If you're reasonably capable as an IT worker - and with that I include social skills - you have *way* more on the ball than your average "want fries with that?" worker. If you had to, you could get a job doing lots of other things, but usually at a lower rate of pay, or in a less challenging and/or satisfying position.
IMHO, of course. On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 8:15 AM, Oliver Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not sure what it's like on the other side of the great divide (I imagine > that you all have big cars and all back gardens are acres in size) but I'm > very surprised that so many people responded saying that they enjoyed their > position, or did it for positive reasons. I was expecting to see a lot more > of "I do it because I can't do anything else" etc. > > > > Certainly I know far more IT workers over here are massively over-worked, > over stressed, hassled by bosses looking to use them to implement > dictatorial technical working conditions and by users who are looking to > blame them for not working as hard as they should. > > > > I, for one, am definitely off to the States, even if it's just for the sake > of my aura. > > > > Olly > > > > From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 18 August 2008 15:49 > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: So, Why Do We Do It? > > > > I do it for love and money and responsibility. > > > > This is a second career for me, retired as a speechwriter 10 years ago. I > have been a sysadmin (one-man-shop) for two different organizations ever > since. I am now 60. I consider this a blue collar job with white collar > working conditions and pay. > > > > I was always told I was a "good" writer, easy to understand, eminently > speakable/readable. I took that as complimentary. It was easy for me to > write, made lots of dough, able to retire at 50. > > > > Always had "gadgets" as an interest, as a hobbyist. When the opportunity > arose, I took the job to work with 'puters fulltime. > > > > I love the work, well, not every minute, but 99% of the time. Average 50 > hours a week, year round. But can take off when I need or simply want. When > you are 60, it's not often you will sleep through the night, so I check the > Museum's servers all the time. Hey, better than 98% of what's on the idiot > box at that hour. > > > > When I wrote, I usually had one "boss." Now I consider every user at the > Museum where I work as my boss. I never call them losers (well, except under > my breath every so often, infrequently). I feel my job is to make sure all > the systems are go and everyone has access. Full inclusion over exclusion. I > want to make their jobs better. > > > > But I'm an old fart… > > > > > > > > From: James Rankin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 9:12 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: So, Why Do We Do It? > > > > To add my two cents worth to this subject - I find a lot of the time I do > extra hours for no reward is to make sure things run correctly. Years ago > when I worked for a large outsourcer I was continually cleaning up the > messes of IT systems that had been designed and run very poorly. Now I find > even when I take the morning off, the people I work with still don't follow > best practises that I document thoroughly for them, even down to little > things like ensuring servers are in the right OUs, putting descriptions on > AD objects, ensuring resources have the right naming convention, etc. Which > means I always spend an extra couple of hours putting everything right for > no reward. Maybe I could just hope these colleagues eventually get sacked > and replaced by ones who listen a little more, but my boss is one of the > worst offenders (especially at following change control procedures - the > bane of my life) and I doubt that the slapdash attitude will change anytime > soon. At least as long as they all know I am there to clean things up for > them. > > 2008/8/18 Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > That was one of 2 different ones I thought was correct but I did not want to > point a finger incorrectly. The other was New Mexico but I was not sure > which one it was or even if my memory was right. > > > > Jon > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 8:39 AM, Steve Kelsay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It was Texas, where the definition of an Engineer is defined by law. Or that > was the story USA Today printed. > > > > From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 23:05 PM > > To: NT System Admin Issues > > Subject: Re: So, Why Do We Do It? > > > > Is it my memory going bad or wasn't Network Engineer a few years back in > some state not allowed as a title as the state in question did not have a > test to "Certify" someone with that knowledge? Don't ask me the state but I > think it was in the south west some place. I could be wrong I am getting > old and forgetful. > > > > Jon > > On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:56 PM, John Hornbuckle > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We certainly fall into the "professionals" category; it takes no fewer years > to become a good technician as it does to become a good lawyer or > accountant. I'm afraid that many of us put in white-collar hours for > blue-collar pay, though. > > > > We've done informal surveys here asking what we all make. Perhaps just as > interesting would be a survey asking what our BOSSES make. > > > > Part of the problem is a lack of official accreditation. Lawyers and > accountants have to take certain actions in order to call themselves lawyers > and accounts. But anyone can call themselves an IT guy. Sure, we have > specialized certifications (Microsoft's, CompTIA's, etc.), but