Upon not being offered the support that a good on-boarding process should include, she worked with other members of the team to solve the problem she was facing and get started on something useful, rather than trudge through the rather pointless series of tasks that were assigned a higher priority than a basic work surface. Sounds like a team player to me.

Uhm not what I took from the text: "Some friends who had already been at the company reached out and provided their own take on how to get started, and I went from that."

This looks like people from random other teams in the company. Not the team she was hired for. Totally doing her own thing because she had some connections.

I suppose that particular sentence could be interpreted a number of ways; I see it more as leveraging connections necessarily rather than surreptitiously. Either way, having friends at the company would also help cultivate a sense of optimism that carried her through this time rather than being as significant at the time as many are proposing.

I agree. Maybe they handed out desks in the onboarding process. At least talk to someone about it instead of punishing yourself by sitting and whining to yourself.

When you join a company you cannot change things that aren’t part of your tasks right away.

You can, however, and should, ask for what you need, such as a desk.

Not taking responsibility, but stewing, playing the fake victim, then writing a self righteous blog post to complain, when you could have just asked and got a desk.

I'm not surprised your experience is not a great one, when you don't communicate then blame others for not knowing what you're missing, and have that entitled and privileged, "Bring me a desk," attitude.

It certainly shows a willingness to not be particularly compliant, which is one of the greatest business (or group) sins.

Agreeableness is an asset in a well-functioning institutions. Disagreeableness is an asset in pathological ones.

Disagreeable people, however, often cannot really tell the difference.

Is the author not a team player or tired of the BS? Would you be willing to have a conversation with a team member like this?

If I witnessed your type of response (seemingly defensive) within the first hours/days of starting, I would begin to wonder what kind of change I could impress even if I did take the "approved channels". Ideally, we would pick up on all of this during interviews and go our own ways. It doesn't always work that way though. There is /something/ we have to offer each other.

You put up your defenses, I put up mine. And in a short time you're looking for a new hire, and I'm looking for a new place.

It’s just a cultural fit issue. Different people have different personalities / preferences, and what may be one person’s “red flag” may be the other person’s preference.

Not all preferences are reasonable.

I've seen multiple posts by the author of this piece and I wouldn't want to work with that person. I've worked with people who have similar personalities, and it's just not worth it. You can find competent people who are easier to get along with.

What does worth it mean to you? I worked relatively near the author of this post in the past, and she’s totally brilliant. Saved our company’s ass over and over again. I personally learned a ton from her and still look up to her immensely even though she left behind a mean (anonymous) complaint about me and probably thinks not very highly of me :p

How old are you? I’m in my thirties and if someone left a mean anonymous note about me I would be pissy about that for a few years before I’d find it mildly amusing. Congrats! (in case there is doubt: not being sarcastic)

Yeah, mean anonymous notes are childish. Be an adult and have a conversation with the person you have a problem with.

I understand what you're getting at here and my hypocrisy did cross my mind when I was typing my comment, but please recognize the power imbalance between somebody like me who is very junior in their career and a visibly-brilliant 20X Engineer with an established audience. It's terrifying to think of the reputational and career ramifications of being a War Story topic for somebody in that very influential camp. My late-night comment wording wasn't the best, and what I was trying (and perhaps failing) to get at was that Rachel belongs to a class of engineer so outstandingly capable that dealing with any faults they may have is still totally worth it. Definitely so on an overall-corporate-success level, but even so on the very personal level. I learned so much by just being in her orbit for a brief point in time that I'd still jump at the chance to be in that position again despite how scared I know I would be of fucking anything else up. The career growth via skill osmosis is worth it to me.

Or put your name on it.

John Hancock didn't sign "Concerned Former British Citizen"

Nah, I didn't mean it like that. I'm a big boy and can handle criticism. It was just hurtful to read a rant about myself from someone I considered kind of an idol before that. It wasn't incorrect or undeserved at all but I just wished I'd been asked my side. I'd rather not identify myself to explain more, especially since Rachel comments here. (Hi Rachel, keep being awesome and ignore the haters!)

> What does worth it mean to you?

Not the parent, not having a strong opinion on the author, but have felt similar about some people in the past. "Difficult to work with" is an issue, and I too prefer to avoid people that sort into that category. They'd have to be actually brilliant to make up for it, just being really, really good doesn't cut it.

Why? Because they add friction to things, and they poison the team's ability to get work done. Difficult people are not fun to work with, so everyone avoids them. And then they avoid using things the difficult person built because using it would mean you'd have to work with them if you run into issues, or want to improve it etc.

It's just much easier to find people that are easy to work with, and working with them is much more enjoyable. Even if they were not as good, my personal experience is that replacing one difficult person with two others is well worth it. A happy team is way more productive and makes up for it easily, so accepting someone that's difficult to work with is generally "not worth it" to me.

