Add it up that is 40% now at home. That more than just kids, or tech jobs. Hybrid models vary from 3 office days a week, to one office a day a quarter. Clearly things are still working for work from home or it would have ended or there would have been a collapse of US industry.

Nov 12, 2023 21:19:43 GMT c said:

Add it up that is 40% now at home. That more than just kids, or tech jobs. Hybrid models vary from 3 office days a week, to one office a day a quarter. Clearly things are still working for work from home or it would have ended or there would have been a collapse of US industry.

You a re going to find most of the people working from home or hybrid are in service or sales based roles.
Well before the pandemic in Australia we migrated sales and service roles away from needing to drive to a physical office every day only to leave it to make service/sales calls.
The Pandemic forced backwards businesses to embrace technology, the drive to have many of these people working from home will coincide with the shutting down of regional and satellite offices which are a legacy of a bygone era.

Places that embrace work from home absolutely can streamline by flattening and eliminating the need for regional offices.

Same goes for simply eliminating jobs by removing to remote, which is what many were finding. Building needs a staff to upkeep them, that need to be paid. Ditto for hardware support since most jobs need tech. I suspect people staying hybrid will rapidly realize they are paying a lot of money for offices that are mostly empty, upkeeping hardware it is cheaper to move to the cloud. It simply does not make sense to have management and exec areas that no one uses, but need to be upkept on the rare instance they appear for a few hours in person.

Time to get management that understands production timelines and focus on production capabilities of your staff, rather than the time people claim to complete a task in the office, usually half assing things. Then does not matter at all where people work. Goal of labor is to produce, the managers who think people produce more in office are simply mismanaging their workers.

Nov 12, 2023 23:42:35 GMT c said:

Places that embrace work from home absolutely can streamline by flattening and eliminating the need for regional offices.

Same goes for simply eliminating jobs by removing to remote, which is what many were finding. Building needs a staff to upkeep them, that need to be paid. Ditto for hardware support since most jobs need tech. I suspect people staying hybrid will rapidly realize they are paying a lot of money for offices that are mostly empty, upkeeping hardware it is cheaper to move to the cloud. It simply does not make sense to have management and exec areas that no one uses, but need to be upkept on the rare instance they appear for a few hours in person.

Time to get management that understands production timelines and focus on production capabilities of your staff, rather than the time people claim to complete a task in the office, usually half assing things. Then does not matter at all where people work. Goal of labor is to produce, the managers who think people produce more in office are simply mismanaging their workers.

I totally disagree and so does the data now, it has been shown that most workers are more productive in the office.
People are staying home and taking the piss essentially spoiling it for everyone by watching Netflix and walking their dog when they are supposed to be working.
It will see all entry level positions come with increasingly draconian monitoring technology of Webcams and AI to verify if people are actually working.
By the time it is all done there will be more suffering in working from home and the only people who choose it are those who can't or won't commute, but it won't be the luxury environment it is now.

Fortune reported on it in July with data from a host of professors leading the research into WFH.

Fully remote work is associated with 10% to 20% lower productivity than fully in-person work. Worker productivity has been plummeting for five straight quarters, for the first time since World War II. It’s why so many Fortune 500 CEOs, from David Solomon to Mark Zuckerberg to Marc Benioff, have been ordering their workers back to the office, hoping it would improve their bottom lines and morale.

They also wrote that challenges in communicating remotely and lack of motivation are the main issues preventing fully remote workers from being more productive.

Long story short, supervising, training, mentoring, and building firm culture is much harder. Also noting that not being in the office limited opportunities for mentoring and connecting with colleagues - the very same issue the WFH researchers noted as a contributing factor in productivity declines.

There's also notes on remote workers along with hybrid workers, being the most stressed at work, according to new Gallup research. It attributes that stress to the “less predictable or structured work life” that comes with full or partial remote work arrangements not being managed well.

And the challenges of leading a distributed team, and how few managers have been given the tools (or the lead time) to pull it off. Middle managers are often left to figure it out and execute a game plan. Cue challenges in communicating remotely and unmotivated tesm or team taking the piss and an inability to properly supervise and manage in person and hence why a decrease in productivity.

