It's good, but it's work. I have a friend, really good swift/iPhone dev who charge 350 to 500€ an hour (so 200-350 after taxes). If after taxes and expenses (loan repayment) he can earn 2-3.5k for less than 10h of work per year that can be a good investment. But that's not taking into account the principal he invested, the fact that the job would bore him, the fact that he can't improve his skills.
It might be an okay investment for me (I'm a salary man, can't be bothered with freelance work), but for him I'd bet it's a money loosing proposition
[edit] the 500€/hour is an outlier, he wanted out of a project and kept increasing his rates, which were accepted up to that point.
Before anybody gets drawn in by the clickbait headline, the text of the article is about how China (i.e. large a Chinese vendor) is trying to win Apple's business away from Korean and Japanese vendors. So their sales teams are 'targeting' Apple, which is fine I guess, but not what most people think about when they hear that someone is targeting Apple.
Economic mobility is definitely a part of social justice. But let's note that those groups that most suffer from a lack of economic mobility are Black and Latinx groups. Even among whites, white men tend have better economic mobility than white women. See for example the data at https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/27/upshot/make-y....
So, race and sex are directly tied to economic mobility, which is why they are the important factors that are being measured.
It doesn't explain why they couldn't just buy wooden or fiberglass ladders though. I'm sure there are many vendors who would be happy to fill such a contract.
Or people who really just prefer horses as a means of transportation. They can have their shows and their rallies, and the rest of us can get to work on the means of transportation that makes sense.
Of all the criticisms one can make of this article, this is one of the weakest. If I agree to a $10k pay cut from my employer, that's functionally equivalent to me giving my employer $10k.
(and in the US at least, 'credits' are usually applied at the very end of the tax process, so have a real 1:1 value with dollars owed, as opposed to deductions which can have varying value)
That would be true if in case you refuse the cut, you continue to be employed at the same salary.
If the alternative is not to get anything (or severance), you would weigh it against future scenarios and calculate your scenarios based on some assumptions eg how many years you planned to stay employed and what is the expected time it will take you to find a new job and what are the costs of switching (house sale and moving costs) etc.
Those are other criticisms of the analysis, not the simple fact that credits are worth 1:1 in real dollars, which is what the original poster was objecting to.
If you've been working at a large company for several years, there may be very few people outside your company who know your work well enough to give a meaningful reference. Then, you can't give a manager's name, since they will almost certainly tell your own manager what is going on. That leaves only your co-workers.
Oh, you're talking about someone applying for a job and using a reference from their current company. I always thought people used references from companies they don't work at anymore.
Or your references might be a manager from your previous position plus a co-worker from a previous position plus a manager from the position before that. The co-worker from the previous position might end up being recruited.
That said, if my reference applied for the same position as me and got it, whatever, more power to them, and I probably wasn't going to get it anyway. There are enough jobs out there for both of us, and I'd rather at least know that one went to someone I like.
In that case they should definitely avoid giving references until the last possible step. For those that do have other options though, I still think going with a manager/non colleague at a company you're not associated with anymore is the safer bet for these sorts of things, since recruiters won't have anyone to poach and your current boss won't know you're looking.
(Solution 2 would be to have as many different references as possible and to give different ones for different applications, so that no one gets too annoyed by all the calls/emails).
Yeah, as much as I like long-form pieces on how a technology was developed, pretty much any company with capital can make an Android tablet nowadays. But "Company develops internal tech solution to reduce BOM costs & reliance on third parties" isn't as sexy a title.
