Is it normal for a company to have programmers on such a rigid schedule?

Question

So I've been working at this job for a couple of months. I'm a little frustrated because I do my best work from 2 to 7. In previous jobs, I've come in at 9:30-10:00 and leave at 7. Some companies have been okay with this, others have not.

But my current company insists on my being there at 8:30. Any deviation from this is a big deal. Is this typical? I have colleagues who are more 9:30 to 6:30, 10:00-7:00 guys...but maybe that is just startup culture?

I don't see why, given that I don't meet clients, etc. what the advantage to having things be so rigid could be. I also don't see why if there is 15 to 20 minute variation sometimes in coming in, why people don't just assume that I will adjust when I leave...

Are these unreasonable expectations as a developer or am I missing something?

Answer 1

But my current company insists on my being there at 8:30. Any deviation from this is a big deal. Is this typical?

Yes it is typical. And companies like that tend to have very high turnover with developers. I was chatting with one of the project managers I used to work with (he's now a VP with some other company) and he was describing the policy at the company he was working at (at that time, one of the big satellite tv providers): starting time was 0830. The second time you are late (within a certain period), the door doesn't open when you swipe your access card, it instead calls your boss who has to come let you in. The third time (in that certain period), it contacts HR who fires you. He was commenting on the 200% turnover they had, and chuckling at the clueless other managers who created this policy. He also mentioned that he gave out his cellphone number to everyone under him, so that if they were late, he could get around the system to get them to work.

Some managers are process oriented, and others are results oriented. You will quickly learn how to tell them apart. If you're smart, you'll figure out a way to ask in the interview some questions to determine one from the other without killing your interview.

In a results-oriented company, what you get done is more important than how you look or what your hours are. These companies/bosses have the least impedance mismatch for developers. In those companies, when someone tries to say "waaah, q303 comes in late", a results-oriented boss will say "q303 gets his products shipped on time and under budget, what have you done lately?" Stars and heroes are very common in results-oriented companies.

In a process-oriented company, how you get things done is more important. For a process-oriented boss, what time you arrive, what time you leave, and what cover sheet is stapled to your TPS report is extremely important. There is a huge impedance mismatch between the typical developer and this sort of manager. There are no favorites, nor stars, in a process-oriented company, and this is the sort who will deliberately fire anyone found to be indispensable. The perfect example of a process-oriented company is a fast food franchise - the goal is for every burger to be the same at every store in the country. If you make a better burger, you'll lose your franchise with them.

Modern business schools teach managers that they do not need to understand a business (nor what their employees actually do) in order to be a manager. These folks will want you warming that seat at the appropriate time because that is something that they can measure - they don't know what you do, nor do they care to, scientific management says they don't.

As you gather more experience in the working world, you'll find out that what is important to your boss is what you give them. You could cure cancer, balance the federal budget while juggling running chainsaws, but that doesn't matter because you come in late. They don't see you when you leave at 2am, because they leave "on time" (whatever that means).

Answer 2

I have never been happy or productive at companies like this. You won't like the code either, because these shops tend not to retain good developers. Get another job where the managers have a clue. There are lots of them.

Answer 3

One of the (reasonably legitimate) reasons I haven't seen mentioned yet is that in many/most companies, support issues get escalated to the developers who know their product. To avoid critical production support issues going unanswered, the company expects the developers to be at their desk for the full client business day.

In a past company I worked at, it was quite common to get support issues come in overnight and early in the morning (due to timezone issues - we had clients an hour or two away - at both ends of our own timezone). So it seemed quite unprofessional when a critical production issue was happening and it couldn't be dealt with by at late as 11am or lunchtime client time - because the responsible developer wasn't coming into work until 10am.

Otherwise, Tangurena is right.

Edit: I should mention - what I meant by issues coming in overnight and in the morning is that they had to be dealt with first thing in the morning. Support was never really required at night, but it looked bad if people showed up very late in the morning and left clients in the lurch until late morning or lunchtime. This was the reason for generally needing to be on time in the mornings.