That study, evolution of working at home, did not have any survey questions about productivity, nor was it discussed in the experimental part of the article. They only covered it in the discussion noting that productivity of often defined by perceptions of productivity. When they discuss fully work from home, they are discussing studies of reduced productivity at the start of the pandemic when non-work from home companies were forced to go to entirely work from home with no transition. Where fully work from home was covered in the context of instantly swapping due to the pandemic in one company, remote work was not, and the context was for companies well into the pandemic being studied, which is why it appears that fully work from home tanks production, and hybrid does not.  

Which likely is why this all is a work paper, and not a peer reviewed paper.  All talk of production would need to be dropped to pass preview on the work paper.

Nov 13, 2023 15:38:48 GMT c said:

That study, evolution of working at home, did not have any survey questions about productivity, nor was it discussed in the experimental part of the article. They only covered it in the discussion noting that productivity of often defined by perceptions of productivity. When they discuss fully work from home, they are discussing studies of reduced productivity at the start of the pandemic when non-work from home companies were forced to go to entirely work from home with no transition. Where fully work from home was covered in the context of instantly swapping due to the pandemic in one company, remote work was not, and the context was for companies well into the pandemic being studied, which is why it appears that fully work from home tanks production, and hybrid does not.  

Which likely is why this all is a work paper, and not a peer reviewed paper.  All talk of production would need to be dropped to pass preview on the work paper.

www.afr.com/work-and-careers/workplace/working-from-home-hurt-productivity-but-poor-managers-partly-to-blame-20230615-p5dgyx

How about this one?
Data's doesn't have to be peer reviewed to be correct by the way, in the old days truth stood until someone could overturn it by proof. The idea that everything has to be put in a journal before it becomes fact is a sign of intellectual regression for our species.
If we wait for a journal and peer review all truth will take 5 years to reach the population.

Like the now clear risks and problems with the covid vaccine.

No paper in that. A lot of talk about a study that they opted not to share. Which is how all those dangers of vaccination articles tend to go.

However, I do know Sean Gallagher since he was in my larger field, and I know that he supports work from home, and believes it is a management program when it does not work.  Which is what I just said. 

And no, if they have something in peer review you get the working draft when it is sent for review, and the pre-print when it is accepted. No peer review mine as well be a blog post as it is basically just be bro.  What is interesting most of these "experts" have far lower citation counts than I do.  So are they experts at all?  Like I got 500 citations during a five period of publication as a student, and they can not despite being actively publishing for 30 years or so and having their own labs?

Also neither Meagher nor Gallagher seems to be promoting this study on their professional accounts that I could see.

Nov 13, 2023 21:18:29 GMT c said:

No paper in that. A lot of talk about a study that they opted not to share. Which is how all those dangers of vaccination articles tend to go.

However, I do know Sean Gallagher since he was in my larger field, and I know that he supports work from home, and believes it is a management program when it does not work.  Which is what I just said. 

And no, if they have something in peer review you get the working draft when it is sent for review, and the pre-print when it is accepted. No peer review mine as well be a blog post as it is basically just be bro.  What is interesting most of these "experts" have far lower citation counts than I do.  So are they experts at all?  Like I got 500 citations during a five period of publication as a student, and they can not despite being actively publishing for 30 years or so and having their own labs?

Also neither Meagher nor Gallagher seems to be promoting this study on their professional accounts that I could see.

Please excuse my dubious nature, but blaming management for the failure of WFH to provide productivity sounds a great deal like the tired story that socialism works, it just hasn't been done properly.

This is the problem with academia the flow of money and ideology of the researchers is not freely advertised.
If you look at College campuses now sponsors are threatening to cut money unless the anti-Israel rhetoric stops.
Now I am the first one to admit that most of those protesting are idiots tagging along with the new BLM or whatever the flavor of the month is...
But it is a clear example of prescribed speech.

This is happening every day.
It is worse when there is a political or ideological lean to a department and you create an environment where people will put forward the work that wins favour, not what they even believe.

