Working Remote

[Jolly]

Alternatively, I have another idea...

Parts of the Midwest, such as some of the prairie towns in Nebraska are in dire straits and dying. Some are doing OK, but they could always use a boost.

I've always thought moving some of the Federal department HQs out of D.C. is a good thing.

Let's combine the two ideas... I hereby propose we move the FCC to Wahoo, NE. Workers may work remotely for 2-4 days/week, if allowed. Some jobs may require more frequent on-site presence.

[Horace]

If remote work becomes a tribal issue, look for a hard left turn from me.

[Mik]

Agreed. Where people work is between employer and employee.

[Aqua Letifer]

@Horace said in Working Remote:

If remote work becomes a tribal issue, look for a hard left turn from me.

Same.

I work more hours now. And have fewer meetings so, y'know, more work done on top of that.

I also don't work in a vacuum. Collaboration's far better remotely than in-person, at least for the stuff I do.

There's no good argument against it other than managers not having the skills to manage a remote team. They don't say this of course, they give a handwavey answer about nobody actually playing golf and "smiling faces."

[Mik]

For several years onsite work meant participating in conference calls, often when everyone was in the same building, but meeting space was limited. An exercise in futility.

[Jolly]

For middle managers, especially for those herding civil servants, productivity depends a lot on being to work the system to keep your employees working. I can see where you need those people in the office at least a few days a week.

[Aqua Letifer]

@Jolly said in Working Remote:

For middle managers, especially for those herding civil servants, productivity depends a lot on being to work the system to keep your employees working. I can see where you need those people in the office at least a few days a week.

All depends on how to track deliverables. Very few can't be tracked remotely.

[Axtremus]

@Mik said in Working Remote:

Where people work is between employer and employee.

+1

No need for big government rule to regulate where people work from, the usual occupational safety rules are enough.

[Jolly]

Lad, I'm talking about government employees. I suspect the government has the right to tell them where they will work.

[Axtremus]

@Jolly said in Working Remote:

I'm talking about government employees. I suspect the government has the right to tell them where they will work.

Let the local managers under the executive branch figure it out. The legislative branch should stay out of micromanaging remote work policies. There should be more useful things for Sen. Cruz to spend his time on, maybe go work on avoiding the impending government shutdown.

[Jolly]

From the FCC's website:

The FCC's Mission
An independent U.S. government agency overseen by Congress, the Commission is the federal agency responsible for implementing and enforcing America's communications law and regulations.

[Jolly]

Ya get that "overseen by Congress" part?

[Doctor Phibes]

If they wish to work from home full-time, cut their pay 15%.

That's a stupid idea.

People should be paid for how well they do the job.

For middle managers, especially for those herding civil servants, productivity depends a lot on being to work the system to keep your employees working. I >can see where you need those people in the office at least a few days a week.

I'm a middle manager, and I have to work 5 days a week in the office, as it 'fosters engagement' with my staff. On Mondays and Fridays the lights go out in the corridor outside my office due to the lack of people moving around.

I don't know about it fostering engagement, but I do know that I check my pension estimator a lot more than I used to.

[Jolly]

@Doctor-Phibes said in Working Remote:

If they wish to work from home full-time, cut their pay 15%.

That's a stupid idea.

People should be paid for how well they do the job.

For middle managers, especially for those herding civil servants, productivity depends a lot on being to work the system to keep your employees working. I >can see where you need those people in the office at least a few days a week.

I'm a middle manager, and I have to work 5 days a week in the office, as it 'fosters engagement' with my staff. On Mondays and Fridays the lights go out in the corridor outside my office due to the lack of people moving around.

I don't know about it fostering engagement, but I do know that I check my pension estimator a lot more than I used to.

Ever work with civil service?

[taiwan_girl]

I am with @Jolly on this. I think hybrid is here to stay, but I dont think that fully remote is overall effective.

(Of course, if varies by job type and person, but as a general, I think being in the office 3(?) days week at least is a good thing.)

But sometimes, opportunity cost is tough to prove.

[Aqua Letifer]

@taiwan_girl said in Working Remote:

(Of course, if varies by job type and person, but as a general, I think being in the office 3(?) days week at least is a good thing.)

A third of my co-workers live sufficiently close to the main office that they have to work on-site three days a week. They literally—and I shit you not—tried to "incentivize" people going in with office pizza parties. They enacted THE meme illustrating band-aid solutions to cultural deficit gunshot wounds.

Anyway, did you catch that this is only a third of my co-workers? So they go into the office, and meet and catch up with precisely nobody. The rest of us are all remote, all the time. They've effectively wasted 6 hours of their week commuting into a place staffed by hallways as dimly lit as Phibes'.

I'm all for in-office work. Makes a heck of a lot of sense for a number of jobs. I'm against some ignorant asshole telling me what's best for me because of their feels, not any experience with the kind of work I do.

[Doctor Phibes]

@Jolly said in Working Remote:

Ever work with civil service?

Are they lazier than the rest of us?

Because I kind of feel like that's the implication. Ted Cruz is basically moralizing about other people being on the take.

And he's a politician. An occupation not normally considered as the acme of ethical behaviour.

[Copper]

@Doctor-Phibes said in Working Remote:

Are they lazier than the rest of us?

It used to be that they pretended to work, and we pretended to pay them.

Now they have the best of both.

[Aqua Letifer]

@Copper said in Working Remote:

@Doctor-Phibes said in Working Remote:

Are they lazier than the rest of us?

It used to be that they pretended to work, and we pretended to pay them.

Now they have the best of both.

So you're saying that America's communist?

[LuFins Dad]

The work at home question really is fascinating. Think of the profound possible impacts to humanity if working from home became the primary model…

On the plus side - profound impacts on time and income with less commuting. Could even reduce the number of vehicles owned. Also it could release a LOT of commercial real estate that can be repurposed to residential or even just parks… What happens to divorce rates of spouses have more time together? Infidelity is almost always between coworkers. More families would home school and generally be a bigger part of their children’s education. It would also greatly expand travel opportunities.

In the negative side, we are already becoming more isolated and less social. What happens when you remove the social necessity of conforming to interactive conventions and niceties? It will also have extreme negative consequences to so many other industries. Transportation, Hospitality, etc… All of that time together could add new stressors to families. The opportunity for abuse grows exponentially, and our social filters disappear…

And that doesn’t even take into account that for every Aqua that thrives in the work from home environment, there’s a me, that wouldn’t be able to accomplish Jack working from home. Some people thrive in the isolation and others need to work in a group setting (even performing the same jobs)

It’s a fascinating conundrum.