• Lightor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Yes, you have to cut certain corners sometimes, that’s reality. That does not equate to “quality doesn’t matter.” That’s a major false equivalency.

    “As for time is money… take a person working 40 hours a week, and replace thier tool with a cheaper lower quality tool, then tell them to make it work. They start working 44 hours a week. You saved money and got the same result. Awards for you.”

    Yes, except people’s hours are much more expensive than licenses. To scale this model as your business grows you would have to hire more and more people, with fully loaded benefits most times, instead of paying for licences to better software that has discounts at larger volumes. If I showed a %25 decrease in a single software spend but a %10 increase in staffing cost I would be crucified. Employees become more expensive the more you have, and software is the exact opposite. Not to mention if you are working 44 hours you now have to pay overtime, and added cost.

    “As a bonus, the people who won’t work extra leave. Now you have a self selecting group of people who will work longer for the same price.”

    This is just not true. Especially in the economy people will hold onto jobs as long as they can, no matter how rough, they just have less output. Which you could track and manage, but that’s yet another expense to manage.

    "So now you can even not backfill some of the ones who left, and tell the ones who stayed to cover the slack. "

    This would put extra pressure on existing employees, possibly causing them to quit or need overtime which would cost more. Then backfilling an employee if very expensive on the HR and benefits side, that’s yet another expense.

    “Wow, even more money saved.”

    I’m not trying to be mean, but a lot of your takes to consider some very basic concepts when it comes to staffing. Like the fact that someone leaving and being replaced the very next day, for the same pay, is actually a large financial drain, it is not break even. Or that fact that software licenses get cheaper as you buy in bulk, where ramping employees to meet scale does not. it becomes more expensive.

    • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I am starting to doubt your credentials. When a salaried employee works 44 hours, it costs the same as when they work 40. And the tougher the economy, the more work you can squeeze out of each person. And no, even in this economy people will leave, not everyone will hang onto thier jobs. And it will be the ones who refuse free overtime that go. This is even amazons well known work model. Only they enforce required firings to take it a step further.

      • Lightor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        You’re doubting my credentials, this is hilarious. Here’s a news flash, most of the employees using software at scale, like say Salesforce, are call center hourly employees. If you actually sold SaaS for as long as you said you have you’d know this, because it’s part of a savings analysis you do in pitch decks. So ya, I’m starting to doubt your credentials.

        Yes yes, not every single person will hang out in their job, but look at the market. It is flooded with talent with no place to go due to everyone having layoffs. You do not have a lot of power as a prospect right now, so people stay put for the most part. Anyone who is in management would realize these things as people start leaving less and you’re flooded with applications when you open a position.

        Yes, people who refuse the free overtime will go, so you have more people you need to rehire, which is very expensive. Have you ever managed a P&L before?

        Amazon does this because they have an infinite supply of applications wating due to them being in the Big 3. Not every company has that pull.