Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s an impossible dilemma. Many workers are highly productive in the work from home model, and it has been a major upgrade to their lives. They will strongly resist RTO policies. Many other workers abuse work from home policies to slack off, and the only way to get any reasonable productivity out of them is to mandate RTO. Human nature being what it is, you can’t let some people work from home and tell others they can’t without creating major problems. And it’s very difficult to integrate new, especially junior employees when all the good people are working from home. We’re just going to muddle along in a hybrid approach indefinitely, there is no way out IMO.

I am willing to bet lots of money that those unproductive workers are just as unproductive sitting in their cubicle.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to strike

This. And maybe it’s time that office workers wholly embrace unions? Especially FLSA exempt workers.

Okay, go ahead and strike. How are you going to put food on the table? It's a lovely little idea for an 18 year old but I have a family, mortgage, life expenses, I NEED to have my job. GTFU.

So be a stooge for the man. Have fun at that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I’m going to RTO, I refuse to do anything after hours from home, either. If I’m not allowed to WFH, that means I’m not required to.

Does this apply only if you are required to go in five days a week? What if it is 2? or3?

m

On any of the days I’m required to go in. It’s basic logic. If WFH is bad, then it’s bad & I shouldn’t do it.

If your employer is allowing you to do both WFH and work onsite, how are they saying either is bad?

So if you go into the office on a Monday, you shut it down completely after 8 hours, but if you WFH on Tuesday you'll put in some extra hours in the evening? Just trying to see how this plays out in practice....

Not that poster, but yes - that’s basically what I do. Each day my hours are roughly the same - up at 6:00 and turning my attention to family/other commitments at 5:00. On days I go into the office I spend about 1.5 hours of that time commuting. that’s twice a week now, but there are rumblings of requiring 3 or 4. So the org is saying he’d rather not get those extra hours from me so that they see my face.

PP asking the questions, and I am sincere when I say this approach makes sense. I also think that organizations are well aware that is the trade-off they are making in many cases...and are indeed OK with it.

LOL. That is a very naive take. Organizations have become used to their employees being way more available due to WFH. You’re kidding yourself if you don’t think they will still have expectations that people be similarly available. You can say I’m not able to work from home and they’ll say you can stay here to do the work. RTO doesn’t mean companies hired extra employees to pick up the extra work that has been dumped on workers that were available for longer periods of time during WFH.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

BS. What other social problems am I supposed to solve at my loss? I'm sorry but we can't be responsible for everyone. How about stop the abuser, not force everyone to dress up and commute to hide the problem.

But whose problem is it? I was at a conference last year and lessons learned WFH was a topic. One managing director at Wells Fargo and a EVP at Bank of America noticed lots of staff and lower level people had cameras off. Both of them were loving WFH in their huge houses or vacation homes.

But when staff turned on cameras they found staff in unfinished basements, 100 degree attics, working off kitchen table in crowded apts, being forced to spend 24/7 on dangerous neighborhoods. Aside from family life not everyone has a good WFH set up.

I live in a nice big house now with a dedicated office and did WFH. No problem.

But in my 20s I had a non AC tiny studio apt with no internet service. I would have went nuts sitting in a single tiny room all day by myself. Plus I had no room for a desk.

But my office I had a cube, high speed internet, company cafeteria. AC, free coffee, printer.

Companies are not paying us to WFH. I never got reimbursed cell phone, WiFi, printer paper, heat, AC or for office equipment I bought.

They really need to deep dive in this. I think people in crappy conditions don’t speak up

“Oh dear, we may have to see the squalor our underpaid employees are forced to live in if they turn the camera on. Clearly the right solution is to make them commute into our delightful offices, rather than paying them enough to live in pleasant and safe homes”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

BS. What other social problems am I supposed to solve at my loss? I'm sorry but we can't be responsible for everyone. How about stop the abuser, not force everyone to dress up and commute to hide the problem.

But whose problem is it? I was at a conference last year and lessons learned WFH was a topic. One managing director at Wells Fargo and a EVP at Bank of America noticed lots of staff and lower level people had cameras off. Both of them were loving WFH in their huge houses or vacation homes.

But when staff turned on cameras they found staff in unfinished basements, 100 degree attics, working off kitchen table in crowded apts, being forced to spend 24/7 on dangerous neighborhoods. Aside from family life not everyone has a good WFH set up.

I live in a nice big house now with a dedicated office and did WFH. No problem.

But in my 20s I had a non AC tiny studio apt with no internet service. I would have went nuts sitting in a single tiny room all day by myself. Plus I had no room for a desk.

But my office I had a cube, high speed internet, company cafeteria. AC, free coffee, printer.

Companies are not paying us to WFH. I never got reimbursed cell phone, WiFi, printer paper, heat, AC or for office equipment I bought.

