Glass Walls

https://www.jamestgreen.com/thoughts/115

by cjlm • 5 years ago

75 27 5 years ago

jamestgreen.com

happytoexplain• 5 years ago

Is "Gimlet Media" a quirky name?

kgin2• 5 years ago

https://www.lexiconbranding.com/entertainment-branding-podca...

djoldman2• 5 years ago

There is a lot going on here but I'll comment on just one facet: the seemingly inexhaustible supply of trust that current(prospective) employees have for their employer(possible future employer).

One should never rely on a statement from an employer that isn't in writing. Furthermore, even if it is in writing, if it says "discretionary bonus," you should consider that a big fat ZERO. If it says "possible," "maybe," "if," etc. you should consider it to never happen (if it's for your benefit, otherwise, assume it definitely will happen).

Only after the above can you reasonably compare offers between prospective employers or value your current job.

HR is trained to hire you at the lowest price and say the most that they can without making fraudulent claims.

Additionally, if you are a current employee, and you EVER speak to HR, walk in with a pen and notepad and take long long notes and do not hesitate to ask someone to pause while you document. Treat it as a legal deposition. They are not your friends, they are trained to extract or give statements that protect the firm (not you).

It's unfortunately a pretty stark reality but it's business. It's even worse if the people involved are your friends - because it will hurt more if you aren't protected or have the wrong expectation. There's a reason that the expression, "never go into business with your family," is a thing.

lumost• 5 years ago

I wouldn't be surprised to see a company successfully sued on the basis that they've been promising HR is for employees when it is not at some point in the future.

I've seen many junior employees hold the wrong expectation of HR in terms of who's on their side. I can't directly fault them at the times that the company is pushing that version of the world.

djoldman2• 5 years ago

I don't think you're wrong.

At the same time, HR does regularly help employees avail themselves of resources (communications with health insurers, 401k providers, etc.). So in that sense, they are "there" for employees.

As far as I can tell, HR does a few things:

1. promote the idea that the company is a great place at which to work (market the company to potential hires, tell current employees about all the great perks, downplay negatives or ignore them)

2. answer most general questions of current employees (benefits)

3. document statements given to and taken from employees (hiring them, firing them, workplace allegations, rules violations, etc.)

Most of it is designed to protect the company but some of it is sometimes the only way to get something if you're an employee. If you ask: "where should I go to set up my 401k?" or some variation, you are pointed to HR.

_jal• 5 years ago

I've seen many junior employees hold the wrong expectation of HR in terms of who's on their side

"Friend or foe" is a super reductive way to look at it, and will limit your ability to actually understand what is going on.

To the generic employee, HR thinks of you the same way a farmer treats cattle. Within the range you are judged to be worth, they want you content, quietly productive and enjoying whatever perks they throw your way.

But if you're problematic in some way, you're only worth so much effort.

And worse, if whatever is wrong with you threatens to spread to the rest of the herd (eloquent expressions of shared discontent, organizing, even being a bit of a natural leader, if they're paranoid), well, who employs things that threaten them?

jmcqk6• 5 years ago

I'm not sure that trust is the right word. If I had to guess, 'hope' might be more appropriate, because at some level we all know the reality of the situation, but I think we hope that it's not applicable to us.

There would be a few factors driving this

1) The stress of not having a job is extreme, and represents a state that people try to avoid thinking about too much.

2) It is, in fact, true for many people, and we want to think of ourselves as people that it's true for, instead of one of the "suckers" that it's not true for.

BugsJustFindMe• 5 years ago

The article should be called "glass text", because I can barely see it.

alphabet9000• 5 years ago

lately i have been having a pavlovian reaction to seeing barely readable text on websites - i associate it in my mind with downvoted HN comments

coldpie2• 5 years ago

Firefox's Inspect Element tool comes in handy a lot lately. You can use it to disable CSS styles to make text readable. I feel like that would make for a good browser extension: detect the page background color and make all text on the page either #FFF or #000 as appropriate.

DavidVoid• 5 years ago

You can also just press F9 to toggle reader view.

IIAOPSW• 5 years ago

Poor mans option: press ctrl+A to highlight everything on the page.

kgin2• 5 years ago

Reader Mode in Safari is the main reason I use it. One click and any unfortunate website styles change into plain text, any size and/or font I want.

corry• 5 years ago

Thought-provoking article and interesting story in of itself.

I can't help but think that this is just a VC-funded version of traditional media, where the # of "sufficiently talented" people (i.e the supply) vastly outstrips the number of full-time well-paying positions (the demand), and therefore creates a massive power disparity in the labor market. Most employers will operate in a way like this because they can.

