Family of MSFT employee who died warn tech companies not to overwork workers

Companies have no morals. They only respond to profit.

Abolish the overtime exemption for computer systems analysts, computer programmers, and software engineers. Make it unprofitable to extract labor until someone dies. All other actions are impotent.

How is this going to be enforced? Does that mean everyone has to fill timesheets all the time? I've worked in placed with timesheets and without them, and I liked latter ones much better.

Not to mention that even if timesheets were used, they provide no guarantees. We always had to get management permission to put overtime in, but no one really knew how much time we worked - especially with a possibility of remote work.

This can only be fixed by pervasive monitoring, and IMHO this leads to a very unpleasant workspace.

I get it. Time sheets are tedious and frankly, they suck.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not advocating for time sheets. I'm advocating against overtime exemption.

Even so, all other things being equal, if the tedium of timesheets is on one side of the equation and all of the exploitation of unpaid labor is on the other, I'd still rather not be exploited. Working for free, which is what unpaid overtime is, is unsupportable.

There are many examples of non-exempt professionals who deal with this without resorting to spyware or coercion. IT support specialists, paralegals, and lab technicians all have systems that work: simple start/stop time logs or weekly attestations, plus manager pre-approval for overtime. No one is tracking keystrokes and no one is forced into surveillance. It's about accountability. You attest to your hours, managers approve exceptions, and overtime gets paid. That's the balance.

you are making it sound there is an upside in timesheets, but there really is not.

In a current world, manager says: "We have great work-life balance, feel free to work as much or as little as you want! Also, here is an assignment, if this is not done by Friday I'll PIP you, then fire you and you'll get deported. Wink wink, you might want to work more."

In a timesheet world, a manager tells the employee: "Sorry, I cannot approve overtime for you, because I care about you! Also, here is an assignment, if this is not done by Friday I'll PIP you, then fire you and you'll get deported. So make sure you don't record more than 40 hours, but remember we don't really know how much you spend working (wink wink)"

This law might eliminate those insane AI startups which openly advertise 996 schedules, but most requirements of overtime are not that overt.

Look, we can spin out any nightmare scenario, but the reality today is worse: unpaid overtime is the norm, and people in tech are burning out and even dying from overwork. That's not a hypothetical. It's our current world.

Timesheets arent fun, but they're not the end of the world either. Other skilled professions (IT support, paralegals, lab techs) use simple weekly logs or start/stop tracking without surveillance. They get paid for their overtime. We don't.

If the choice is between tedious record keeping or doing more work for the same pay, the latter is far more exploitative and soul crushing. We can fix the mechanics without ignoring the principle: work more, get paid more.

Honest question: is filling out a timesheet really worse, to you, than working extra hours for free?

Let me try to restate my argument:

If your boss is bad, you are still going to be working extra hours. Timesheets DO NOT PREVENT extra hours for computer programmers (unless there is also pervasive surveillance, like in the worst consulting shops).

Look, I've worked in a few places with timesheets before. In one place, there was a "no overtime" policy. All this means you always put 38 hours on your timesheets, no matter how much time you actually work. Worked 57 hours? Well, you put down 1 hour in your timesheet for every 1.5 hours actually working.

So I am sorry, but your idea is super naive. It's not going to work. It will make life worse, but will not provide benefits.

If your boss is bad, they'll abuse power no matter the system. I don't disagree. But that's true in every field. So why do IT support, paralegals, and lab techs manage to make non-exempt status work without "pervasive surveillance"?

Help me connect the dots: how do you get from "I had a bad boss who broke the rules" to "therefore we should remove the legal framework that makes rule-breaking punishable"? Because without that framework, exploitation isn't just a possibility, it's legal.

That’s like saying "people will speed, so speed limits don’t work." Sure, some people speed, but the world without those limits and the legal weight behind them is objectively worse.