Answer 4

It's normal, but it shouldn't be. I am a major advocate of the fact that we as developers should not be treated the same way as other office staff, because the nature of our work is vastly different and is not quantifiable by being at your desk for 8 hours. In fact from my experience, being forced to be at your desk 8 hours a day fosters the desire to pretend to be working instead of actually working, because most developers are only actually programming for about half that time, with the other time spent thinking/researching problems - this is often viewed as unproductive by others ("If you aren't typing, you aren't working") so we have to creatively work around it to still appear as though we're working even if we are reading documentation or playing with a sandbox for something new.

What if other people complain?

This is a management issue, and one that is their problem. A good company won't have these types of issues because they allow flex time, but the proper answer is something along the lines of "Developers have flexible hours due to the nature of their work."

What about meetings?

If you're always having surprise meetings, there's a bigger issue than your hours. Meetings should be scheduled in advance to you know that on Friday you need to come in earlier for this meeting (and leave earlier to compensate).

Answer 5

A while back I worked for a major investment management company. Most people connected to their core business got there no later than 6:00am. Most devs came in no later than 8:00. But I liked to come in at 10:00. (I still got up early, but I like to exercise for a couple hours first. lol.) My boss? He couldn't have cared less. All he cared about was results. This worked well for me. However, at least once every 2 to 3 months someone from another group would complain "blah blah blah why does HE get to come in all late??" and word would get back to my boss. He would sit me down, tell me he doesn't agree with it, but could I please come in at 8:30 to keep the peace? I'd apologize, make an effort to come in earlier, but within a week I'd be back to my 10:00am arrival time. That cycle repeated for two years! The truth is, it didn't matter when I came in because most of my work there was highly independent. If I had early meetings or needed to collaborate with coworkers, I of course would arrive at an appropriate time for those specific things. My boss could have put his foot down any time he wanted to--had he, say, threatened to fire me, I would have made damn sure to come in earlier--but as long as I got my work done he simply didn't care.

The moral of the story: see what you can work out with your boss that would give you greater flexibility but still allow you to do whatever it is that's necessitating the relatively early start time.

Answer 6

Every company I have ever worked for has core hours. Some are more liberal, some are more strict, but the intent is that employees are more productive if they can consult their coworkers about problems.

If one developer likes to be in at 5:30am and out at 2pm, and another is in from 10:30 to 7:30 and takes an hour lunch, then there isn't much time to schedule a meeting or work on tough problems together.

The alternative is to have all employees available by phone for questions. Would you rather show up during core hours or have people call you at 7am when they are stuck?

Answer 7

Well I guess that is a programming question. I think it is pretty common.

As to why...

1. It might be that they feel collaboration will work better as it is a problem when different time zones and schedules are involved.
2. Along the same vein, this might promote a better "team" atmosphere.
3. And of course it's always possible that you're superiors are forced to start at 8:30 and by golly you're going suffer too.
4. They may have had some discipline issues in the past and are rigid now.

I think you would do well to try to determine the exact (and real) reasons from within the company and then present your case on how they would benefit from a more flexible attitude.

Answer 8

It's not unreasonable.

Even though it might not be ideal to your needs as a person or a developer, it might make sense for everyone else. Having everyone come in on time helps identify who comes in late. Having everyone come in on time helps minimize arguments regarding "why does he get to come in late and I don't?". Having everyone come in on time helps schedule early meetings, for those rare cases where someone does need you face to face.

Those are just some of the reasons. They may not be important to you or make sense to you, but they make enough sense for the person signing your paychecks. It's not at all unreasonable or rare.

Answer 9

About a year ago, I had an employer who valued style over substance, and thought it reflected positively on his company to have happy, smiling employees at their desks by 8:30 in the morning. Except when I needed to take conference calls with teams in Asia, I had never really needed to keep such early hours, but it seemed essential in the 8:30-5 shop that I was working for.

I'm a bit of an insomniac, so this didn't work very well for me. I would often arrive exhausted and didn't do my best possible work, but apparently that wasn't as important as the ritual at that company.

