Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

UsidoreTheLightBlue t1_iy7c8dm wrote

This is sadly not a shock.

Some people do not have the capacity to work unsupervised.

A lot of employers take this to heart and take it out on all employees.

If you have a team of 10 employees and 2 of them are shit at remote they’d rather just slowly call all 10 back to office than deal with the two who can’t handle the responsibility of being remote.

It really sucks.

I really fucking hate it.

It’s also how a lot of the world works.

86

SashainSydney t1_iy7fcer wrote

Or, put another way, some managers don't have the capacity, ingenuity, training to deal with changing times and requirements.

What I mean is, let's not blame employees for poor strategy, management, and process.

Also, remote tech jobs are drying up, unfortunately.

43

Sheshirdzhija t1_iy7m5ly wrote

Yup.

Management now forbade us of having smartphones placed on tables.

They did not want to go with punishing people caught doing what they are not supposed to (netflix), or texting far too often (when caught), but instead all of us.

Also, have to check out to pick up food which is delivered like 5m from the door.

Next, I am fully expecting for them to start taking off work hours for going to the bathroom.

14

pSyChO_aSyLuM t1_iy81z2n wrote

One of my previous employers said I couldn't listen to music at work. Fuck you, I don't interact with anyone outside of meetings, I'm more distracted by other stupid-ass people gossiping about Janet's choice of clothing for the day.

6

kungpeleee t1_iy7sfzh wrote

Ha, shit company. Which?

4

Sheshirdzhija t1_iy7tbv2 wrote

Small local one. It's IT/semi-IT. Productivity tanked during work from home, due to poor middle management, but also it was less work then, less customers, so norms were lower anyway. But then it further tanked after we got back to offices.

So now they are desperate. All they do is make people agitated and less productive. Many are now deliberately working less as a sign of protest. So I have no idea what the deal is.

They fail to understand that productivity has tanked because people got used to a far superior work-life balance and are depressed.

15

gymbeaux2 t1_iy8e3u6 wrote

Punishment will continue until morale improves

2

Sheshirdzhija t1_iy8j516 wrote

Is that like a business 101 rulebook, or are you being sarcastic? Not a sociologist, so AFAIK, this could work. Normally. Not here though I suspect. People just pack up and leave, since most are young and with no families, and there is no advancements. And for many, they think to themselves "you can't pay me as little as little I can work". Seriously, nobody has ever gotten a sack for underperforming.

1

Northernmost1990 t1_iy8rmeg wrote

"The beatings will continue until morale improves."

It's a common sarcastic remark with possible origins in the navy. It highlights leaders' often ass-backwards way of punishing low performance in a way that will only result in even worse performance.

4

ogfuzzball t1_iy858mw wrote

Wait, you said productivity tanked when your company did WFH. So why would they keep it? If people worked less (aka goofed off) when working remote, then any business would stop WFH.

Are you by chance conflating lack of available work (less business) with productivity?

1

Sheshirdzhija t1_iy88d4m wrote

No..

Productivity did tank during WFH.

But, there was also less available work, because some of our customers were hit by lockdowns.
It is not clear what metrics my company uses to determine productivity, and in what proportions were these 2 factors responsible for lower $/worker.

​

But, then we got back to the offices. And that productivity (again, however they define it, might just be $/worker) AGAIN drooped compared to WFH. So it's even worse then WFH.

​

Now talking to colleagues, it seems many are depressed because they lowed WFH. I see that as the main reason for why productivity has declines SINCE coming back from offices.
But, management obviously does not, and have started a campaign of petty nips.
Like, you can you your phone if you have to for important things (as it was always the case), but can do it over you desk, or keep it in the office.
You can't go 5m outside the office building door to pick up food delivery, unless they deliver it exactly when we have a collective break (even though we have flexible hours, and can clock out at any time). You can smoke, or do whatever you want when you clock out, but apparently not pick up food.
They bring us table soccer, but the company is 200 people and we are only allowed to play during the 30 min break.
Etc..
Just antagonizing people with small things that don't affect the bottom line much, if at all.

7

UsidoreTheLightBlue t1_iy7xfri wrote

Oh it’s 100% on the employer.

If 8/10 employees can work from home they should be able to.

Just because 2/10 are shit at it they should be dealt with on an individual level.

5

grimace24 t1_iyadyu3 wrote

It’s also who is on top of that manager. I used to bad mouth my boss for being out of touch. Recently, I had to deal with his bosses on some emergency work and projects and saw that he was just regurgitating their message. If the C level folks are against remote work it’s less likely to be a thing.

1

[deleted] t1_iy7t93w wrote

[deleted]

−2

TheSchlaf t1_iy8hag4 wrote

I don't know why your getting downvoted. My IT managers didn't like WFH because they were micromanagers. You're going to have slackers, but they just do BS work in the office to make themselves look busy. The bad ones just slept at their desks regardless.

