with the previous
             | company (I'm still getting invited to their anniversary
             | parties and stuff like that), so there was no issue in
             | working something out.
             | 
             | Also, remember that ~6 weeks of vacation per year is common
             | outside the US, so often it boils down to taking your
             | remaining vacation. (Though I think you need to be careful
             | with taxes and other regulations if the contracts overlap.)
        
             | etripe wrote:
             | > But 3 months seems crazy to me.
             | 
             | What you might not realise is that these three months would
             | be the default legal position _in case of disagreement_. If
             | you want to leave earlier and the employer agrees, you can
             | usually leave earlier, too (with them being off the
             | financial hook).
        
           | tkgally wrote:
           | I remember reading many years ago that employees in the U.S.
           | have the right to quit at any time because being penalized
           | for quitting would make the employment "involuntary
           | servitude," which is forbidden by the Thirteenth Amendment to
           | the U.S. Constitution. I can't find any confirmation of that
           | explanation on the web now, though.
        
             | alistairSH wrote:
             | Yup. Most states are "at will", which effectively means
             | both parties can leave the arrangement without notice or
             | repercussion.
             | 
             | There are federal laws that limit this, typically applied
             | to larger employers making entire business lines redundant
             | (closing a factory, etc). State laws very, some with zero
             | extra protection, some with a bit more, but AFAIK none with
             | European-style rules.
             | 
             | In professional jobs, it's traditional for an employee to
             | give 2+ weeks notice. Most employees will try to stay long
             | enough for a reasonable transition - depending on
             | position/project status, that could be 2 weeks or a month
             | or two.
             | 
             | It's traditional for employers to give 2+ weeks severance.
             | Most white-collar employers have periods that start at 2
             | weeks and grow with tenure. Including benefits is hit or
             | miss, and a HUGE issue because health insurance/care in the
             | US is so expensive.
        
             | staticman2 wrote:
             | You can quit but they can sue you for breach of contract.
             | 
             | I think what you are thinking about is the court almost
             | certainly won't order you to go back to work after you
             | quit.
        
             | garmaine wrote:
             | This is correct. If you don't have the right to quit at any
             | time, you are legally a slave / indentured servant. And
             | that is very, very illegal.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | The military is sort of a special case however. (And, of
               | course, private employment contracts can make it
               | financially onerous to break.)
        
               | garmaine wrote:
               | Interestingly the case can be made that the military is
               | not exempt from the 13th amendment, which only makes one
               | single exception for prisoners. It's just that the courts
               | have ruled consistently that _OBVIOUSLY_ the military
               | wasn 't meant to be included in the ban against
               | involuntary servitude. Obviously.
               | 
               | Just like they have also ruled that mandatory Jury duty
               | is not in violation of the 13th amendment either. Funny
               | how the system protects and perpetuates itself.
               | 
               | But with respect to your point, I am nearly 100% sure
               | that it is not the case that employers can use financial
               | penalties to enforce such a contract. Anything you are
               | paid as wages is pretty much untouchable after it is paid
               | out, unless it was paid in mistake or you intentionally
               | damaged the company or something. The best the company
               | can do is withhold potential future earnings or bonuses,
               | or take back conditional non-wage payments like bonuses
               | within a certain window of time.
               | 
               | This is part of why golden parachutes exist. Your
               | contract has very generous severance clauses which award
               | you lots of money if you follow a certain procedures for
               | leaving, which involves advance notice and such. Fail to
               | follow that and your paycheck just stops the day you walk
               | off. So there are incentives, but they can't go after
               | your already earned wages, paid or still due to you.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | > Your contract has very generous severance clauses
               | 
               | That's pretty much what I meant although, as noted in
               | another comment, I assume there are cases where they
               | would try to claw back relocation or signing bonuses.
               | Also, of course, things like RSU vesting.
               | 
               | >they can't go after your already earned wages, paid or
               | still due to you.
               | 
               | Certainly, and depending on how paid time off accrues,
               | anything earned there--which is one of the drivers with
               | "unlimited" PTO because that's not owed when you leave.
        
           | hvidgaard wrote:
           | In reality, you can walk out of any job in EU as well. Unless
           | you have some specific clauses in your contract, the worst
           | they can do is simply not pay you anything. There may come a
           | lawsuit after, but I doubt it. You can also get a doctors
           | note and go on sick leave if you feel some serious stress on
           | the job.
        
             | ACS_Solver wrote:
             | It's true that they probably won't sue you for breach of
             | contract, though they can, but if you just walk out of a
             | job, you're at the risk of ruining your professional
             | reputation, arguably the most precious resource. There
             | aren't many other things that would be as much of a red
             | flag when hiring as an employee that just decided to walk
             | out of a job.
             | 
             | Of course if you have good reasons to stop working, there
             | are good options. If it's stress or similar mental health
             | issues, you can resign and spend your notice period on sick
             | leave. If your employer assaults you or just stops paying,
             | or otherwise grossly neglects their duties as an employer,
             | you're legally entitled to quit immediately.
        
             | benhurmarcel wrote:
             | Typically a company owes you money when you leave, like the
             | started part of the month, pending holidays, and the annual
             | bonus/extra pay that you already earned.
             | 
             | If you don't respect your notice period they'll remove your
             | salary over the missed time from that final payment. So in
             | that case they'd remove 3-month salary. Sometimes it goes
             | into the negative, and some companies actually send a bill,
             | but there's basically no consequence for ignoring it.
             | Usually companies don't push the matter.
        
