Aqizzar, they are paying you a pittance and expecting 60 hours. They have every intent of burning you out for what little your worth and then tossing you out on your ass. Don't kill themselves for you.
Basic entry-level programming is 40k and up. If they're paying you less, its because they don't expect you to be able to do any real programming. So, just chill, and most importantly don't let them destroy you. You may be salaried, but this doesn't mean your a slave, and it SOUNDS like the sort of job where they are going to fire you as soon as the product gets finished or your up for a pay raise anyways, so use it for the experience but don't kill yourself for them.
And try to avoid picking up bad habits, I guess...
^^^^^^^^
This.
Sounds like they want a codemonkey on the dirt cheap. Look at it as a way to get hands-on training and make a few bucks to boot. You'll probably be asked to do a lot of the drudge work, which isn't all bad, because it will drill certain skills and knowledge into you by sheer force of repetition.
Agreed. Get whatever you can out of them because they will take everything from you if you let them.
Expect guilt trips about being "salaried." Even if you can't get out of their bullshit demands, never, EVER feel like you owe them shit on a personal level. They can make you give them stuff, but don't let that "salary" get you down on the inside. Don't take it personally, because they're screwing you, you're not "failing to meet their demands." Their demands will be per se unreasonable, and there's shit all to be done about it unfortunately.
-moronicness-
if you work on a no-win-no-fee basis, then that can be a large problem.
if you don't, at least the repercussions won't be as bad.
oh god, I fail at attempting optimism.
I do appreciate the concern truly. Though honestly that's called a "contingency" basis and it's illegal/you get disbarred for it if you do it in certain cases like criminal defense or if its tied to getting someone a certain amount of child/spousal support (I'm pretty sure the Professional Rules of Conduct forbid it under one of the subsections of Rule 1.5 or something. I dont' remember the code off the top of my head.)
Contingency cases are often disfavored except in certain types of cases and they usually aren't offered unless either A.) There is a fairly high chance of winning, or B.) The lawyer's entire practice is set up so he has 10 cases at a time and as long as he wins 3 of those ten, he gets paid a good compensation.
Contrary to popular belief, contingency cases usually end up bad for the client in practice.
That's a bit like saying "It's the lion's fault for eating him, not the fact that he wandered into a nature preserve while wearing a coat made out of raw meat." I get what you're saying, but c'mon...the world is like that.
*fist shake*
I fail to see how either of those apply. I wasn't making a moral judgement, nor attempting to justify it from any perceived (a)morality in the natural world.
I wasn't saying "Lions eat anything too dumb to run away from them, therefore con-men ought to swindle anyone dumb enough to fall for them."
It was more of a "Lions are an environmental danger (in some locations), and cognizance of that danger is the responsibility of the individual. Likewise, being tricked by those with nefarious intent is essentially an environmental danger (in pretty much any location with more than a couple of people in it), and cognizance of that danger is likewise the responsibility of the individual."
Redking basically has it, except add to that being told not to do something and explained why it would be a terrible idea to do that thing. Then you do it anyhow, all the bad stuff you were warned about happens, and you then complain that life isn't fair and you were tricked. Also it is clearly the fault of the person who warned you because they... "didn't do anything...."
This is how shit always seems to go:
1. I explain the law; it is complex; people don't seem to get it or why it is necessary.
2. They then say something along the lines of, "why can't we just do [simpler thing]?"
3. I explain why simplier thing won't work, which is partially me repeating myself about why we need to do the complex legal stuff.
4. They either ignore me and do the stupid simple stuff, or bitch about me not doing it the [simpler way] they really want. Then they complain about how I spent "way too much time on this" and how the bill is thus too high (even after I've really already knocked off some time, because if they really paid me for my time like they should, they'd be broke.
People: "But it's just [insert incredibly hard thing here]! Why does it have to be so complicated?"
[facepalm].