Uh... what?

I don't think, that was the point. It was having to do things on the clock with unfamiliar equipment.

I'm not sure that under those circumstances anyone is predisposed to like things (laptop, company...)

But that’s not a permanent conundrum. Either get the company to buy you an external keyboard or bring your own...of course you’re gonna need a desk in that case though.

Yeah, I don't really get the part about the Touch Bar MacBook. How is that relevant or how is it a red flag on the company's part? Did she request a MacBook Air or something?

It's relevant as a stressor.

It's a device not used by the author previously, and does weird janky things, distracting them from otherwise being able to work.

I've gotta say I was in a similar situation with regards to new unknown hardware last year.

They hand me a new-ish Macbook Pro, wireless keyboard and mouse, and point me at a desk. It's not new hardware, and it never operated together so I spend way too long trying to figure out why the fuck there's no "Pair device" button, or anything like that on the Mac OS hardware.

After struggling and trying various online tutorials which involve holding the mouse near the screen while you turn it on - I finally ask for help and someone points out that I can just plug the USB/Thunderbolt cable in. What USB/Thunderbolt cable? Oh the one that someone else stole to charge their iphone, I guess.

Meanwhile I'm being bombarded with a ton of forms and shit I have to sign up with and people from all over messaging me to welcome me to the company and "Can you do x,y,z real quick..."

As it was, I was a nervous wreck for the rest of the day second guessing everything that didn't quite work like I expected (weird OSX-isms), and worried about looking like some new overpaid idiot that doesn't even know how to operate a computer.

Okay, it's shit, but then what? Looking at the blog, the author uses a Mac in general. If they want to use a Mac, then you either need to live with the butterfly keyboard or buy a used machine.

Living with the butterfly keyboard is relatively easy as a developer, since you're probably going to have the computer docked with an external monitor, keyboard and mouse most of the time anyways.

I dunno, that keyboard gave me feelings of RSI literally about after twenty minutes of use when I had to extract it from my desk for assorted trips/meetings/whatever. I ended up getting a 2015 MBP, provided by work, which was technically a downgrade but ended up being an upgrade in basically every way.

The red flag is thus: they give you an apple device manufactured after 2015.

;)

Is it reasonable to be expected to do timed onboarding tests with known problematic hardware with zero opportunity to familiarize you self with it?

I wonder how quickly the HR person who set that test up would do if required to do it on, for example, a UK English keyboard?

That requires getting a desk

Yeah, I mean, ok the Buttefly MBP might not be great

But the amount of companies that would give a brand new MBP to a newcomer are in the single digit percentages.

Most likely you're given an (underspecced - at least for the amount of 'corpware/AV/etc' installed on it) corporate Windows notebook, brand new if you're lucky, maybe a hand me down. Oh and maybe you get the admin password or maybe not. And maybe your day starts 30min later because of all the Windows updates.

So no, I'm not complaining about company Macbooks

>But the amount of companies that would give a brand new MBP to a newcomer are in the single digit percentages.

What, for developers? Usually tech companies emphasize that they'll get you the kind of tools that you want. I personally got a brand new 15-inch MacBook Pro after I joined my current workplace right out of school.

Outside of the "web startup" scene (in first world countries, especially) getting a MBP is rare.

I don't care all that much about what kind of laptop I get (or if I even get one, never requested one from my employer) but they better provide a proper desktop workstation with a full keyboard and large screen.

Doesn't say she uttered anything out loud about what a garbage laptop it is.

But why not? At that point, I'd rather just bring my own hardware. I'd rather have just about anything else, a less powerful Macbook Air, a Thinkpad, a Dell XPS, almost anything. I'll take a wired keyboard ducttaped on top of the Macbook.

Touchbar MacBooks are just one more sign of a bureaucratic company that cannot functionally empower any single person who gives enough of a shit to recognize that a lot of people hate the Touchbar. Nope, just someone signs off, "Yeah whatever get them the expensive one, it must be better."

You accidentally nailed it though: she didn’t try to fix anything. She was given some kit that most people are happy with, and didn’t try to change the situation. She went and sulked. You’re assuming the company wouldn’t have offered an alternative if she requested it, but I guarantee that they would have gotten her something else.

She either "whined" immediately upon getting her laptop, how dare she. Or she "sulked" and didn't try to fix anything. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't.

What? How are those two remotely collectively exhaustive? Let's give her the benefit of the doubt and presume this company really has some issues. Another approach would be to accept that companies can't cater generic HR processes to every single employee, complete the "bullshit" tasks as best she can (as she will likely be required to many times again throughout her life) and then raise the issue with the appropriate team at a later date. People encounter these things with comical frequency when starting a new job that it's basically a meme...however most people manage to get things sorted out.