Fortunately for me, since that CEO valued style over substance to such an extent that he wasn't actually conducting the business he said he was. He's now in jail awaiting trial for money laundering, wire fraud, running a Ponzi scheme, etc. This may not apply to your case (I'd say the odds are that it doesn't), but the upside is that I quickly found another job when that company declared bankruptcy, but before they completely ran out of mis-appropriated investor funds. So you may find a light at the end of the tunnel: Namely, another job.

Startup culture in most worlds that I can think of don't emphasize early-to-rise hours. They may expect long hours, self-sacrifice, and your full attention, but not usually early morning start times. It's kind of hard to simultaneously expect early morning start times and after-hours availability, after all, so most startups tend to have flexible hours, at least in the West Coast. Most interesting software companies emphasize delivering great stuff over all sorts of other things, occasionally valuing results over basic social skills and general pleasantness. (I prefer a more balanced approach, personally).

That being said, I don't think an 8:30 start time is completely unreasonable; I've made certain adjustments to my daily routine to accommodate employer needs. I would just prefer a more flexible start time, and tend to take gigs with companies that are less rigid about things that aren't related to delivery of quality work. (I have a family now, and starting after 9:30 on a regular basis would burden my family's routines as well, so I try to head off to work early enough to get home by 7 or so, but I also do some late night work from home).

Answer 10

One valid reason is that if you allow lot of flexibility, it's practically impossible to organize any big meeting. You can't do it in the morning, as some people come in late, you can't do it midday, as people take their lunch break at different times, you can't do it late, as some people leave early. This leaves you with very limited range of hours, when everybody is supposed to be in the office.

Answer 11

It probably is indicative of the demographic here, but no-one has mentioned children. Won't someone think of the children? If you've got kids, they need to be at school at 9:00 and picked up at 3:30.

My previous job was a strictly 9-5 place because the IT section was only a small part of the business, thus got the same rules as the kitchen staff, cleaners and admin people. I explained to my boss that I had to do school drop-offs and could not be in until later (9:30~9:45). My wife, who also works full-time, would start at 7:00AM so she could do pickups.

But that was not the question: Often companies may have a stated 9-5 policy but I've never come across a place where it is rigidly enforced. Usually, as long as you are there in core hours (10-4) then it is not a problem. The bigger the company or the less IT focused the company, the more likely to have such a policy.

Answer 12

There are two types of programming jobs:

1) You're an asset - they understand the value and importance of their in-house technology.

2) You're a liability - they'd rather not have you around, you're some weirdo taking up money and space, and doing things that really aren't necessary.

How to quickly tell the difference:

Type 1: They are concerned mostly about what you accomplish - goal oriented.

Type 2: They are concerned mostly about how you fit in and follow the rules - process oriented.

You are probably in a Type 2 job - find a Type 1 job if you can.

Having said that, discipline and restrictions will make you more of a pro - a pro delivers, regardless.

Answer 13

In the last two companies I've worked for, I had no limitations about the time I start or finish my work. The only rules was:

• 8 hours a day minimum.
• I have to go to all the meetings, they will tell me the time the day before.
• I have to coordinate my hours with your co-workers. They must know when I will be available.

These rules are the same in my current job. I know I'm very lucky.

Of course, my company knows that I'm not going to lie about my hours, because I put my fingerprint in a machine when I arrive and when I leave the office... and there is a camera looking to me all the day. That is the prize.

Answer 14

Part of the consideration is the area where you work. For instance, in the Washington DC metro area, it's considered 'normal' for people to come in to work between 6:30am and 10:30am. When they do that, they usually stay for 8 hours and then leave (so people who come in at 6:30am would leave at 2:30pm). This works because otherwise people would constantly be late trying to get to work at 8:00 or 8:30am.

On the whole, it's foolish to ask developers to keep to an 8-4 schedule. That's like asking motivation to keep to an 8-4 schedule. It doesn't happen.

I'm happy that where I work (The Motley Fool) allows me to come and go as I please. Most people get into the office around 9:00-9:30am, but we're allowed to come in whatever time we'd like, so long as we get our work done. They also have no vacation policy (a la Netflix), so that if I need a day off (for whatever reason) I just need to let my scrum team know I'll be out and have someone to cover any of my responsibilities.