I think at one point I was 100% more productive in the office, but now I'd say I'm way more productive at home. I start earlier and work later and don't charge for it because they are saving me the headache of getting ready for an hour and then driving in/home which is another 30-45 minutes. Plus this way if I do take 30 minutes to do something around the house other than on my lunch break, it works out. Today was a STAT holiday and I answered all my emails and got a start on things for tomorrow because I'm in the office and know my boss (who lives alone) will talk my ear off. I'm glad you have nothing else to do there Cheryl, but my sites worked all weekend and I've got my hands full, so fuck right off or I'm going home to work in peace and quiet.

The flow of money is freely advertised in academia. Every single mainstream journal requires you to disclose all interests from university affiliations, to industry connections, to grants used for funding. Lie on that form and it is a retraction, which in the digital age, removes your study entirely.

For the business side of college, that is unrelated at all to the research side. The research side of the college only interacts with the kids when they teach them, or use them as subjects.

But places like Brigham Young University produce great research, despite demanding banning staff and students from consuming tea or coffee (for caffeine is a drug that profanes thy body).

Anyone who spent anytime on campuses know the kids will always protest one cause or another and they have since the 1960's. And it is about 5% tops that are into activism with the rest of the campus generally ignoring them.

As for ideology, the sole people who complain are people who want to force one onto students or students who are failing and want an excuse to convert to a C to save their GPA. Sole class I was in that would be considered leaning was Philosophy of the State, but we did Plato first, then parts of Leviathan, then Marx and Engels.

But the thing with this whole left wing ideology, everything is now left wing on colleges. Social sciences are all left wing by default to the right. Science is left wing as it does not support beliefs in facts. Economics and math are left wing, because once you move past the basics in either field the right screams. Business is left wing since people push for novel solutions while the right wants the classic ones. Arts are all left wing, because of course they are. Hell even the history of the roman empire these days is right wing these days due to woke men on boy bathhouse love.

People are bitching that Brigham Young University is too woke. You miss sunday mass they can expel you, or if a professor fire you, but that is too woke for people who never attend church. This is why people do not take this shit seriously at all. Nothing will ever be good enough.

Nov 14, 2023 0:58:23 GMT iron maiden said:

I think at one point I was 100% more productive in the office, but now I'd say I'm way more productive at home. I start earlier and work later and don't charge for it because they are saving me the headache of getting ready for an hour and then driving in/home which is another 30-45 minutes. Plus this way if I do take 30 minutes to do something around the house other than on my lunch break, it works out. Today was a STAT holiday and I answered all my emails and got a start on things for tomorrow because I'm in the office and know my boss (who lives alone) will talk my ear off. I'm glad you have nothing else to do there Cheryl, but my sites worked all weekend and I've got my hands full, so fuck right off or I'm going home to work in peace and quiet.

The science of it comes down to if you spread yourself out for the traditional 10 hour NA work day vs the 8 hour WFH day, you simple will put more energy into your work, since your energy is not being spent on driving and what no instead.  

Also at home there are fewer distractions than at work, with that "productive" social time, really not actually being on task for anything and just time eaten away.  

This is why we see two sets of results in studies.  Studies that ask people if they are more productive find that managers claim people are less productive at home.  Measure it objectively, and the opposite is found.   The reason is super simple, it is involves flow.  People can gear in for longer periods of uninterrupted work at home than they can in the office, where people are encouraged to "work together" and "team build."  The distractions add up and lead to more periods of start and stop at work.  People may work more objectively on the job, but at a lower productivity rate. 

A good manager help mitigate this either way, but I/O psychologists start at six figures, and no one wants to pay that.  And executives themselves have almost no formal study of management.  So they bring in an I/O guy for a two hour talk and assume everyone can learn 8 years of grad school knowledge in two hours, which the I/O guy teaches something you are expected to know when you get accepted.

Nov 14, 2023 0:58:23 GMT iron maiden said:

I think at one point I was 100% more productive in the office, but now I'd say I'm way more productive at home.

Strangely enough I have gone in the opposite direction. At the start of the pandemic I was more productive working from home as from the office ,as you said the removal of commuting times helped tremendously. I had a long commute at that time.

