I'm saying that the highly skilled people aren't gonna put up with it because they are in the drivers seat..
JDCAG (NOT Colin) said:Complete Idiot said:We definitely have had employees ask us to buy monitors and docking stations and other hardware for their home, things we've already bought them in our physical office since we were a full work in the office company until the pandemic. It's usually the same employees that say "I'm saving thousands on gas and tolls and car maintenance, and have tons of free time" but oh can you buy me a $150 monitor.Comeby! said:
At what point will WFH employees start calling on employers to cover their wifi and other WFH support? Also what will the IRS and Dept of Labor have to say about it? I know it's considered a perk to WFH but I see a scenario where an employee is wanted to get compensated for holding a home office.
If a company has always relied on remote workers, with no physical location, I get offering home office supplies, gym memberships, maybe coffee/snack stipends - they traditionally competing with in office employers who offer their employees all those things in the big office building. But if a company has always been a non-remote work environment, but due to competitive environment is forced to shift to WFH options, and has already invested in break rooms and coffee and snacks and gyms and office equipment - it seems a bit whiny and needy for the employee to now ask for all that same stuff for free at home.
To me this is another example of a company trying to lay WFH on top of a traditional in-office culture, and I agree - it's going to be very difficult to make it work. It will be interesting to see if some of those pivot how they allocate equipment and how they spend their money to support in-office comforts.
I think the key in your statement is "to be competitive". You can say it is whiny, but just as somebody else pointed out that it isn't the businesses problem if you aren't located conveniently...it isn't the potential employees problem that you spent a ton of money to build a nice office with creature comforts for folks. Ultimately it may be better for both parties to seek other options at that point.
thousands even...and the world's oldest sale's profession definitely required face to face interaction.Aust Ag said:
I'm in sales and alot of my clients and prospects are now at home. Kinda sucks. I miss the days of being able to find people at their office. They were more willing to go to lunch or HH then too. Now, they're out in the burbs and don't want to leave the house to meet you.
Personally, I'm working more from home now as a result. Doesn't suck, but not great either. I don't care what you say, it's better to have a relationship, face to face, with a person you are looking to sell (or buy from if you are on the other side). All kinds of advantages for both parties.
Been like that for hundreds of years, now it's half gone in a relative instant.
Stat Monitor Repairman said:
I'm saying that the highly skilled people aren't gonna put up with it because they are in the drivers seat..
Frok said:
In my profession it's important to get beyond the daily tasks so you can be proactive on more strategic goals.
WFH hasn't been good for that because people answer their emails, complete their tasks, and then check out. I'm the same way, it's harder to be focused and keep going at home.
This I've started going back to the office more and more because I don't want to stay in the same position the rest of my life.
I'm more productive from home because Im able to get all my work done without any distractions. In the office, I used to have coworkers that would stop by and chit chat and interrupt whatever I was working on. It was impossible to complete a task from beginning to end some days because Suzy would want to chat about her sons t-ball game, or Mike wanted to talk about his fantasy football team. Meanwhile I had to sit there and pretend to be interested without looking like a dick lol.jh0400 said:Frok said:
In my profession it's important to get beyond the daily tasks so you can be proactive on more strategic goals.
WFH hasn't been good for that because people answer their emails, complete their tasks, and then check out. I'm the same way, it's harder to be focused and keep going at home.
This I've started going back to the office more and more because I don't want to stay in the same position the rest of my life.
This has been my experience as well. "Check the box" tasks still get done, but it is significantly harder to get traction on more strategic initiatives. That amplifies if those initiatives require cross-functional support.
Ditto. There is a certain collective creativity and problem solving (in some jobs) that are better off when the right collection of people are interacting. The spontaneous, "Would this work...?" type of comments that benefit the organization.jh0400 said:Frok said:
In my profession it's important to get beyond the daily tasks so you can be proactive on more strategic goals.
WFH hasn't been good for that because people answer their emails, complete their tasks, and then check out. I'm the same way, it's harder to be focused and keep going at home.
This I've started going back to the office more and more because I don't want to stay in the same position the rest of my life.
This has been my experience as well. "Check the box" tasks still get done, but it is significantly harder to get traction on more strategic initiatives. That amplifies if those initiatives require cross-functional support.
AggieMainland said:
The people WFH and taking care of kids when before they were working and sending kids to childcare are the ones that will ruin it at some companies. It was acceptable during covid. Now its being greedy.
I have not found this to be the case. There is a significant portion of the working population (I'll call it around 40%) that are good employees, but they need to get their work clothes on and get to the office in order to perform.AggiEE said:
So fire them
Problem solved
The reality is that those that didn't do **** in the office don't do **** at home. Nothing has really changed much
The ones that produce in the office produce at home, and if their job is all on the computer they can probably perform it better at home. Don't let outlier abusers ruin it for everyone.
I have said the same thing about a certain percentage of the Corps at A&M...some of those students wouldn't survive college without that environment around them. Same can be said for some coworkers.Quote:
I have not found this to be the case. There is a significant portion of the working population (I'll call it around 40%) that are good employees, but they need to get their work clothes on and get to the office in order to perform.
Stat Monitor Repairman said:
Our brains and bodies haven't evolved fast enough for this technological leap.
So let them go to the office then, if thats where they feel most productive. Leave the rest of us alone who are productive working from homeDRE06 said:I have not found this to be the case. There is a significant portion of the working population (I'll call it around 40%) that are good employees, but they need to get their work clothes on and get to the office in order to perform.AggiEE said:
So fire them
Problem solved
The reality is that those that didn't do **** in the office don't do **** at home. Nothing has really changed much
The ones that produce in the office produce at home, and if their job is all on the computer they can probably perform it better at home. Don't let outlier abusers ruin it for everyone.