nothing at a > higher level. Perhaps a more formalized definition of "Systems Engineer" > ought to be codified. Maybe the issue is that this field is still in its > infancy, and somewhere down the road things will change. I know there have > been movements towards this in the past, but they don't seem to have picked > up any steam. > > > > > > > > > > From: Durf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 10:48 PM > > To: NT System Admin Issues > > Subject: Re: So, Why Do We Do It? > > > > Jon, you raise a lot of great points here. > > I have to ask, aside from WHY we do it, what do we think we are? > > Are we more like lawyers or accountants - or more like electricians or > plumbers? Are we white-collar professionals, or blue-collar hourly workers? > > If we are more like lawers, then what? I have a lawyer friend who regularly > works 100+ hour weeks. She also collected a $250,000 bonus last year, on > top of her $100,00 regular salary. > > By saing that "We're just geeks, and that's why we do it," aren't we kind of > opening ourselves up for abuse by the employers who are aware of that and > more than eager to exploit it? I'm sure a lot of lawyers are "law geeks" > too, but they sure as heck seem to find ways to get compensated for their > time. > > -- Durf > > On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What you say seems to ring true. I came over to being a computer person > because I got tired of having my hands tied about fixing things I saw were > wrong. When you start as a regulator of a highly regulated industry and see > people lying to stop things that should not have been stopped and you can > now look back and say very loudly "I told you so" and they were kind enough > to actually document my telling them so at the time and for the reasons that > are now apparent it feels kind of good but you also feel sad to know that > you could not make yourself understood at the time. At the time I thought > nothing of 80 to 120 hour weeks for months on end. That is until I got > called into my boss's boss office and told I was taking 3 weeks off starting > as soon as I could that day. They loved the work till it is done attitude > but the State hated it on a whole as a lot of the workers could not build up > any time off and I had at that point something like 12+ weeks of just Comp > time not counting vacation days or sick time. > > > > Jon > > On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Kurt Buff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We're geeks. > > That carries a lot of freight, but let's start with a few things I've > noticed: > > 1) geeks tend to like to concentrate on problem solving, and work > through problems to their own satisfaction, though not necessarily to > completion. > > 2) geeks tend to devalue personal interaction on the job - they're > more about getting the work done, rather than the office politics - > this is related to the above, but not the same. > > 3) geeks tend to be more honest than most - a controversial point, I > know, but I believe it to be true. This means they don't like to let > others down, and will work to get things going longer than others. > > 4) geeks like to be seen as heroes - uber-competent, and able to save > the day, when nobody else can. > > 5) geeks tend to underestimate how long any task will take, because > the field of network/systems administration is still in its infancy, > and metrics are very hard to come by - leave aside the fact that we're > doing some of the most complex work in the work force. > > It's not that non-geeks don't have these traits, but that I've noticed > a confluence of these traits in geeks, which seems to compel them to > work the extra hours. I've oversimplified a lot of this, but it's a > start... > > Kurt > > On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 11:05 AM, John Hornbuckle > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I was recently talking to a technician who works for a company we >> sometimes >> hire for projects. He's salaried, but working just 40 hours in a week is >> pretty rare for him. Looking at the poll in another thread and how many >> of >> us are basically on call 24x7x365 for no additional compensation, I have >> to >> ask… Why? Why, as a profession, do we allow ourselves to be treated this >> way? >> >> >> >> Is it that the pay is just so good that it's worth it? I know a few folks >> on >> this list have indicated that they get compensated pretty well, but my >> sense >> is that most of us just earn average pay and aren't living the high life. >> I'm not really sure why. We have skills that are in high demand, and take >> years to develop. Why are we selling ourselves short? >> >> >> >> Personally, my pay is just so-so. For the area I live in (poor, rural, and >> with a low cost of living) it's decent, and I do work in the public sector >> rather than private—that's always going to hit you win the wallet. But I >> generally get to make up the extra time with time off, a long lunch, maybe >> going in late or going home early. Plus I get vacation and sick leave >> that's >> pretty generous by American standards, and participation in the state >> retirement system. So all in all, I can't complain much. >> >> >> >> But I know a lot of people who work in the private sector for pay that's >> only so-so, and regularly work 60-hour weeks. >> >> >> >> Why? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> John Hornbuckle >> >> MIS Department >> >> Taylor County School District >> >> www.taylor.k12.fl.us >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > > > > > > > > -- > -------------- > > Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. > Give a fish a man, and he'll eat for weeks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