           | Mauricebranagh wrote:
           | I agree (I am from the UK) when first saw US professional
           | workers complaining about > two weeks my first thought was
           | wow you must have a really low status job.
        
             | foobiekr wrote:
             | Not too long ago a friend witnessed the SVP GM of an $5b a
             | year division quit with two weeks notice.
             | 
             | I'm senior enough that I give at least a month, often more,
             | and this made me realize that I've been perhaps overly
             | generous.
        
         | dspillett wrote:
         | UK here. Terminology may differ, I think what is being
         | discussed is a _notice period_. Normally a resignation is
         | either accepted or rejected pretty much on the spot and if
         | accepted is officially seen as a more amicable departure.
         | 
         | Handing in your notice to leave is something the employer
         | cannot reject. Depending on circumstances you might try to
         | resign first. Sometimes you may be "asked to resign"[0] and
         | made a nice offer to encourage you to do so, offer will almost
         | always have an NDA attached to it.
         | 
         | [0] this can be preferable to the company as it can be quieter
         | than sacking you
         | 
         |  _> This guy(gal?) is really required to submit 3 months notice
         | or face some sort of repercussions (financial, I assume)?_
         | 
         | Yes. The worst they can do is take you to court for breach of
         | contract though. That can be expensive and embarrassing for
         | both parties so unless they are whiter than white[1] or bitter
         | enough companies often don't bother.
         | 
         | Potentially a big risk to take though. And in an industry that
         | is hardly free from nepotism, you probably don't want the
         | reputation of being someone who walked that way.
         | 
         | Three months is most common in skilled jobs, one month
         | otherwise. In retail work and other low-skilled professions two
         | weeks is not uncommon, though here people often do just walk
         | away as the hassle of chasing them for breach of contract is
         | massively not worth it.
         | 
         | [1] i.e. there is nothing you can say on public record that
         | looks bad for them going forward
         | 
         |  _> Does this 3 month period apply in reverse (employer can 't
         | fire employees without a full 3 month warning)?_
         | 
         | Yes. What usually happens if they want to have you gone without
         | notice and don't want to make you an offer to resign "amicably"
         | is that they put you on gardening leave. You are still employed
         | and paid for the notice period but are told to stay home. They
         | can't stop you looking for new work[2] as long as you don't do
         | it "on their time"[3] but you can't start new work without
         | resigning and them accepting that resignation until the end of
         | notice period without the same risks as if you had just walked
         | out without notice yourself[4].
         | 
         | Gardening leave can also happen when you hand in your notice,
         | though if you want to leave and the company wants you to leave
         | then they'll just agree to waive the notice period.
         | 
         | [2] Some contracts have clauses that say otherwise, those
         | clauses are not legally enforcible. Some even have clauses
         | saying you have to actively look for new work, these too are
         | not legally enforceable. [3] Which is impossible for them to
         | prove unless perhaps they have you check-in regularly while you
         | garden. [4] Though they are likely accept the resignation as at
         | that point they can stop paying you for the notice period,
         | unless you are going to work for a competitor, or they
         | otherwise feel like being dicks about it.
        
           | ectopod wrote:
           | At places I've worked in the UK it is asymmetrical. The
           | employer has to give three months' notice but the employee
           | only has to give one month's. It is intended as an employee
           | benefit, and it is. I've never been asked for more than one
           | month's notice from my side.
           | 
           | I don't know where the OP is located but he should double-
           | check his contract. The first time I heard of the three month
           | period I was reluctant, until I realised it didn't apply to
           | me.
        
         | numbernine wrote:
         | In my country, we have a 3 month notice aswell and yes it does
         | also apply in reverse. You can negociate to lower the period
         | but most of the time the company will decline your request. For
         | high-demand jobs it is a nightmare for everyone.
        
         | Symbiote wrote:
         | I once had a colleague "go on holiday" and never come back to
         | work.
         | 
         | If you don't work your notice period, you obviously won't be
         | paid for it, and any reference will state that you broke your
         | contract.
         | 
         | (Unless your employer asks that you don't come into work any
         | more. This is called "gardening leave" in Britain:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_leave , and it's normal in
         | some industries and circumstances.)
        
           | Mauricebranagh wrote:
           | :-) I once replaced some one (UK) who "disappeared" -
           | apparently he went to NYC
        
         | throwaway14337 wrote:
         | In a previous job it slowly dawned on me that the job was
         | making me quite unhappy. This was about six months in. Only six
         | more months until the "vesting cliff"! I managed to power
         | through and get my stock options for the year.
         | 
         | So, while we don't have 3 months notice in the US, we certainly
         | have similar ways to get stuck.
        
       | viraptor wrote:
       | These kind of posts are awesome tabletop scenarios. (and fuel for
       | https://twitter.com/badthingsdaily ) Coming up with potential
       | fixes is a good exercise.
       | 
       | Things I would do that I haven't seen mentioned yet:
       | 
       | - Grab images from the relevant servers to have current backups
       | before messing with anything.
       | 
       | - Try tcpdump-ing and decoding the custom KV protocol - other
       | databases are complicated, but things like memcached/redis/...
       | have trivial wire protocol. Maybe it's possible to recover some
       | data by listing all entries.
       | 
       | - Run `strings` on the KV binary or `file` on the data to make
       | sure it's not just some open source project with a proprietary
       | interface. With any luck it's just something like bdb that can be
       | accessed externally.
       | 
       | - Hook up a debugger to the KV and try to recover the keys (or
       | maybe just strace to see if they keys are in any files)
       | 
       | - Start tcpdump on the old DNS IPs. They mentioned they have no
       | idea which domains they own anymore - as long as NS on customer
       | domains wasn't trashed as well, they could collect queries coming
       | in and recover a list from there.
       | 
       | - See if the customer domains can be collected from billing data
       | / some email store of notifications.
       | 
       | (as much as I try to design for no disasters in production, the
       | rush of "this is so FUBAR, what insane thing I can do to fix it"
       | for me is an amazing feeling :) )
        
       | comeonseriously wrote:
       | Choice 1: Leave. Just leave.
       | 
       | Choice 2: Put your head down and fix this. Your worth (to another
       | company because you really should leave after you fix this) will
       | increase dramatically.
        