Collectively exhaustive? I'm just summarizing the two direct replies I've gotten, both of which are making assumptions about what her behaviors must have been on her first day. They're diametric opposites, silently sulking or loudly whining.

I think the OP can be criticized at a basic level of being overly negative as well as being a personal rant rather than anything particularly insightful for HN. Rachelbythebay had a bad experience at some job and feels like the onboarding experience was a big red flag--that doesn't offer us much to learn. And that's fine, I can see a criticism of the post like that and half-agree. Maybe it's not for HN, and that is her own personal blog, so it fits that she might write posts on her blog that can miss the mark here.

Making assumptions about her exact behaviors beyond what was written in the article, that's just weird to me. It's an odd defensive position you're taking in which you don't like the post so you have to defend the company by making shit up.

"She must have been sulking silently!" Interesting, tell me more about this moody, sulking woman. What else did she do wrong?

> GROAN.

> After another hour of this, I had enough.

> I wound up camped like a refugee

I'm not assuming anything. She spells it out right there in TFA. This is the definition of sulking.

> Interesting, tell me more about this moody, sulking woman.

Not sure why you're so intent on this gender strawman. Just because she's a woman does not absolve her of bad behavior. I never said she was moody. I don't know her in the least bit. What I do know is that she handled this situation poorly, but is undoubtedly emboldened by people like you who will trip over yourself to play the gender card.

Thank you so much for pointing this out.

The whole thread is full of toxic and judgemental comments. I enjoyed reading her post but I am put off by the absence of empathy in the comments here. Imagine being the author and reading this comment section where you're called out as a "whining", "autistic", "lame", "entitled" "tech-fetishist with poor communication skills" who is "not taking responsibility".

Am I wrong if I pick up a vibe of misogyny as well?

> Am I wrong if I pick up a vibe of misogyny as well?

Half the comments are incorrectly saying "he" so no, you're not (perhaps for assuming gender, not for the critiques though).

But nice try.

> Half the comments are incorrectly saying "he" so no

Let's exclude that half (?!) and look at the others then which may very well be.

Also, I couldn't find any of those comments referring to the author as "he" / "him". Would you mind please pointing me to one?

I’ve never heard of any tech company that doesn’t give you a choice. That is of course, unless they don’t use Windows organization wide.

But besides, she’s getting a computer from her company, not her grandma on Christmas. They hire devs by the handful, they can easily take it back and put it to use. The point is, it’s hard to sympathize unless her supervisors turned her down.

I agree though, orientation is boring and I’ve never gone to one in my life. I didn’t know until my senior year in college that I had been assigned an advisor. But then just skip it, and try to forget it. Don’t skip it just to linger on every horrible detail, and spiral deeper into a depression because you weren’t assigned a desk. Ask for one.

Damned if you don’t. No one will hate you for making perfectly reasonable requests, though I’m sure people like that exist in the world, I just don’t see them in this story.

How's it different from companies that give you a Dell notebook or Windows notebook? The best solution would be to give the new employee the option between a Mac and Windows. Amazing solution would if you then could pick your preference from a small list. E.g. MacBook Air, MBP and a Surface or something.

> I think she believes her own stress is a perfect guide to the world being wrong, rather than her own limitations.

I like how she's listening to herself and insisting on some basic human decency. You should always at a minimum insist on your right to walk out of uncomfortable situations. Personally, I'd be doing the exact same thing for similar reasons, and I'd feel bad if others tried to come up with a diagnose for me for trying to minimise emotional stress and eventual burnout.

She didnt say "I didnt enjoy the HR day and found it stressful". She didnt say she's trying to "minimise emotional stress", she said it was a "redflag".

Doing a pointless quiz and being given a macbook pro is a "redflag".

This is a person who does not take any responsibility for the stress they feel and attribute it all to some nefarious feature of the environment they are in.

What she needs to do here is learn what features of that environment caused her stress, and be self-aware enough to seek out other employement which is structured differently.

What will happen if you don't understand yourself well, is that you'll keep thinking its "problems with other people" that you need to "fix". And you can't fix the entire world. You have to learn a compromise for the sake of your own mental health.

If stepping out of an uncomfortable situation can evoke such a strong negative response from so many people (as can be seen here), that doesn't bode well for actually confronting the issue.

> In this case, the HR dept has created a process for HR people: mostly extroverted who think "fun" is about chasing things around and answering pointless questions.

Yeah, especially since she mentioned that there seemed to be "junior" (possibly new college hires) programmers in the mix. Sometimes when you're senior you just gotta roll your eyes and sit through the BS.

Since it's done so rarely and tends to be unique to the employee--onboarding ALWAYS results in a disaster somewhere--as a manager it's my job to make sure that I put the fire out, squash the problems, and get my new employees up and running.