Would you WFH if your company heavily monitored you

[Anonymous]

I have basically no downtime and don't do much personal stuff during work, so I'd still WFH. It would affect things on the margins, like when I have to sign my kid up for camps mid-morning on a weekday: I guess I'd block that time like a medical appointment. But I am not routinely doing dinner prep or anything. Never in my 20-year career have I had enough downtime to watch TV during the workday.

I have a 30-minute break built into my official schedule (that my boss approves) for picking up my kid from school, and I start work that much earlier to accommodate it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, but that is because I don’t want to be micromanaged whether in an office or at home. I am a professional and I can manage my workload without someone needing to know how many times I pee, or when I need a stretch break, or when I need to take a phone call from my doctor, or when I eat lunch, etc. I am a high performer. I respond to emails and IMs in a short time period. I attend meetings. If my boss needs more than that it’s not a good fit.

You aren't the employ they need to monitor. Many are not like you and spend a lot of time not working. It is these people who are ruining WFH for many of us.

Why don't you just enforce performance standards? Write someone up for not being responsive or missing deadlines or not being productive. Do the same thing you would do in the office.

[Anonymous]

I’m a supervisor and would like some monitoring equipment. No I don’t want keystrokes, but would like a larger level picture of productivity. Or to know if someone is using a mouse minder.

“If my job is done well it shouldn’t matter.” Okay well what about if your job is barely done. Done enough that it’s not egregious but constant issues, you’re never around to answer questions and you always have knowledge gaps. Managers have a very hard time counseling those people. I can’t outright fire them. If I knew they weren’t working at all for hours during the day, it would be incredibly helpful because that is a fireable offense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, but that is because I don’t want to be micromanaged whether in an office or at home. I am a professional and I can manage my workload without someone needing to know how many times I pee, or when I need a stretch break, or when I need to take a phone call from my doctor, or when I eat lunch, etc. I am a high performer. I respond to emails and IMs in a short time period. I attend meetings. If my boss needs more than that it’s not a good fit.

You aren't the employ they need to monitor. Many are not like you and spend a lot of time not working. It is these people who are ruining WFH for many of us.

Why don't you just enforce performance standards? Write someone up for not being responsive or missing deadlines or not being productive. Do the same thing you would do in the office.

Fed here. You just can’t. It’s a years long process to try to fire. And now we have “pre- PIP warnings” that you have to issue before a PIP. I can tell people are away from their desks for long periods of time but it’s not something I’m able to track otherwise.

[Anonymous]

How do you micromanage someone who is working from home? I wouldn't put up with that, but I'm senior in my career, and there are many things I wouldn't put up with, and I have leverage. On the other hand, we have some younger employees who can't be bothered to answer an email before 11 am when they work from home, so I get why policies are in place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, but that is because I don’t want to be micromanaged whether in an office or at home. I am a professional and I can manage my workload without someone needing to know how many times I pee, or when I need a stretch break, or when I need to take a phone call from my doctor, or when I eat lunch, etc. I am a high performer. I respond to emails and IMs in a short time period. I attend meetings. If my boss needs more than that it’s not a good fit.

You aren't the employ they need to monitor. Many are not like you and spend a lot of time not working. It is these people who are ruining WFH for many of us.

Why don't you just enforce performance standards? Write someone up for not being responsive or missing deadlines or not being productive. Do the same thing you would do in the office.

Because it is easier to game the system when you WFH. And not every business has the ability/technology/money to implement measures to track this. Sure, you can write people up for being non responsive, but if they get THEIR work done, and don't help the people who rely on that person, that is a slippery slope. Success in business isn't just about individual contribution, but about how the individual contributes to the whole.

Some of us are self-motivated and willing to work hard to contribute on all fronts, home or in office. Many will take advantage of WFH given the chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you micromanage someone who is working from home? I wouldn't put up with that, but I'm senior in my career, and there are many things I wouldn't put up with, and I have leverage. On the other hand, we have some younger employees who can't be bothered to answer an email before 11 am when they work from home, so I get why policies are in place.

+1 Very much this. And it's the younger workers who are pushing back on everything. We have raised many of them to not want to work hard, or even work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you micromanage someone who is working from home? I wouldn't put up with that, but I'm senior in my career, and there are many things I wouldn't put up with, and I have leverage. On the other hand, we have some younger employees who can't be bothered to answer an email before 11 am when they work from home, so I get why policies are in place.