       | aidos wrote:
       | I've seen a few data disasters in my time but I think this takes
       | the cake. It's a good reminder of why you just need to prioritise
       | the sort of work that has no immediate payoff.
        
       | flaxton wrote:
       | Can't you just pull the drive from the failed server, extract the
       | DNS entries and build a new DNS server? It doesn't sound like
       | everything is broken, just that it is failing because the DNS
       | server isn't answering. Just install Linux on a new box and set
       | up a DNS server on it. It could be done in a day I would expect.
       | Or am I missing something?
        
         | Kranar wrote:
         | Its encrypted and the encryption keys are lost.
        
         | capableweb wrote:
         | It would work if they knew what the DNS entries were but seems
         | they lost all DNS records and don't even know what records they
         | have/had, so spinning up a new DNS server won't help as they
         | don't know what it should serve.
         | 
         | > All domain information was wiped out and records became null
         | [...] Our records are wiped from all domain servers out there
         | [...] We don't even know what domains we own, the listing was
         | hosted in the ERP which is now busted
        
           | drummojg wrote:
           | That's part of what bothers me about this whole story--it
           | says they were running BIND, which configs on text files for
           | goodness sake. These critical records were tiny and could fit
           | anywhere & transfer in the blink of an eye. That such a
           | simple thing is buried under & dependent upon an entire
           | complex and untested/maintained DR plan is mind-boggling.
        
             | capableweb wrote:
             | > That such a simple thing is buried under & dependent upon
             | an entire complex and untested/maintained DR plan is mind-
             | boggling
             | 
             | I find this to pretty common in many setups where the
             | engineers don't focus on simplicity and removing layers of
             | abstraction. If the workforce is young and inexperienced,
             | over-engineering tends to happen everywhere and you end
             | with situations like this.
             | 
             | I have seen worse in my years in the industry, that's for
             | sure.
        
       | michaelhah wrote:
       | How many people had to log into their own work systems and check
       | that things were running in order to be sure it wasn't their
       | employer?
        
         | loloquwowndueo wrote:
         | I know it wasn't mine because we still have one guy who knows
         | how everything works :) (unless he quit over the weekend oh
         | crap)
        
         | HourglassFR wrote:
         | Nah, I'm not saying my employer's IT infra is rock solid but at
         | the very least we have backups.
        
       | simonebrunozzi wrote:
       | Best thing to do for this poor sysadmin, before all else: talk to
       | a lawyer, understand what you should do from now on to minimize
       | risk of being sued by company/shareholders, etc.
        
       | airhead969 wrote:
       | 50% of companies who lose all of their data go out of business
       | within 6 months. They clearly failed to test their backups with
       | regularly-tested restores. And, a separate alternative system
       | should've had multiple revisions of critical pieces of
       | information like customers, assets, inventory, bank accounts,
       | debts, and employees.
       | 
       | A data recovery shop could attempt to forensically-reconstruct
       | SMS numbers. Look for logs and other places critical deets might
       | be found. Try your best to get things back and make alternatives
       | processes to piece together what you can. A phone carrier or SMS
       | send provider might have a log of phone numbers. The paycheck
       | company may even have the address of everyone. Send them a $0.01
       | paycheck with a note on them to call in.
       | 
       | I would ride it out for a paycheck because it's not like it could
       | get worse than going under. Just be sure to get paid.
        
         | lopatin wrote:
         | They didn't fail to test their backups. They tested them, they
         | didn't work, and then they said "this is fine".
        
           | airhead969 wrote:
           | Oh my, I missed that, thanks. I can envision the dog in the
           | burning house meme. Ouch!
        
         | joncrane wrote:
         | Only 50%?!?
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | Reaching people seems like the least of their problems to be
         | honest. If they use a payroll service, they'll have addresses--
         | don't know about Europe but does just about any company do
         | their own payroll in the US at this point? In any case, I
         | assume most people know how to reach most of their direct
         | reports and many of their co-workers. Especially at a fairly
         | small company, I would think you could reconstruct contact info
         | on employees fairly quickly.
         | 
         | Of course, that may not help with the bigger problem.
        
           | airhead969 wrote:
           | Yep. It's going to be a massive problem figuring out what's
           | what, who owns what, and who owes what. I don't even see how
           | they'll keep enough customers to stay afloat.
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | You should sue the LTO tape conspiracy that means you need to
       | spend $3000 to back up the contents of a $300 hard drive.
        
       | tclancy wrote:
       | "let the boat sync."
       | 
       | Sure, now you start thinking of backups.
        
         | atmosx wrote:
         | I loled, although non-native speaker who does similar mistakes
         | all the time :-)
        
         | sombremesa wrote:
         | Loathe to be "that guy" but a sync is not a backup.
        
