Worthwhile intertubez finds

[Highway]

Even if you're being paid for goals accomplished, when you prove that accomplishing one goal no longer takes you the same amount of time, I don't think you can ethically coast on that forever after. And "hey you automated that thing we hired you to do that used to take us 4 days each week, and now it takes no additional input and is done perfectly. Cool, thanks for helping out. BTW, don't bother coming back tomorrow, since we don't need you now."

There's going to be a tipping point where you an employer is going to need you to spend an amount of time in a continuing fashion to add value through your work. Whether that's by taking on other tasks and automating them (until you run out of low hanging fruit), or whether that's doing things that can't be automated, I think that employers are fine asking employees to continue to add value. And yeah, employers need to be able to recognize the value added and reward people for that, but there's gonna be a balance that needs to get struck.

[Kolohe]

Meh, I don't believe in ethics for that sort of thing. I do believe in competition though.

[Kolohe]

I mean, if management doesn't understand or even know how long a process is supposed to take, they aren't doing their jobs, for which they are ostensibly paid even more (or have some other perq or upward mobility)

[Mo]

The only thing that would have made this better is if the trophy hunters got trampled to death.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... mibia.html