I am not a fan of the “everyone must work from home” mindset. I think it works for a lot of people, and those who it works for, should be given the option if it works for the company as well.
I get to see this close up (and participate in it) and the drop in efficiency is apparent. I think a degree of efficiency drop is acceptable if it improves that work-life balance for people and also works for the company.
And if someone works for two companies and their output is focused on deliverables where a schedule is less important, that may work fine for them too.
The downside is that working from home enables this type of fraud and dishonesty.
And it is clear that there are some people who engage in that.
People can rationalize this until the cows come home, but the bottom line is that unless fully codified contractually and understood by both parties, IT IS DISHONEST, UNSCRUPULOUS, AND THEFT.
But it is true I come from a different time. I come from a time that compels me to give my word, even to companies or people I don’t like or agree with, and follow up with it.
I guess we come from the same era then.
I agree. And this type of fraud supports the push to get people back into their slave cubicles.
Very few people can work from home and be fully productive.
The solution is to offer those who want the WFH lifestyle a set list of deliverables, ditch the cameras and timeclock, and let them do their work as it suits them.
Example was when I wrote my book. I had deadlines to meet and a product to turn out. My best ‘writing time’ is between 3am-6am at 500-800 words per hour. Don’t ask me to do that at midday it just won’t happen. Cubicle? Too many distractions, surprisingly for me a coffee shop was great too. My point being people have different work-styles. And some people have different skills that might peak as different times of the day. Mine happen to allow me 3 different jobs and deliverables are what works, not timeclocks.