       | le-mark wrote:
       | It's easy to imagine there are a lot of these type of time bombs
       | out there, particularly in really old legacy systems (> 20 years
       | for example). I was at one place where even building the
       | application for deployment led to a one week outage when some
       | core people were laid off.
        
         | protomyth wrote:
         | Interestingly, some of these legacy systems run on things like
         | IBM i (AS/400) which have an easy backup story and vendor
         | support for recovery. I can have a new i machine receiving a
         | backup and deployed fairly quickly (day or two) and I'm out in
         | a rural area.
        
         | abruzzi wrote:
         | Up until 5 years ago, my employer's primary system (government,
         | property tax assessment, billing, and collection) was from a
         | company that had gone belly-up in the early 90's. We
         | fortunately had the source, but it ran on a VERY legacy
         | database called Unidata because it had originally be developed
         | on the Pick operating system. Unidata was/is a Multivalue
         | Database with a built in BASIC programming language. By the
         | time 2014 rolled around there was one programmer in the
         | organization that understood the system, and he was responsible
         | for all code changes. I half-joked with management that we
         | needed an insurance policy on his life/ability to work, because
         | if we lost him, it would put us in a very difficult position,
         | and that software accounted for 90% of our revenue (as well as
         | a lot of the revenue that went to all the local towns and
         | school districts for their operations.) That employee was also
         | nearing retirement (he is retired now.) Fortunately we were
         | able to successfully migrate off of that application, though we
         | keep a minimal license pool to the old system so people can
         | validate pre-migration data against post migration data.
        
       | tsomctl wrote:
       | improved link:
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/ma4mwl/the_absolu...
        
         | benlumen wrote:
         | Thanks. Reddit is such a good example of how "progress" hasn't
         | really been progress in web development. The new front-end
         | framework site is so much slower and more buggy.
        
           | xchaotic wrote:
           | wow, it was so much better before. What the heck? Who made
           | the decision to switch?
        
             | mkl wrote:
             | They want people using their app, for some reason I don't
             | understand. Maybe to make ad-blocking harder by getting
             | people off computers where it's easy (most mobile browsers
             | don't support plugins, so it can't be about them).
        
               | the_only_law wrote:
               | Ironically, every time I click their "open in app" link
               | it's drips me straight to the App Store despite me having
               | the app installed.
        
             | perlgeek wrote:
             | The old design was optimized for usability, the new is
             | optimized for ad revenue and/or for pushing people on the
             | app.
        
         | fsflover wrote:
         | Even more improved link:
         | https://teddit.net/r/sysadmin/comments/ma4mwl/the_absolute_w...
        
           | sodality2 wrote:
           | Superior link (if you can parse json): https://www.reddit.com
           | /r/sysadmin/comments/ma4mwl/the_absolu...
        
       | newsbinator wrote:
       | > we don't even have a listing of our ~300 employees SMS numbers
        
         | elif wrote:
         | This surprised me. If ever there was a use case for an
         | organizational structure, this is surely it.. just have every
         | manager reach out to their direct reports? Following the tree
         | communication should happen at something like nlogn speed
        
       | arnaudsm wrote:
       | Are the CTO and sysadmins liable in such scenarios? Can they be
       | sued ?
        
         | viraptor wrote:
         | Anyone can be sued. But it wouldn't be a good idea if they kept
         | the receipts:
         | 
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/ma4mwl/the_absolu...
         | 
         | > We tried really hard to make management aware and actually
         | succeeded in that, only for management to follow up and say we
         | don't have enough money to fix it, and they understood the
         | possible outcomes.
        
       | teddyh wrote:
       | They might check on robtex.com and other DNS historical
       | information sites.
        
         | TeeWEE wrote:
         | Exactly what i was thinking. Its D_NS its Distributed. The
         | records are out there somewhere.
        
           | teddyh wrote:
           | The 'D' in DNS stands for "Domain", not "Distributed".
        
       | mperham wrote:
       | Technical debt can lead to non-technical bankruptcy.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | pjmanroe wrote:
       | I worked for a newspaper group back in the 1990s. I did all their
       | programming in dBase III & IV LAN. I was putting in 80+ hours a
       | week. I wasn't getting paid squat, but then they wanted to put me
       | on salary (at less than I was currently making) and I said no way
       | I'd give my notice first. So that's what I ended up doing.
       | 
       | They didn't believe me. But I left. After a few months of
       | haggling I went back at $50 an hour on contract. I did this for a
       | few weeks (about 25 hours a week), then started to not want to
       | pay me. So I quit for good. Unless they made an upfront deposit.
       | Which they wouldn't do.
       | 
       | They ended up spending close to $250,000 on equipment and
       | programmers and still couldn't do what I could. They were
       | duplicating and tripling everything. Wasted so much money. Now
       | I'm going to college for my BS in Computer Science with a
       | specialty in Software Engineering. I'm currently running Windows
       | 10 Pro Insiders Edition DEV and VMware with Kali Linux.
        
       | gillesjacobs wrote:
       | The managed service provider company built a custom DNS inside an
       | ERP without backups or bootstrap strategy in place.
       | 
       | House-of-cards core infrastructure is a sign of negligence and OP
       | should have reconsidered working there a long time ago.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | Division of responsibility can make this sort of thing very
         | difficult to know.
         | 
         | If you aren't running drills then transparency may not be in
         | everybody's self interest and someone somewhere is covering up
         | for the fact that they only half know what they're doing.
        
