I truly do not understand the anti WFH sentiment

[Anonymous]

The simple fact, op, is that people do not actually work from home.
Most do not, they are do a bit here and there. It is human nature to do as little as you can to get by.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because we are human and need social interaction, facial expressions, and time to communicate outside of discrete work tasks to feel good about ourselves and be productive. People need to see and hear each other to informally learn from each other. We know that being together in person reduces cortisol and stress levels. Being isolated associated with higher levels of disease.

YOU need that.
many many people do not need that and in fact have stress levels significantly raised by commuting and being in a big room with other ppl all day when they dont need to be.

Why is what you need more important? People need different things and workplaces are collaborative environments. Do you ever go to a concert? Why not just watch a video of someone online? A play? Why not just watch a movie? In person is just different.

You’re comparing working to watching a movie or watching a concert…

You could’ve just admitted your argument absolutely sucks…

In person is different than virtual. If you don’t understand the analogy, no one can help you.

Again, you’re comparing watching a movie to working….


Apples and oranges comparison. It’s like saying “I’m going to the spa and expect to get paid for enjoying my time”. That’s not a thing…

When I’m working, I’m working. Regardless of where I’m at. I’m not going to Disney world and expecting me to work while on space mountain.

Just a dumb comparison.

[Anonymous]

You posted on dcum on Tuesday, May 23, 2023, around 11 AM.
I mean, you are the perfect example of why WFH does not work!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people abuse it. I assume. I don’t have evidence, but it feels like something that’s true. Therefore, no one should be allowed to do it.

People goof off in offices, too. Guess we shouldn't be allowed to have offices.

THIS.

Here's the deal. If you don't feel like the people you have can WFH and produce, then you need to fire them. Bringing them back to the office just because you don't know how to manage people is your problem. Bringing them back to the office is likely to only worsen a bad situation, because now they feel like they are being punished. Employees who feel like they are being punished are not employees you want because now you are risking sabotage, negativity, poor culture, etc.

Yes, if you are a nurse providing patient care, you need to be in a building. There are very clear lines IMO about who needs to be onsite and who doesn't. If the job can be done from home, then it should be allowed. If you can't trust your people to WFH, and they are WFH, you need to step up as a manager. Offer hotelling options for folks who like to be onsite (assuming traditional office space here).

It's not that hard. And too bad for the commercial market. They were headed this direction anyway - COVID just accelerated it by 20 years.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You posted on dcum on Tuesday, May 23, 2023, around 11 AM.
I mean, you are the perfect example of why WFH does not work!

Lol you are funny. All posts during work hours are by WFH folks? What a dumba$$.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You posted on dcum on Tuesday, May 23, 2023, around 11 AM.
I mean, you are the perfect example of why WFH does not work!

Lol you are funny. All posts during work hours are by WFH folks? What a dumba$$.

Ah ! The witty insult? Oh wait, it is not, is not even sarcastic nor does it have any style. Your WFH work must be similar, narcissistic and devoid of IQ power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You posted on dcum on Tuesday, May 23, 2023, around 11 AM.
I mean, you are the perfect example of why WFH does not work!

Lol you are funny. All posts during work hours are by WFH folks? What a dumba$$.

Ah ! The witty insult? Oh wait, it is not, is not even sarcastic nor does it have any style. Your WFH work must be similar, narcissistic and devoid of IQ power.

Poor deflection

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The simple fact, op, is that people do not actually work from home.
Most do not, they are do a bit here and there. It is human nature to do as little as you can to get by.

Sorry, but this assertion is at best not known and at worst demonstrably untrue. See, e.g., Bloom et al 2022 and references therein. There just isn’t reliable statistical evidence that proves WFH is significantly less productive (in certain information-oriented jobs) than in-person work. The one thing that the randomized controlled trial cited above *did* show is that people who work in person are more likely to perceive those who WFH as being slackers despite having no (or merely anecdotal) evidence for this.

