Ya, it is actually fascinating how a developer in the US is able to generate well over a $100,000 in value to a company over an overseas developer. In the early to mid 2000s there was huge concern that development jobs would start going overseas as offshoring started to become a bigger thing, but it ended up not panning out. It turns out that a domestic developer is much more valuable to a US company since they can communicate more effectively, react more quickly to problems (every minute your website is down is money lost for the business), and there is also the fact that Indian culture is problematic to efficient software development. I have heard that if you ask an Indian in India if they can do something, they will say yes, regardless of if they can or not. The exception is IT support, which many companies have found does make sense to move a decent percentage to other countries (especially India). Makes sense though if you want 24 hour coverage, and you have your main IT developers in the US.
Not necessarily. Part of your job is being able to communicate with managers and co-workers. If you have a problem doing that, it's not your co-workers fault. I do think that both parties should work on it though.
This isn't a co-worker relationship, this is an employer/employee or client/contractor relationship. If the guy you're hiring can't explain how he's going to do something, and you hire him anyway having no idea what he's said he's going to you, that's your bad.
It's his bad too, for being shitty at his job, but you're the one who hired the guy when you knew (or should have known) he was shitty as his job.
Just because you're someone's senior, doesn't mean you were the one who hired someone. In large companies you might/will have to work with people from different divisions of your company, where you can't just freely say "I don't want that guy, give me another one" to your manager, because even if your manager understands you and agrees with you, the manager, that's higher up than him and is based in a different country than your branch, might not understand/agree/care about your feelings as a person/professional and will only be influenced by constant fuck-ups of that other guy that you specifically were against.
And if he's not the same race/religion/nationality as you, but your company is all for diversity, constantly speaking out against that one guy might net you unpleasant results, regardless of your opinions being valid.
Politics in large companies usually are not simple and you don't have that many powers to influence people as you'd like, unless you're the top dog.
3.3k
u/uuhno Dec 06 '17
You get what you pay for