       | sorokod wrote:
       | "Every person who knew how the custom DNS system worked has left
       | the company years ago."
       | 
       | Keeping the people who know how the system works is really the
       | last line of defense.
       | 
       | From, the point where such last person left without any
       | compensating mechanism in place, the clock started ticking
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | Somewhere right now there is a disgruntled former employee
         | drinking a glass of Scotch and smiling.
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | This is the snow on the tip of the iceberg. I'm sure there's
       | plenty more where this came from.
       | 
       | There's so many things wrong with the scenario described, that I
       | can't even begin to talk about it.
       | 
       | My experience is that folks never want to talk about backup or
       | DR, as they are expensive, and the idea is that they should never
       | be used.
       | 
       | No one ever has a problem with insurance premiums, though...
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I keep wondering if there's an underwriter angle here where you
         | offer insurance and audit the company to set the premiums based
         | on how broken their IT situation is.
        
       | blhack wrote:
       | It's dark, but I kindof love situations like this (although
       | luckily I haven't had something like this happen to me in digital
       | space since I was a teenager). Some places I would look:
       | 
       | 1) Are you SURE that everything is actually gone? Is there a
       | logfile, a billing trail, sent emails trail from your email
       | provider, something like that? If it was me I'd be looking for a
       | secondary system (like alerts, logfiles, billing, etc.) that had
       | some of this information stored in it as secondary function, and
       | writing some scripts to parse those things and start rebuilding
       | what can be rebuilt.
       | 
       | 2) You said you lost all the emails and SMS of your team. Do you
       | have an HR department? Surely they have this information. Your
       | team is likely going to start trying to send emails to each other
       | about this. Can you dump logs off of your mail server to rebuild
       | at least the naming schema? For phone numbers: can you try an old
       | school phone tree style? Start with somebody you know, and ask
       | them for everybody that THEY know and so on.
       | 
       | 3) Was there a staging environment that might have had some of
       | the data you're missing on it?
       | 
       | 4) Are you really really sure that everything was wiped out? Is
       | it possible that your ERP system is broken (lost its DB
       | connection or something?) and that caused a cascading failure
       | that makes it LOOK like everything is gone?
       | 
       | 5) Can you get at the BIND server somehow? Are there logfiles
       | there?
       | 
       | I'd love to know more specifics about what "wiped out" means in
       | this case. It seems unlikely that it's properly "wiped out"
       | unless something malicious happened, and even then I think you
       | could rebuild a lot of this from sortof "secondary" data.
       | 
       | Think like a hacker, but your system is your own target. How can
       | you steal the data you're looking for from places it isn't really
       | "supposed" to be?
        
         | CobrastanJorji wrote:
         | I get where you're coming from. It's a little bit like a real
         | world, high stakes escape room.
         | 
         | Come to think of it, this could be a fun online challenge. I
         | picture a series of VM images, each of which describes the
         | design of the system and the terrible thing that has gone
         | wrong, and you are challenged to get it fixed and/or get the
         | data out of it.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | Start connecting with everyone on LinkedIn for one...
        
           | Graffur wrote:
           | That's actually a very good idea. Even the people not on
           | there might be connected through other platforms whatsapp etc
           | so could be contacted
        
       | devit wrote:
       | Definitely not the "absolute worst", they merely lost all DNS
       | records.
        
       | mysterydip wrote:
       | A good reminder for everyone to check your backups work, and if
       | you don't have any, start!
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | QA departments used to be good for this.
         | 
         | Setting up a test cluster using real backups can be good. If
         | you have the crosstalk problem sorted out that is.
        
       | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
       | One of the comments in the thread said, simply, "Prepare 3
       | envelopes." Being a 25-year sysadmin, immersed in thinking about
       | the problem, it caught me totally off-guard. I don't think I've
       | ever seen a more perfect response in a Reddit thread.
        
         | etripe wrote:
         | Which 3 envelopes would those be?
        
           | lmkg wrote:
           | It's an old story.
           | 
           | New executive starts the job. On his desk are three
           | envelopes, left by his predecessor, with a post it note
           | saying "When shit hits the fan, and you don't know what to,
           | open one of the envelopes."
           | 
           | Yadda yadda, exposition, things are normal and exec is
           | successful for a year or two and then things go pear-shaped.
           | Completely out of options, he opens the envelope, finds a
           | letter which says "Blame me." He blames his predecessor for
           | leaving the state of things in such a poor shape that this
           | misfortunate was unavoidable, everything blows over, his
           | success continues.
           | 
           | Blah blah, narration. Another shitstorm. He opens the second
           | envelope, finds a letter which says "fire all the managers."
           | He promises a significant shake-up, says he has the
           | leadership to turn this around, purges the old guard. Things
           | go well.
           | 
           | Hurly-burly story, and so forth. Catastrophe strikes. Having
           | blamed his predecessor and fired everyone and installed his
           | own managers, he has no one else to turn to for casing the
           | blame. He opens the last envelope, hoping to find salvation.
           | 
           | "Write three letters."
        
             | unnouinceput wrote:
             | My recollection of 2nd letter is "blame it on current
             | economy situation"
        
           | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
           | It's an older reference, which is why it was so funny to me.
           | I hadn't seen it in a long time. GIYF.
        
       | scandox wrote:
       | How people handle this level of disaster is always very
       | revealing. In every case I've ever experienced someone kept their
       | head and a solution was found. Usually there was reputational
       | damage but surprisingly most times the actual business bounced
       | back. But it was always the actions of someone in particular in
       | those first hours that made the difference.
       | 
       | Thinking you're fucked is unhelpful, because you start talking
       | about resumes and expecting some deus ex machina to appear and
       | resolve the situation (for good or ill).
        