Nowadays I'm a 15 minute walk from the office and I work a hybrid schedule. I am substantially more productive in the office. The main reason is that at home I can get easily distracted and do non-work things on work time. I know, I'm despicable. Why didn't this happen before? I think the main reason is that I am less engaged with my work at my current job, but also the years I have spent working from home has slowly degraded my resistance to distractions.

Working from the office frees me from that, although it's hardly a distraction free environment. I am in the epicentre of an open plan office featuring people sat at their desks in Teams meetings all day long, chatting away. It can get unpleasantly loud. Wear headphones, wear earplugs, you say. Yes I could, and I do sometimes, but I don't like wearing them all day long and they don't always help.

I wrote more words than I intended, the point is I work more effectively in the office and I prefer being there, but not 5 days a week. Hybrid is perfect for me and even though I'm a programmer I wouldn't want to WFH full time. I'm a rare breed.

Nov 14, 2023 0:59:56 GMT c said:

But places like Brigham Young University produce great research, despite demanding banning staff and students from consuming tea or coffee (for caffeine is a drug that profanes thy body).

I've learned from Mormons I work with that the prohibition on caffeine is misunderstood - there is no prohibition on caffeine. There is a prohibition on tea and coffee because they are explicitly called out. In Utah, caffeinated soda and energy drinks are huge business. They have chains dedicated to soda fountains that get traffic like a brand new In-n-Out. It's wild.

Nov 14, 2023 20:06:16 GMT Gyro LC said:

Nov 14, 2023 0:59:56 GMT c said:

But places like Brigham Young University produce great research, despite demanding banning staff and students from consuming tea or coffee (for caffeine is a drug that profanes thy body).

I've learned from Mormons I work with that the prohibition on caffeine is misunderstood - there is no prohibition on caffeine. There is a prohibition on tea and coffee because they are explicitly called out. In Utah, caffeinated soda and energy drinks are huge business. They have chains dedicated to soda fountains that get traffic like a brand new In-n-Out. It's wild.

Can confirm from watching Real Housewives of Salt Lake City.

Mormons don't knock on my door anymore, neither do the JW's...

It's either my award winning personality or the fact I know their theology better than they do, neither group is actually Christian.

Mormons I did not mind. JW however were a fucking nightmare. A few finally got arrested for trespassing a while back and they learned that neighborhood is off-limits. They ended up moving down the street to harass people at the supermarket.

Should go door to door and ask if people would be willing to talk about their lord and savior Satan <.<  Would be one way to get a ban on religious solicitation fast.

I've had 2 JWs knock. One was a pair of cuties, the other a very old couple.

I'm just saying I mulled it over.

Now what if it was two hot goth girls <.<

Nov 14, 2023 21:59:08 GMT @ness said:

One was a pair of cuties,

Not an accident, every hook needs bait.

Nov 14, 2023 21:55:25 GMT c said:

Mormons I did not mind. JW however were a fucking nightmare. A few finally got arrested for trespassing a while back and they learned that neighborhood is off-limits. They ended up moving down the street to harass people at the supermarket.

Should go door to door and ask if people would be willing to talk about their lord and savior Satan <.<  Would be one way to get a ban on religious solicitation fast.

Satanists are universally edgelords and really cringe if anything I have ever seen online is anything to go by.

They should just rename themselves evangelical atheists.

Satanists get religious protections in the US. Atheists do not.  That is the sole reason we use the term.  Atheists cannot put up a holiday displays freely for instance, but Satanists can.  Atheists cannot have after school programs freely, but Satanists can.

Says who?

In the US if a public entity allows one religion to do something, legally they need to offer it to all religions who desire it.

So if you have a prayer club after school, you cannot deny After School Satan. If you have a nativity on public property, you need to allow a satanic holiday display as well.  Offer a pray before an event, you need to allow all religions to offer a pray.

Courts ruled directly on this too recently, so considered now legally settled. And Satanic Temple is recognized religion by the US government that was granted tax exempt status.

Establishment clause goes hard.