They really need to deep dive in this. I think people in crappy conditions don’t speak up

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

BS. What other social problems am I supposed to solve at my loss? I'm sorry but we can't be responsible for everyone. How about stop the abuser, not force everyone to dress up and commute to hide the problem.

But whose problem is it? I was at a conference last year and lessons learned WFH was a topic. One managing director at Wells Fargo and a EVP at Bank of America noticed lots of staff and lower level people had cameras off. Both of them were loving WFH in their huge houses or vacation homes.

But when staff turned on cameras they found staff in unfinished basements, 100 degree attics, working off kitchen table in crowded apts, being forced to spend 24/7 on dangerous neighborhoods. Aside from family life not everyone has a good WFH set up.

I live in a nice big house now with a dedicated office and did WFH. No problem.

But in my 20s I had a non AC tiny studio apt with no internet service. I would have went nuts sitting in a single tiny room all day by myself. Plus I had no room for a desk.

But my office I had a cube, high speed internet, company cafeteria. AC, free coffee, printer.

Companies are not paying us to WFH. I never got reimbursed cell phone, WiFi, printer paper, heat, AC or for office equipment I bought.

They really need to deep dive in this. I think people in crappy conditions don’t speak up

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

BS. What other social problems am I supposed to solve at my loss? I'm sorry but we can't be responsible for everyone. How about stop the abuser, not force everyone to dress up and commute to hide the problem.

But whose problem is it? I was at a conference last year and lessons learned WFH was a topic. One managing director at Wells Fargo and a EVP at Bank of America noticed lots of staff and lower level people had cameras off. Both of them were loving WFH in their huge houses or vacation homes.

But when staff turned on cameras they found staff in unfinished basements, 100 degree attics, working off kitchen table in crowded apts, being forced to spend 24/7 on dangerous neighborhoods. Aside from family life not everyone has a good WFH set up.

I live in a nice big house now with a dedicated office and did WFH. No problem.

But in my 20s I had a non AC tiny studio apt with no internet service. I would have went nuts sitting in a single tiny room all day by myself. Plus I had no room for a desk.

But my office I had a cube, high speed internet, company cafeteria. AC, free coffee, printer.

Companies are not paying us to WFH. I never got reimbursed cell phone, WiFi, printer paper, heat, AC or for office equipment I bought.

They really need to deep dive in this. I think people in crappy conditions don’t speak up

Again, did the company they work for just decide to skimp on offices? Were they refusing these people’s ability to come into the office? If not, why should everyone with a sane setup be forced to come in? You’re just voicing this inchoate concern and then proposing fixing it by doing something completely unrelated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

BS. What other social problems am I supposed to solve at my loss? I'm sorry but we can't be responsible for everyone. How about stop the abuser, not force everyone to dress up and commute to hide the problem.

But whose problem is it? I was at a conference last year and lessons learned WFH was a topic. One managing director at Wells Fargo and a EVP at Bank of America noticed lots of staff and lower level people had cameras off. Both of them were loving WFH in their huge houses or vacation homes.

But when staff turned on cameras they found staff in unfinished basements, 100 degree attics, working off kitchen table in crowded apts, being forced to spend 24/7 on dangerous neighborhoods. Aside from family life not everyone has a good WFH set up.

I live in a nice big house now with a dedicated office and did WFH. No problem.

But in my 20s I had a non AC tiny studio apt with no internet service. I would have went nuts sitting in a single tiny room all day by myself. Plus I had no room for a desk.

But my office I had a cube, high speed internet, company cafeteria. AC, free coffee, printer.

Companies are not paying us to WFH. I never got reimbursed cell phone, WiFi, printer paper, heat, AC or for office equipment I bought.

They really need to deep dive in this. I think people in crappy conditions don’t speak up

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

BS. What other social problems am I supposed to solve at my loss? I'm sorry but we can't be responsible for everyone. How about stop the abuser, not force everyone to dress up and commute to hide the problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

BS. What other social problems am I supposed to solve at my loss? I'm sorry but we can't be responsible for everyone. How about stop the abuser, not force everyone to dress up and commute to hide the problem.

This is the kind of ridiculous response that will make WFH arguments all sound ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

BS. What other social problems am I supposed to solve at my loss? I'm sorry but we can't be responsible for everyone. How about stop the abuser, not force everyone to dress up and commute to hide the problem.

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.

Anonymous wrote:People fail to realize not everyone has a good home life.

I work with people in bad marriages, single people with small apartments with annoying roommates, lonely people who live alone, people no place to work at home, people with abusive spouses, young people who live at home with parents and so on and so on.

They were thrust into WFH against their will. It is unhealthy for their mental health to be home.

There has to be a balance between WFH and RTO outside of business reasons.