         | batch12 wrote:
         | One thing the situation does show is a lack of proper care for
         | their most critical assets. When the dust settles, there should
         | be hard questions for several people. One being-- when was the
         | last time backups were tested..
        
           | amachefe wrote:
           | The answer to the question is there
           | 
           | >We can't access the backups. Even if we could, we noticed
           | two years ago when trying a restore from the backups, that it
           | doesn't work. Booting the restored server leads to a kernel
           | panic we couldn't figure out. Management said we don't have
           | enough money to fix any of this.
        
             | carschno wrote:
             | I have no reason to doubt that this is factual. However, I
             | have serious doubt that management will acknowledge they
             | made that decision.
             | 
             | Typically, this kind of decisions are made more or less
             | implicitly during long meetings about priorities, often
             | without any minutes. Managers will presumably try to hold
             | (senior) engineers accountable as they had not made clear
             | enough how important that was.
             | 
             | I obviously don't know who is right here.
        
             | kwhitefoot wrote:
             | > Management said we don't have enough money to fix any of
             | this.
             | 
             | It's often even worse. Many years ago I was responsible for
             | backup a DEC Unix system. Asked for funds to conduct a
             | disaster recover exercise to find out if our backups worked
             | and was turned down even before we had tried to work out
             | how much it would cost.
             | 
             | I often wonder what proportion of backed up files and
             | systems are actually in a state to be restored and have the
             | necessary tools and expertise to do it in a timely manner.
             | 
             | An even worse problem in some places, including the one I
             | worked at, is a tendency for users to assume that backups
             | are kept forever and for the management to totally neglect
             | archiving of important documents such as specifications,
             | drawings, and design calculations of products that have an
             | expected lifetime of over fifty years.
             | 
             | I had to inform several users that I could not restore the
             | file that they had only just noticed was missing because it
             | was last seen more than two years ago and presumably
             | disappeared longer ago than our longest backup cycle which
             | was one year of monthly full backups.
        
               | benlivengood wrote:
               | > I had to inform several users that I could not restore
               | the file that they had only just noticed was missing
               | because it was last seen more than two years ago and
               | presumably disappeared longer ago than our longest backup
               | cycle which was one year of monthly full backups.
               | 
               | If you can afford 12 months of backups then you can
               | almost certainly afford >=12 years of yearly backups by
               | buying a new set of monthly tapes once a year and taking
               | a set out of rotation and into archive.
        
               | Symbiote wrote:
               | But you are then archiving data (not just backing it up),
               | and will need to work out how to delete records you are
               | no longer legally able to keep.
               | 
               | (GDPR and earlier laws, etc.)
        
             | pedro2 wrote:
             | IMO Management will find the money pretty quick if the
             | business survive.
             | 
             | Up until now, they didn't know what 'backup not working'
             | meant. Now they know.
             | 
             | Not being bitter -- there was a failure of communication
             | from both parts.
        
         | colmvp wrote:
         | Thinking you're fucked is unhelpful, but it's pretty normal to
         | go full Alien Hudson in a dire situation and need someone else
         | to assure you that things will be okay.
        
         | 4e530344963049 wrote:
         | If you have been that person before, it can be fun and exciting
         | to think up solutions and implement them under pressure.
         | Definitely a real test in your ability to concentrate. But
         | don't expect the credit you deserve for it, and don't even
         | expect others to even bother to put in any effort towards
         | fixing things.
         | 
         | Also, make sure everyone knows you are going on vacation once
         | you resolve things.
        
           | paulz_ wrote:
           | These types of situations always wind up being the most fun I
           | have at work and leave me feeling most fulfilled. I wish I
           | could do that all day instead of going to standups.
        
             | 4e530344963049 wrote:
             | A "firefighting" consultancy might be fun, no? And you
             | would give people a lot of time off!
        
               | pratik661 wrote:
               | I always wondered this:
               | 
               | If you are an external consultant (with no prior
               | knowledge of the company's systems/processes/hierarchies)
               | brought in to "fight" a particular fire, how do quickly
               | get ramped up to a level of knowledge where you can
               | analyze the root cause of/recommend a fix for a
               | particular "fire"?
        
               | Clubber wrote:
               | I would say the analysis is 90-99% of the work, based on
               | my experience. Especially the more jacked up systems
               | where cheapest devs found work on the codebase and it's a
               | mess. 90% only comes in when it's so jacked up it
               | requires a lot of refactoring.
        
               | paulz_ wrote:
               | I've thought about that before. You get the call. "It's
               | 30 minutes away. I'll be there in 10"
               | 
               | If anyone happens to know of a career path or company
               | that does that sort of work I would be interested to hear
               | about it. Bonus points if the pay is half decent.
        
               | clipradiowallet wrote:
               | I don't know of a _company_ that does this sort of work,
               | but I know of some technologies that experts in receive
               | these types of calls. The one that comes to mind is an
               | ERP-focused database system. It 's called "Progress" by
               | "OpenEdge". IMHO, it's _awful_ , but this has no hindered
               | adoption in the slightest. I wrote Progress/4gl (their
               | query language) often enough in a prior position to have
               | it on my resume. Every 2 or 3 months, I'll get an
               | email/call, asking if I could be available for short-term
               | contracting upwards of $200/hr for Progress emergencies.
               | I have declined all of these, because I found it soul
               | crushing to work with in the past. However, if you could
               | enjoy that sort of thing, that's one example of a very
               | lucrative field to dabble in.
        
