Reply to WFH and “on the clock”

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "WFH and “on the clock” "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Workers who punch in and punch out on a set schedule at work want to do remote more.

But exactly what is benefit to management?

They can’t work any extra time. Exactly 40 is allowed. My firm we do a clunky VPN on your home laptop or a cheap company laptop and no printing allowed and can’t save work to laptop. No where near quality of set up at physical office.

Plus they have to fill out productivity logs, log on and check with supervisors to make sure working.

Sounds like a headache to managers. I WFH myself off the clock but when network issues, people not available, system down, laptop issues I work later or weekend etc. But on the clock sounds like an invite to get fired. They can’t make up time.

[/quote]

Your company does not sound like it is resourced to move to a WFH model. They could:

- Upgrade their IT generally: Plenty of people use a VPN from home or wherever that works fine. Getting better hardware for remote employees would allow them to be more effective remotely. 
- Change the way that time is tracked and/or implement very clear rules about work hours expectations: Again, plenty of people work for companies that are able to have clear expectations about WFH rules. Do people like a rule that they must remain green on Teams during their core hours? No, but the expectation is very clear. Other companies do not have those kinds of rules and focus more on deliverables to track whether people are doing what they need to do.

As for what benefit there is for management, the honest answer is that it is likely to be a mixed bag. Some people will use their time well, communicate well, and be more productive for all the reasons people say that WFH is better for them. Other people will use WFH as a way to avoid accountability and work less, creating more personnel work for management. If much of the staff works remotely, the company can save on office space. They may also face cohesion problems if people are not feeling connected. Trapping people in an office was definitely a way that people felt connected to their colleagues. That's the whole point of retreats, and many companies who are primarily remote take retreats together a lot in order to support cohesion. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Either way, it doesn't sound like YOUR company is very well positioned to be effective in this model, so I can see why you'd be down on it. But I think that the reasons it wouldn't work for your company are largely self-imposed, however justifiable they may also be.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics