Job and General Employment Thread

[skullman80]

I mean it would have been great to get my target of 12% of my salary or whatever it is, but I knew that wasn't happening this year. I was expecting no bonus, so anything that came was basically free money to me.

[Beveridge]

What's a bonus?

[robbiestoupe]

What's a bonus?

[NTP66]

The Surprising Effects of Remote Work

Working from home could be making it easier for couples to become parents—and for parents to have more children.

n the past half century, Americans have had fewer and fewer babies with almost every passing decade; in 2020, the U.S. reported the lowest official fertility rate on record. But last year, statisticians observed a surprising baby bump. Researchers weren’t entirely sure what had happened. Maybe this was random noise. Maybe, like so many pandemic effects, it was a weird one-off phenomenon.

A new paper puts forth a fascinating theory: Maybe remote work is making it easier for couples to become parents—and for parents to have more children.

[Lemon Berry Lobster]

Fake news. People would rather commute 2.5 hours one way than wfh.

[dodint]

Anyone surprised by parents using company time to raise kids has never worked in a workplace. Ever.

[tifosi77]

I'm not sure about raising more children, but WFH certainly makes making more children a lot less of a hassle. At least as far as scheduling goes.

[Shyster]

More proof that people working from home are doing other stuff on their employer's dime. People working from home should either: (1) have to prove that they actually spend a full daily allotment of time actually doing work and not spending time on childcare or other tasks; or (2) be paid less because they are doing less work.

[dodint]

Our policy at work is to be in there by 9am and work 8 hours. It can be any 8 hours. That's how I can take an extra half hour for lunch and run some errands, or get an exercise session in. So long as I'm at my meetings, get my work done, and clock 8 hours nobody cares. I used to take 4 hours off in the middle of the day to golf, then wrap up after 8pm. Now that I'm a lead my meeting schedule is a bit too intense for that, but it was fun.

With WFH I don't actually have to visibly see parents shirk their work duties so it's actually less bothersome to me.

[NTP66]

Really, Shyster can just **** right off.

[meow]

I am 100% a better father and a better husband since working from home. And this is with me working more hours during the day and the week. Saving nearly 10 hours a week in commute time is invaluable. Such a waste

[RonnieFranchise]

I don't give a **** where or when my people work as long as they accomplish their workload at the expected quality and timeframe. Why would I care if they are actually putting in 8 hours and not off screwing at 2 pm if the work's getting done?

If the work's not getting done at the previous quality, then yeah, we have a problem with your WFH.

[Troy Loney]

More proof that people working from home are doing other stuff on their employer's dime. People working from home should either: (1) have to prove that they actually spend a full daily allotment of time actually doing work and not spending time on childcare or other tasks; or (2) be paid less because they are doing less work.

Unproductive people are just as unproductive in the office as they are at home

[MR25]

What's the most professional way to say "It feels like we're talking about 2 completely different things"

Only because I'm at my wits end here and would prefer not to come across as too frank.

[robbiestoupe]

I've known 3 people fired for having sex at work. People hump where they want to hump.

And if I can be at home while my kids wait for the bus instead of sending them into pre and post school programs which cost me $450 a month for 2 days a week, what's the harm? Not like I'm holding them and burping them after they eat.

This American mentality that work is life needs to die a quick death.

[Shyster]

I don't give a **** where or when my people work as long as they accomplish their workload at the expected quality and timeframe. Why would I care if they are actually putting in 8 hours and not off screwing at 2 pm if the work's getting done?

If the work's not getting done at the previous quality, then yeah, we have a problem with your WFH.

Because under your example, that person can and should be doing more work. Now, if there is literally no other work they can do, then, sure, knock off at 2 pm because it's on the employer to make sure an employee has enough to do. But what you are describing is more akin to sandbagging, where the employee could be doing more work but instead is choosing not to. Yes, the "work's getting done," but the employee could be doing more.

Another solution would be to make work-from-homers hourly employees, with trackers that make sure that the "meter" is only running for the time they are actually logged in and actively doing work. Want to start at 9 and knock off at 2 pm? Sure, but you only get paid or 5 hours. Need to spend an hour minding the kiddo rather than working? Not actively working, so no pay for that hour.

[RonnieFranchise]

I've known 3 people fired for having sex at work. People hump where they want to hump.

And if I can be at home while my kids wait for the bus instead of sending them into pre and post school programs which cost me $450 a month for 2 days a week, what's the harm? Not like I'm holding them and burping them after they eat.

This American mentality that work is life needs to die a quick death.

I was on a project where this happened. Project manager and his assistant... gone.

It's hard for me to imagine anyone wanting to **** either of them, so I guess it's good they found each other.

I was driving an hour and a half each way for that project. 1/8 of my day I can use for screwing off in WFH world

[Troy Loney]

I don't give a **** where or when my people work as long as they accomplish their workload at the expected quality and timeframe. Why would I care if they are actually putting in 8 hours and not off screwing at 2 pm if the work's getting done?

If the work's not getting done at the previous quality, then yeah, we have a problem with your WFH.

Because under your example, that person can and should be doing more work. Now, if there is literally no other work they can do, then, sure, knock off at 2 pm because it's on the employer to make sure an employee has enough to do. But what you are describing is more akin to sandbagging, where the employee could be doing more work but instead is choosing not to. Yes, the "work's getting done," but the employee could be doing more.

Another solution would be to make work-from-homers hourly employees, with trackers that make sure that the "meter" is only running for the time they are actually logged in and actively doing work. Want to start at 9 and knock off at 2 pm? Sure, but you only get paid or 5 hours. Need to spend an hour minding the kiddo rather than working? Not actively working, so no pay for that hour.

Seems like you have a limited understanding of how jobs work.

No one has like real time staffing models that match demand and capacity. You are paying for capacity in lots of cases.

So your solution is to make managers work more to find things for people to do?

[Morkle]

I am just pretty convinced it's either all an act, or quite possibly the most unfun, unreal person to be around.

[MrKennethTKangaroo]

Has anyone else other than shyster billed by the hour on their job?

[Morkle]

I did way back when, when I worked as a consultant. Was awful.

[faftorial]

I hope Shyster doesn't have authority over anyone at work. If he has a paralegal I pity that person.

[Morkle]

[Shyster]

So your solution is to make managers work more to find things for people to do?

A good manager should be making sure that their employees are all busy. Not overloaded, but busy. If everyone can complete all their work in less than a work day, then you either have too many employees or not enough business. Either way, that's an issue for management.

[skullman80]

Shyster has to be a parody account at this point.