               | munchbunny wrote:
               | Blue teaming in big company cyber security teams will get
               | that for you. Not everything is a true positive but it's
               | always urgent. Pay is decent too.
        
               | meowface wrote:
               | I've worked such a job at a large enterprise. It really
               | does feel like firefighting (minus all the smoke
               | inhalation and physical strain and death risk).
               | 
               | However, not only is not everything a true positive,
               | probably only about 0.001% of things are true positives,
               | among a sea of alerts and reports and dashboards across
               | myriad systems. Some coming from your SIEM, some
               | generated by security appliances and products, some from
               | internal employee reports.
               | 
               | An ideal place will have people who continuously work on
               | trying to reduce alert fatigue and false positive noise -
               | but, in practice, at most big companies it's probably
               | like working at a fire station and getting hundreds of
               | dispatch calls per hour, every hour, every day, each
               | about a potential fire at a different residence. And then
               | you drive up and see they just used the stove for a few
               | minutes or a character said the word "fire" in a TV show
               | they were watching.
               | 
               | But you have to urgently show up every time no matter
               | what because, occasionally, the house actually is
               | engulfed in flames and might be on the verge of igniting
               | the whole town.
        
               | htrp wrote:
               | I spoke with a CISO of a large F500, his biggest gripe
               | was that he has a team of 30 that can barely keep their
               | heads above water, let alone respond to incidents
        
               | insomniacity wrote:
               | I know Mandiant do this (disaster response) for security
               | incidents. Don't know of a generalised service, but I
               | imagine the big consultancies offer it.
        
               | easton wrote:
               | This is my ideal job, I think. Charge a big rate to be
               | the consultant you call when everything dies from
               | ransomware or OPs problem or whatever, I calmly fix it to
               | normal standards (as possible), take three weeks off
               | after.
        
               | notyourday wrote:
               | > A "firefighting" consultancy might be fun, no?
               | 
               | It is... interesting. I have been doing this over last 4
               | years. The biggest problem, as I pointed out before, is
               | the disconnect between what companies claim they would do
               | to fix the problems vs. what they would actually do. So
               | ~90% of selling is repeatedly explaining the same things
               | to different people whose jobs are in the eminent danger
               | of being restructured/deprioritized/eliminated if your
               | services are successfully engaged.
        
               | 4e530344963049 wrote:
               | Do you mind if I email you with some questions? Thank
               | you.
        
               | notyourday wrote:
               | Sure. Email is in the profile.
        
               | beckingz wrote:
               | hopefully you can skip most of those people and talk to
               | the people who are in danger of being eliminated if your
               | services are NOT engaged?
        
               | notyourday wrote:
               | CEO: We are doing project X. We have engaged so and so to
               | do it. You are to support this.
               | 
               | <multiple layers down, Jack, head of IT in charge of
               | backups>: I'm uncomfortable sharing this information with
               | the outside party. I will need to get the approvals for
               | <blah blah blah blah>
               | 
               | ...
               | 
               | CEO: Yes, tell them to do this.
               | 
               | ...
               | 
               | Jack, head of IT in charge of backups: Ok, you can have
               | this access.
               | 
               | Consultant: Great. <comes back ten minutes later> It says
               | I'm not authorized to perform this operation. It is a
               | blocker, could this be fixed so I could continue?
               | 
               | Jack: This was not in the scope of authorization that I
               | have received. I'm uncomfortable providing this level of
               | access without additional authorization.
               | 
               | <repeat>
        
               | beckingz wrote:
               | Oh.
        
               | digi59404 wrote:
               | This happens, and honestly it happens rarely.
               | 
               | When you're in this role your goal and job is to build
               | relationships and help people. That includes Jack. The
               | job is getting done with or without Jacks help. So he can
               | either jump onboard or he can be removed and someone else
               | can be added to give access.
               | 
               | In the end people like Jack benefit nothing from being
               | gatekeepers. Because the third time I have to ask for
               | permissions to be changed - I'm asking for Jack to be
               | removed from the task and someone else to be put in
               | place.
        
               | notyourday wrote:
               | That's not correct.
               | 
               | When you are in a firefighting role, your job is to fix
               | the fire, not appease Jack and build relationship with
               | him, the person whose practices created the situation to
               | begin with. Unfortunately, even in those cases the
               | highest level of stakeholder who engaged your
               | firefighting service may not be willing to tell Jack's
               | manager or Jack that he will do what he is told or he
               | will be removed.
               | 
               | Jack's gatekeeping is what keeps Jack employed. The
               | company's ultimate bosses will need to make decision if
               | they want to remove Jack and solve a problem or if they
               | do not care that much that the problem is quickly solved.
               | In the vast majority of cases no one in the company who
               | can fire Jack wants to be seen as a bad guy.
        
               | wiz21c wrote:
               | Damn that's so true. We hired a network expert to figure
               | latency somewhere between our app and the end user. Spent
               | a month asking autorisations for each g _d_ mn net boxes
               | which were owned by several organizations which were
               | working _in the same building_ but not able to cooperate
               | because they were not paid by the same institution.
               | 
               | The guy did very creative reporting though :-)
               | 
               | And the problem was not fixed, of course.
               | 
               | I tried to help him as much as I could, but at some
               | point, the thing is so intricate that you basically give
               | up.
        