1

ShiningInTheLight t1_iy88nse wrote

This has always been my experience in every job I've had, from when I joined the Army at 18 to now working corporate jobs in my 40s.

​

Leadership will always make the productive employees suffer so that the shitbirds can be catered to, whether that's a bad micromanager or those completely unproductive social butterflies that love to "collab" by getting other people to do the intellectual heavy-lifting for their job.

18

RichBitchDress t1_iy8cxtk wrote

Have you worked in an office? This is how they work remote AND in-person. There are so many people who do jack shit all day, march around with self importance while merely accomplishing, at most, ass kissing. Or their favorite part of work is delegating all their work load to people who make a fraction of what they do.

6

UsidoreTheLightBlue t1_iy8d8qe wrote

That’s not what I’m talking about.

Sure there are pieces of shit who do nothing all day every day.

However there flat out are people that do/can work who just can’t pull it off without supervision. I’ve seen it everywhere I worked. Once some people get freedom to not directly be monitored they just can’t handle it. They start thinking they can get away with stuff and when they realize they can they just become shit.

5

grimace24 t1_iyadedm wrote

That tends to be younger workers. I used to be that way in my 20s. Now I focus on work and don’t need as much guidance. It is very tough for people out of college to adapt without supervision. For 22 years, they were told what to do and how to do it.

0

grimace24 t1_iyacvmz wrote

I love working remote but I do get how some people struggle to work without supervision. As said by @RichBitchDress these people work as bad in office as they do remote. At the office they are striking up conversations and bringing productivity down. At home, they’re doing everything but their job like running errands. You know how many times I’ve been in Zoom meetings where someone GPS comes up “turn left in a half-mile”.

2

gymbeaux2 t1_iy8dycd wrote

I think it’s a huge reason why we won’t see 4 day workweeks or 32-hour workweeks anytime soon… people who have to work 40/5 days will bitch and bitch and bitch. Employers are toxic, but let’s not forget that coworkers can be, too.

4

BigBobbert t1_iy87wfe wrote

At my last job there was a remote worker who barely did anything. There was a massive queue of stuff that needed to be done that she never touched. I have no idea how she didn’t get fired, because she was consistently unreliable.

3

UsidoreTheLightBlue t1_iy899x1 wrote

Yeah we ended up in the same boat when we were covid remote. There were 2-3 people who it was baffling that they weren’t written up.

One guy you absolutely knew if it was Friday after 11 you weren’t getting a hold of him, which with my job is real shitty.

6

anonpls t1_iy7i4q5 wrote

What? Firing people is still an option I thought?

0

LiberalFartsMajor t1_iy7fg88 wrote

Anyone that can't handle working unsupervised should be on permanent disability.

−7

r3dk0w t1_iy8803w wrote

Just another bullshit article by the Washington Post. You know, the newspaper owned by one of the richest people in the world that also has a history of employee work violations, union busting, and other unsavory anti-employee actions?

36

Accidental-Genius t1_iy7hziv wrote

I could make quadruple, maybe more, if I went back to an office.

No thanks.

15

Usedtoknowsomeone46 t1_iy7nnjp wrote

You will be forced back thankfully. Business owners are done with remote work. You will either comply or they will fire you.

−78

Accidental-Genius t1_iy7ols7 wrote

I doubt it since my company just sold 25% of its corporate real estate with more on the block and is investing several million in advancing remote work.

Not everyone is stuck in the Stone Age.

37

9-11GaveMe5G t1_iy9r8hg wrote

> >Not everyone is stuck in the Stone Age.

Hey man the Amish are nice people leave them out of this

1

9-11GaveMe5G t1_iy9r3ll wrote

If the only value you bring is "physical presence", you'll get fired soon too

3

CactusCurmudgeon t1_iy9i8ro wrote

My experience is that things are shifting and rather than try to come out with a consistent policy, some companies are starting to take up a public and private position. Publicly the policy is in-office or (more likely) hybrid, but privately, if you're a high performer, everything's negotiable. Its being left up to the discretion of individual managers. Simply looking at counts of remote job listings doesn't give a full picture. You also won't get a full picture from only talking to people who are trying to land a remote position as an outside hire. You're far more likely to still be working remotely if you've stayed at a company long enough to make yourself indispensable. Which makes me think that long term, WFH may emerge as a counterbalance to the increasing trend of job hopping. I know I could probably lift my salary by a decent amount by looking elsewhere, but between WFH and a decent amount of PTO, I don't have much inclination to try.

3

skunksmasher t1_iya61qt wrote

What are good easy to get high paying walkin jobs WHICH ARE NOT REMOTE?

Asking for everyone who doesn't need remote.

1