What's surprising here is that we'd think of podcasting as new media. Why would really talented people work for Gimlet vs. trying to get their own shows off the ground?

Financial security is probably the only reason. In fact, it's cited as THE reason this guy went to Gimlet both times. Holding his nose both times. Even the 2nd time, knowing what the company was.

So let's talk about Substack. (Didn't you know? All discussions of online media MUST go back to Substack these days).

This is why Substack is genius. Give the producers more direct access to monetizing their creative efforts. Even give the most promising ones an advance on their efforts to create some short-term financial security so they can do their thing. Let the talented people control their output and business.

Otherwise, in markets where labor vastly outstrips demand, you are fodder for the people with sufficient resources/capital to take the chance. And minority / disadvantaged folks are more at prey to it.

legerdemain2• 5 years ago

ME: "I've been supporting your team a lot for the past year. Can I just join your team? You have a lot of interesting projects available."

MGR: "Actually, it's really hard to onboard new people right now. We're stretched very thin. Can you do this urgent project for us and then get back to me?"

MGR: <onboards some new hires>

ME: <finishes urgent project>

ME: "So, any chance I can join the team?"

MGR: "Actually, I'm not sure we really have space on the team anymore, I'm really sorry about that."

Takeaway: If you're in a meeting with a manager and they sound completely unenthusiastic, and not even making eye contact, and falling back on their basic lead training to feed you non-committal apologies, you have lost hard. I don't know how you messed up or what clues you misread, but there is nothing for you there. Stop hoping to strike gold. Run.

twobitshifter• 5 years ago

He did get hired as full time eventually.

But I don’t know why he took the second offer for contract work other than lack of options, as they say “fool me once…”

legerdemain2• 5 years ago

I assume it's some combination of hard luck and interesting work.

phibz• 5 years ago

You have no real leverage in that position. Your best bet would be to find something else and then see if they want to keep you. Only thing is you can't bluff.

anitil• 5 years ago

Some context behind this article for those not in the know -

Reply All (the leading show at Gimlet Media) has had something of a public implosion lately, following their reporting on 'Bon Appetit', with accusations of racism (or at least non-diversity) in their hiring practices, and a lack of support for the unionization efforts there. The irony being that this is the exact sort of behavior they were investigating at Bon Appetit.

Their co-host PJ Vogt and a producer has now left the show (the interplay between PJ and Alex was the primary highlight of the show, so if it continues it will be a very different show).

Following that, there's been a few articles like this one looking at some of the behind the scenes at Gimlet.

meowmaniac• 5 years ago

This article provides excellent insight into contemporary recruiting techniques.

Contracting agencies are inherently predatory.

'Working hard' to get 'hired on full-time' has and always will be a myth. The 'corporate finance' line makes no sense. If the company didn't have the budget to bring you on full-time then they wouldn't have had the budget to bring you on as a contractor.

My entire employment history consists of contract gigs like this and they all play out the same way.

1) Promise of a full-time position

2) Excuses like 'It's not in this year's budget, but we're in the process of renegotiating the budget so we can have some of you contractors brought on full-time'

3) Contract's extended indefinitely/you're let go only to be offered another contract position with the same organization several months later

Regulations to stop this may be necessary.

Hell, one of my previous co-workers has a PhD in mathematics from an Ivy League university and was being paid $15/hr by a contracting agency to work as a programmer while some of our teammates had no IT experience and struggled to figure out how to use their computers.

Right now I'm working for a contracting company at a massive healthcare organization (16,000+ employees) as 1 of 9 people on our IAM team where I'm tasked with automating all the things and I'm only making $24/hr while the full-time employees that do less work are being paid double, some even triple what I earn.

dublin• 5 years ago

I'm sure my view of this will provoke some, though that's not my intent.

Wow, the author of this is so drenched in his own racist worldview that he can only blame a situation of his own making on his skin color. In reality, he was taken for a ride by sleazy NY media venture people. (Is there any other kind?) The color of their, or his, skin is irrelevant. If people treat you like crap, they're garbage humans, regardless of skin color.

As the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." From where I sit, bringing race into this at all is the worst sort of hateful excuse-making. This was the author's stupid call, and the fallout of his poor decision to work for known untrustworthy a-holes twice falls entirely on him. And has nothing to do with race - a-holes come in all colors.

MichaelGlass• 5 years ago

We noticed the new batch of contractors were Black and Brown like us, and the Full Timers were mostly white.

This doesn't strike me as drenched in a racist worldview, rather than just an observation of racism.

This was the author's stupid call this is the same kind of narrative that blames women for the clothes they wear.

Be better. Expect better.

Glass Walls

Related Stories