             | Aeolun wrote:
             | Come work for our company! We have an infinite amount of
             | fires to put out.
             | 
             | To be fair, the number of fires is finite, new ones are
             | just getting started faster than they are put out.
        
               | sanedigital wrote:
               | I believe that implies that the fires are indeed
               | infinite, just countably so.
        
             | m463 wrote:
             | It would be fun just to be able to talk to management with
             | the same sort of candor the "cleaner" in pulp fiction did.
             | (harvey keitel)
        
             | papreclip wrote:
             | Being an SRE is a little more of this and a little less
             | scheduled work. You still have standup and plenty of other
             | meetings, though
        
             | mattlondon wrote:
             | Constant "emergencies" soon wear you down.
             | 
             | Sure it is fun, but the stakes can be high and the stress
             | gets piled on.
             | 
             | It starts with congratulations all-round. You are a hero!
             | Good job! Nice save! Your boss's boss's boss's boss comes
             | over and thanks you personally. Take the rest of the week
             | off!
             | 
             | Later, its people asking when will _you_ fix it? Why haven
             | 't _you_ got this back working yet? Didn 'y you fix the
             | same thing last month? (no) We really need _you_ to fix
             | this before 5pm or the TPS reports wont go out, and the
             | management will be pissed.
             | 
             | Failures become normalised. They get reliant on people
             | doing heroics. People forget that the systems are crap and
             | need investment, and start to rely on _you_ being there to
             | fix it, and if things don 't get fixed then it is _your_
             | fault the TPS reports didn 't go out, not tech-debt/lack-
             | of-investment/bad-design/whatever.
        
               | ido wrote:
               | I remember stuff like that, once the COO called the
               | entire company to the common room to present me a bottle
               | of champagne for my efforts (another time I was given a
               | fancy bottle of whiskey that some marketing guys drank
               | 3/4 of before I ever got around to it). I rather not work
               | any overtime instead.
        
           | blhack wrote:
           | This is basically the reason I got out of doing IT and into
           | development.
           | 
           | "If you do things well enough, nobody will think you did
           | anything at all."
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | The first manager I ever respected was this goofball who worked
         | at a fast food restaurant. I don't think the other managers
         | took him seriously. He didn't really take himself seriously
         | either (told the worst jokes), but when there was a rush he was
         | the one you wanted running the kitchen. The other 2-3 people
         | were kind of assholes under stress (they were assholes all the
         | time if I'm honest). He was a machine, and it didn't hurt that
         | he good at predicting orders before they were even made. We
         | always made too much food in these situations but more of his
         | would sell and the wait times were lower.
         | 
         | In war room after war room there has always been at least one
         | person who would be categorized as 'disorganized' by their
         | coworkers. When thrown into a stressful situation they either
         | don't change or become more focused, while the 'organized'
         | people crumple like tissue paper, so Mr Disorganized ends up
         | either fixing the problem, keeping everyone on task until it
         | does get fixed, or insisted on some process/tool improvement
         | that made the problem easier to identify or fix.
        
           | danaliv wrote:
           | "Are you Mr. Disorganized who shines in an emergency?" would
           | be a not-terrible screening question for ADHD:
           | 
           | https://www.additudemag.com/benefits-of-adhd-crisis/
        
           | oehpr wrote:
           | I've heard this is a kind of symptom of people who have ADHD,
           | some of them have grace under pressure.
           | 
           | I've been diagnosed with ADHD and I'm not sure I'd qualify as
           | having that trait. So I don't believe this a general sweeping
           | statement you can make for everyone with that, or if your
           | boss even had ADHD.
           | 
           | But maybe check this out and ask if it rings any bells:
           | https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/attention-deficit-
           | hyperactivit...
        
         | danjac wrote:
         | Looking through the comments, it appears concerns were raised
         | for years and management refused to allow the necessary changes
         | to save money.
         | 
         | While you can and should be the cool head in the room, it's a
         | route to burnout if you end up being the hero who has to keep
         | saving a dysfunctional organization and management from the
         | consequences of its own failures. By all means do your best fix
         | the immediate problem but get the hell out as soon as you can.
        
           | jart wrote:
           | Reading comments https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/m
           | a4mwl/the_absolu... it sounds like he ran into a kernel
           | panic, maybe because cosmic radiation messed with their full
           | disk encryption because they went cheap on the ecc ram, and
           | then he got discouraged, he probably asked management for the
           | resources to rewrite the whole system from scratch, they said
           | no, and then he sat on his hands collecting paychecks for two
           | years until the thing he knew would happen finally happened.
           | How else can you explain an MSP not having a copy of their
           | zone file? That's their core business. It's also no secret in
           | the MSP world how frequently these DNS servers get hacked. I
           | read about it all the time. Especially on Reddit where you
           | can just sense the pervasive fear. So you'd think that'd give
           | a sysadmin a moment's pause to think, OK, have I scp'd my
           | zone file in case that happens to me?
        
           | pydry wrote:
           | >it's a route to burnout if you end up being the hero who has
           | to keep saving a dysfunctional organization
           | 
           | The same dysfunction that led to disaster after disaster is
           | likely to lead to very little reward (if any) for actually
           | being the hero, also.
        
       | iJohnDoe wrote:
       | I'm guessing the IT department reported to the CFO. Bean counters
       | have zero IT knowledge but like to think they do. They also by
       | default like to say no to any expenditures. Combine the two and
       | you have a disaster waiting to happen.
       | 
       | IT reporting to finance/CFO is always the worst decision.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-03-22 23:03 UTC)