+1 Very much this. And it's the younger workers who are pushing back on everything. We have raised many of them to not want to work hard, or even work.

Half the anti-WFH threads on this site claim younger workers are the ones pushing for RTO because they prefer in person. Which is it?

[Anonymous]

That's fine because I do my job and don't have any time to mess around not doing my job.

What are they using to monitor you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The title basically states the question.

A lot of people like WFH due to the lack of commute, but another huge benefit is using your downtime as you please. Lots of people drop kids off at school, grocery shop, do laundry, prepare dinner, watch Netflix, etc. However, employers are now clamping down, with many requiring more days in the office.

But, what if your boss offered you WFH on the condition that you couldn’t use your downtime as you please and enforced it with invasive and tinker-proof monitoring? Would you still want to WFH?

I don’t have a WFH job, but I’m curious: you say you can use your “downtime as you please.” But aren’t we talking work hours here, not “down time”? If you are getting paid to watch Netflix, as you list, then you need a ton more work to do and perhaps some supervision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a supervisor and would like some monitoring equipment. No I don’t want keystrokes, but would like a larger level picture of productivity. Or to know if someone is using a mouse minder.

“If my job is done well it shouldn’t matter.” Okay well what about if your job is barely done. Done enough that it’s not egregious but constant issues, you’re never around to answer questions and you always have knowledge gaps. Managers have a very hard time counseling those people. I can’t outright fire them. If I knew they weren’t working at all for hours during the day, it would be incredibly helpful because that is a fireable offense.

If the work isn't being done well, why can't you document it and fire them? It sounds like you want to be the lazy one.

[Anonymous]

My old company I always found if funny our Head of BSA/OFAC was married to a Compliance guy and both worked from home in same office. You could see husband in background sometimes.

I then went through all the slacks and emails I got from her and sometimes tone changes, her husband would answer things when she was out at bus stop.

I caught it when she mentioned her stomach bug flu her two kids had last week yet she was responding to messages. Out system tags it if from a phone, these were not and a different tone. J

[Anonymous]

Our work requires 5 minutes an hour to not be at our computer.

So yea, that is fine because nothing I do during my "downtime" take more than 5 minutes.

How are bathroom breaks handled. What about lunch?

I'd love for the tracking system to report who is not taking the 5 minutes break because that is a bigger problem than not working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, but that is because I don’t want to be micromanaged whether in an office or at home. I am a professional and I can manage my workload without someone needing to know how many times I pee, or when I need a stretch break, or when I need to take a phone call from my doctor, or when I eat lunch, etc. I am a high performer. I respond to emails and IMs in a short time period. I attend meetings. If my boss needs more than that it’s not a good fit.

You aren't the employ they need to monitor. Many are not like you and spend a lot of time not working. It is these people who are ruining WFH for many of us.

Why don't you just enforce performance standards? Write someone up for not being responsive or missing deadlines or not being productive. Do the same thing you would do in the office.

Because it is easier to game the system when you WFH. And not every business has the ability/technology/money to implement measures to track this. Sure, you can write people up for being non responsive, but if they get THEIR work done, and don't help the people who rely on that person, that is a slippery slope. Success in business isn't just about individual contribution, but about how the individual contributes to the whole.

Some of us are self-motivated and willing to work hard to contribute on all fronts, home or in office. Many will take advantage of WFH given the chance.

It's really not a slippery slope, if their job is to contribute to the team and they're not doing so then write them up and fire them and be done with it. We have these same people in the office that blow off responding to e-mails and it's the same situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you micromanage someone who is working from home? I wouldn't put up with that, but I'm senior in my career, and there are many things I wouldn't put up with, and I have leverage. On the other hand, we have some younger employees who can't be bothered to answer an email before 11 am when they work from home, so I get why policies are in place.

+1 Very much this. And it's the younger workers who are pushing back on everything. We have raised many of them to not want to work hard, or even work.

Half the anti-WFH threads on this site claim younger workers are the ones pushing for RTO because they prefer in person. Which is it?

Maybe young people are monolithic? Young people lacking discipline are a disaster if they WFH; nothing gets done. Similarly, overachievers will overachieve wherever they work.