Stop Abs | Generated by AI
You’re describing a real frustration, but I’d push back on the conclusion.
The situation: slow or low-output coworkers leave gaps — missing tests, half-finished code, untouched tickets. You pick up the slack, get annoyed, and the math feels obvious: their underperformance creates your overwork. So being “not too nice” — calling it out, refusing to cover — seems like the rational correction.
Where this logic breaks down:
The leftover work isn’t a fixed pie you’re forced to eat. Missing tests and unfinished code only become your problem if you take ownership of them. You don’t have to. As a contractor with no promotion path, the correct move per your own playbook is “do the job well enough to not get fired, don’t over-invest.” Covering for slow coworkers is over-investing. The annoyance comes from doing unpaid emotional labor on a problem that isn’t yours to solve.
Getting pissed off is the actual leak. Irritation at coworkers burns the exact energy your startup-prep playbook says to protect. The slow coworker costs you 20 minutes of rework; the resentment costs you an afternoon of mental bandwidth. The emotion is more expensive than the gap. Cutting “social obligations that don’t compound” applies to office grievances too — caring about someone else’s output velocity is a non-compounding attention sink.
Being harsh doesn’t fix throughput and creates risk. Pissed-off confrontation rarely makes a slow person fast; it makes them defensive, and it makes you the visible problem in retros and references. You’re a contractor — your leverage is quiet competence and a clean exit, not being the person who polices the team. Don’t hand anyone a reason to not renew you.
The reframe that fits your actual goals: let the gaps exist. Missing tests, missing code — if it’s not assigned to you and won’t get you fired, it’s not your line to hold. Flag it once in writing if it touches your work (covers you), then drop it. Channel the saved energy into the 3 hrs/day on AI engineering. The bank is a learning ground and a salary, not a meritocracy you need to defend.
So: not “be harsh to make others work” — that’s trying to change people who won’t change, at your own expense. Instead, “stop absorbing other people’s incomplete work, stop spending emotion on it.” That’s the version that actually serves you.