l8rpeace's comments

I like these articles. But, what I'd really like are some examples of good and bad writing. This would actually help (as opposed to explaining the process behind it). Anyone have any examples?

Shocking as it might seem, pieces of this approach are still missing from some work environments. I've seen it first hand. Heck, I even asked a former colleague who is now at Zoom, "You're helping power the remote first experience. How is remote onboarding going, how's the culture of remote-only?" And it wasn't something they had nailed. I think it's a hard problem to solve. But shouldn't the people problems be the FIRST problems you solve?

Passpack: https://www.passpack.com/

I've been using this for years. Basic plan at $18/year is everything I need.

It's subjective, but since there is some scale (from personal to professional), couldn't there be a way to classify this and filter it out? That would be a cool feature.

Talk with my friends at Codefi in Called Girardeau, Missouri: https://www.codefiworks.com/

Yeah not even that sometimes...dates of employment, title, broad responsibilities (she wasn't a gardner, she was a nuclear physicist). Anything else potentially implies judgment and is open to interpretation/libel. That's how I've been trained in scenarios for references.

You really tell this story well. I could never voice my frustrations with cloud that I've had diving back into code lately. But you nail it - it's a time suck that really is a different Cloud DevOps (tm) skill set. Literal moment of personal clarity for me rn (however obvious this may be for the outside world and how dumb it might make me look). Seriously, thank you!

I made an example https://www.sportstrace.com

Yes! There cannot be an expectation of goodwill, especially with policy. While I personally think people should be more generous, I can't believe that policy should depend on it. Thank you for pointing this out and I will work to be more clear.

You are right and thank you for pointing that out. He hits these areas but, in my reading, fails to fully close the loop.

I feel that policy supported wage floors for tipping isn't addressed enough, if at all. Sure, they tried to get rid of tipping, but tipping here is only a problem when a former policy maker says, "tip because the policy supports it." I don't agree that policy should be reliant on goodwill but rather policy should support outcomes of goodwill.

That's the only part I find missing, especially considering the conclusion which doesn't strongly suggest policy around labor and wages as a cause (or even a solution).

These are very valuable points from the article and good observations about the condition that a HCoL area (really, any area) is subjected to. Thank you for that.

One area that is problematic is not the custom of tipping, but the policy around tip-based wage earners. Sure, people will tip. Is the concern that the practice makes untraceable tax revenue? We could do away with the policy practice of reduced minimum wage floors for tip-based jobs. It wouldn't introduce a barrier for the practice of tipping, but it also wouldn't tacitly condone tipping through policy, either.

Now, can off-books money change hands (undeclared, untaxed income)? Sure, but honestly someone can hand me cash right now and it wouldn't be trackable either. So from that, I don't believe that we can or should stop tipping, actually (I don't see the problem with it).

My problem is: I don't think that policy reliant on goodwill (suppressing minimum wage floors and hoping tips arrive) is a good strategy. I've had those jobs and I know that pain. It's * almost * like the author is saying that demand will meet the supply shortage in labor right now, but there's this ghost tip component of the equation that troubles me. Just do away with reduced minimum wage floors for "tip based" jobs. Then we don't have to send this message any way other than, "it's nice to tip for nice service."

Agree that the titles may distort the perception (you make an excellent point), but I was concerned about the conclusion of the article. Thank you for bringing that to light.

I also respect your reading of the article as a generalization of this predicament. This is also very helpful to reframe the article. But personally, I'm not so sure of that entirely. And that's because he's outlining tip practices, a voluntary operation, while offering no real conclusion beyond his observations (which I agree are universal) besides "please tip more." I would have also liked (unfairly expected?) someone who said "I have pretty much been in politics my whole adult life" to filter through that lens - policy enablement of the situation.

From the end of the article:

"As for customers… You want to see Spider Man? You desperately want to bring your kids to Encanto or Sing 2? And you want your popcorn, food, and drinks? Cool. But if you don’t tip or act like an asshole, taking your personal anger and frustrations on workers who don’t deserve it, workers will not be there to serve you.

"Good old Adam Smith and his invisible hand of supply and demand works both ways, and the reason why you won’t get what you want will be staring right back in the mirror."

I agree with the author: don't be an a$$hol3 is a good life principle. I actually agree people should tip, too, for good service. What I don't agree with is that, as a legislator, you should craft policy and policy enforcement around the concept of goodwill. Goodwill is a societal outcome of policy, not a requirement of policy. Especially when wellbeing through wage earning is at stake.

Also, supply and demand does work both ways, as the author says. Will policy be able to keep up? Meaning, if demand for workers increases, we should see adjustments in wages. Yet the "rely on tipping, take a lower wage" policy remains with know conditions of the system (that people might not tip).

Yes! And how policy can have unintended consequence is HUGE. Why doesn't he really even mention that? It's upsetting that among the many observations that "people, tip more" ends up being the final thought and not "we created a system that affords all of this behavior, " not one that works with known conditions.

Sure, I personally think people should be more generous, but they aren't obliged to be generous, I don't really fault them for not being more generous, and if lack of generosity is a condition of the system, he doesn't really have a good argument for saying "we crafted a system knowing people aren't generous, please be more generous so our system works."

Too true! Yes he's now in the workforce, and it's such a shame that he NOW sees how the system works AFTER dictating/enforcing policy about it for an entire state.

And there's an implication at the end of the article: tip more, customers. Policy is fine, it didn't cause this problem, customer behavior did.

Perhaps he needs more confirmation through that experience.

Former politician who focused on labor joins the workforce and learns the real truth THEN chastises customers for not tipping in the conclusion of his article?

Yes, he talks about the tough conditions of the job and customer behavior and other things, but nothing about how MAYBE legislation should change for wages (hourly service workers relying on tips in the US actually make well below the hourly minimum wage).

Sorry, for once I want to throw some outrage around about this.

Link for the lazy: https://xkcd.com/1102/

I can relate to info/knowledge about that edu debt, went to undergrad in the 90's and while I might be naive, I can say I didn't comprehend the debt side of things. And my edu debt pales in comparison to today's students. Fortunately I grew up, buckled down, and paid it off but there were some lean years right after school. Now? I can't even imagine.

And I also agree: how will these institutions scale back? What if tuition was cut significantly? What programs are on the chopping block?

"I often find that there's a tendency to endlessly navigate a streaming service just to find something to watch."

I miss in person product discovery and wayfinding mechanisms, even if I know they themselves are (were?) curated (toy stores, record stores, book stores). I have diligently tried to adapt well to digital discovery, but it hasn't been the same for me. Part of it is haptic, but another part is that digital seems overwhelming. I also get discouraged when I know exactly what I want to find digitally and I'm given myriad other options except the one I want. I look forward to constant evolution in the space and I actually think that AR/VR scenarios can help there.

I get the concept of a charge back. But upwork and the freelancer are both in contact with this 'Robin' person (who I assume won't sort out the fraudulent psyment despite admitting to the freelancer that an unauthorized card was being used).

So why not have Robin sort out the payment? There's no mention of that from the freelancer or the freelancer's account of upwork's responses.

"What if I am not a customer? Does that mean I cannot get a job here?"

Facebook recruited me a few years ago. I told them 100% that I don't use Facebook. I think a few people I met with didn't get the memo because...well, I ultimately didn't get a job because I don't use Facebook.

So yeah, I could see that happening.