Nov 16, 2023 2:58:45 GMT c said:

In the US if a public entity allows one religion to do something, legally they need to offer it to all religions who desire it.

So if you have a prayer club after school, you cannot deny After School Satan. If you have a nativity on public property, you need to allow a satanic holiday display as well.  Offer a pray before an event, you need to allow all religions to offer a pray.

Courts ruled directly on this too recently, so considered now legally settled. And Satanic Temple is recognized religion by the US government that was granted tax exempt status.

Establishment clause goes hard.

Like I said, total and absolute cringe.
Same deal with the idiots wearing colanders on their head like they beat the system.

Same people who say if you don't like gay marriage don't marry a guy, cannot stand the fact other people worship a God.
If you don't worship, then don't...

Schools can end this easily by banning religious groups. Do not apples and snakes near baby jesus, do not allow public groups to have religious displays on public property.

If people want religion in public, then need to accept all religions, including ours.  We are fine without religion public, but we are not fine with some religious groups promoting their beliefs on children, while barring others from doing the same.  If people want to teach children about the garden of eden, we should be able to teach them Satan offered Eve the ultimate gift, freedom from ignorance.

Also pretty sure Pastafarian are not a federally recognized religion in the US.  Satanic Temple has been for some time now.

Tech trend now to see companies aiming for 15% quarterly growth, while also doing routine layoffs of 5% or more. Investment first business design in very much in vogue, and demands constant high growth while regularly reducing headcount. Investors demand record profits and anything else is unacceptable.

But it is consumers that are the ones with unreasonable expectations like 5% annual raises.

///

Also businesses are pushing they have to lay off because of the "recession." But record profits do not happen in a recession. Nor does construction spending soar. But just as I called, as soon as people started to repay student loans, the media would scream recession. Companies want the recession, as recession means free government cash.  But record profits means no recession.

Most tech companies are burning cash and trade off fictitious future earnings, companies like Netflix and Uber burn a lot of cash and that is hard to justify in a 5% bond market, competition for capital got real.

I was looking to buy the factory opposite mine in 2021, mine has rental income of about 6% of what I paid for it. Over the road went for a much bigger price which returned 3% because it was better than bank rates at the moment.... Now you can get 5% risk free, changes everything.

Fair Work Commission rejects Adelaide man’s request to work from home 100 per cent of the time.

That's the headline.

" The Fair Work Commission deeming an employee’s reasoning to work 100 per cent from home was “perplexing”.

The FWC said “the worst of the pandemic” was over and as such the company involved was “within its rights to require its employees to return to the office”.

The company's policy stated team needed to be in the office 40% of the time, and this particular employee was in a specialist role and that demanded different skills that meant he needed to be present some of the time.

The team member was also struggling mentality, and his line manager noted he “was not in a position to support him properly,” if he never came into the office.

In addition, the firm claimed that when working from home, his productivity was around 50 per cent which was below the 85 per cent target. As he was not achieving an increase in productivity, and so it would be advantageous to observe and support him in the office,”

The FWA rejected thr request to work from home full-time and said it in its decision that it was “desirable” for him to be in the office to “allow for observation, interaction and (if necessary) coaching to improve his productivity” and additionally so his knowledge, “could be more easily accessed by less experienced team members on a face-to-face basis”.

And in a warning to staff at other firms that might try to push back from going into the office, the FWA said: “the worst of the pandemic appears to have passed and the company is now within its rights to require its employees to return to the office in accordance with their contracts of employment”.

---

I'm still amazed by this sort of thing, I heard a case few days ago on Financial Advice page on Facebook where the person claimed they "couldn't work in an office environment" despite having done it prior to the pandemic for years and having a 10 minute commute to work.

He was rightfully eaten alive.

In addition, the firm claimed that when working from home, his productivity was around 50 per cent which was below the 85 per cent target. As he was not achieving an increase in productivity, and so it would be advantageous to observe and support him in the office,”

If they use metrics like this to force people back I am totally fine.  In the US this is not what is being done.  It is all the gut feeling of execs and upper management.  Generally to try to save the value of their real estate holdings that decline rapidly if they sit even partially used.