EDIT: also I wouldn’t consider this egregious. If the Senior explains and the person was happy to learn something then that’s a good outcome. If they are stubborn about it, then that wouldn’t be great.
I've seen far worse things than this done to a SQL database though…
Just have a look at the list from Wikipedia [1] and notice how many repeats there are.
As an example AMT could be either UTC+4 or UTC-4.
And this doesn't even includes the various local acronyms that people use around the world.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_time_zone_abbreviation...
If you don't use these, you will inevitably be somewhat wrong due to leap issues, political changes in time, or the like.
IANA time zone identifiers are fully-qualified and unambiguous like America/Los_Angeles or Asia/Kolkata.
If you are trying to store dates and not timestamps, that’s what you want, otherwise equality tests might not work right.
> (The integers stored are usually POSIX timestamps.)
For date types, if they exist distinctly, usually not.