[Anonymous]

I respect the grift if nothing else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The simple fact, op, is that people do not actually work from home.
Most do not, they are do a bit here and there. It is human nature to do as little as you can to get by.

LOL, fact?

No, Our work has "cases" that are measured and close rates are measured and have been for years most employees have increased their close rate with people at home. 70% have been given such large bonuses due to close rates they needed reevaluate close rate bonuses.

The fact is most people get more work done at home, most people work past their normal hours, most people work through lunch.

The fact is it's human nature not to tell you coworker to go back to work when they want to chat at work.

[Anonymous]

So I stopped WFH and one staff was gob smacked.

Was in my office like 3 hours on and off.

By end of day I discovered he started two side businesses, his wife is also WFH, he got two younger kids to get on bus, off bus and to make snacks and he has some medical conditions where he runs to doctor a lot during work day. Even more amazing his wife not only is full time WFH but also on side sells AFLAC.

He also moved cheap area two hours from work. Guess what he has 9 hours in office r everyday and four hours commuting. That is 13 hours a day. His pyramid is collapsing.

I am going to re-roll out hybrid and WFH after these free loaders are flushed out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because it's killing my marriage very slowly..... It is a big turn off seeing him lay around him bed all day

if he's laying in bed all day the problem is not work from home, it's not work at all and not even get out of bed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A “dirty secret” of WFH at my 6,000 person old firm that is fully remote is “job abandonment” was number one termination reason in 2022.

Also we pay out vacation days. So people literally rarely put in vacation days to build them up.

People have figured out let’s say I make 120k a year. And I have RSUs vest at 2k a month and accrue vacation days at 2 per month why quit. Just start new job and ghost or just pretend or pretend to work it can take weeks, months etc. to get terminated. It becomes headache for managers.

I ghosted my old job four months once and new job boss was a pest. I ended up ghosting new job, catching up old job and eventually new job terminated me.

I say 70 percent of employees my old firm did it. So funny. This is why WFH is dying there is never a reason ever to quit. We had retirees, people move back to hone country, people start new business. There is never a reason to quit. Companies are catching on. Which is what RTO is about.

Heck I did a five month consulting gig at $20k a month flat fee. All WFH. Of course I kept my day job. What was downside?

80 percent of Remote people have a second gig. That’s a fact. Other 20 percent 10-15 percent goofing off or SAHMs.

Yes you can goof off in office. But I literally did 3-5 hours a week work for five months. That’s impossible in person to pull off.

This is insane. we are in meetings all day and have rolling deliverables. if your employee is not so busy that you need to make sure they are sitting in an office to KNOW they just doing your job, then you don't need to have that employee to begin with

I have strict KPIs and deliverables. Why do you have meetings all day? My job I just left after 2 years 2 months had two hours of meetings a week and a 90 minute meeting every other week. My meetings was 12-1 on Monday, 1-2 on Thursday and 7 am to 830 pm every other Thursday. I on my own never scheduled a single meeting unless forced. And always early or late or at lunch. I kept 9-12 and 2-430 free as “focus” hours.

The job countered when I left. I literally could do 3 months of work in three weeks time. In person I would do more work. At home I hit the kpi and stop. Either goof off or do another job.

Ironically in WFH I looked like the hard worker. I have a 7 am meeting with UK and same day a 7 pm call or slack messages with San Fran. I only work before 9am or lunch or after 6 pm.

I'd seen a few of your posts - they're easily recognizable - and I suggest that in all your free time, you take a remedial writing class.

Perhaps a couple of them.

Sorry I am not a fruit-loop like you. My secretary has better legs and spelling than me. Not my job to spell my job is to WOW.

EUW.
I highly doubt you are wowing anyone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The simple fact, op, is that people do not actually work from home.
Most do not, they are do a bit here and there. It is human nature to do as little as you can to get by.

The simple fact is that most white collar jobs don't require much more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The simple fact, op, is that people do not actually work from home.
Most do not, they are do a bit here and there. It is human nature to do as little as you can to get by.

How is this any different than the office?