Working From Home Megathread

AndrewJRenko

a_squirrelman wrote: »

I understand. Anyway, for those that CAN download there are alternatives to using a mirror.

This is the kind of stuff that happens when you let end users have admin rights to install software.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-nhs-test-and-trace-unaffected-by-cyber-attack-at-serco-firm-says-12204747

I genuinely haven't seen that kind of setup for about 15 years. Are you talking about a developer machine that is segregated from the main corporate network?

kippy

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

This is the kind of stuff that happens when you let end users have admin rights to install software.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-nhs-test-and-trace-unaffected-by-cyber-attack-at-serco-firm-says-12204747

I genuinely haven't seen that kind of setup for about 15 years. Are you talking about a developer machine that is segregated from the main corporate network?

Yep,
totally agree - security 101 - don't give folks any more access to any resources than they need to do their roles and have a robust system in place to authorise and audit any access requests.
Giving end users admin access to PC's/Laptops is a potential for disaster.

a_squirrelman

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

This is the kind of stuff that happens when you let end users have admin rights to install software.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-nhs-test-and-trace-unaffected-by-cyber-attack-at-serco-firm-says-12204747

I genuinely haven't seen that kind of setup for about 15 years. Are you talking about a developer machine that is segregated from the main corporate network?

I get you, no it's not a developer machine, when not in the office it's just connect with a vpn and you log in to the systems/applications you need.

hots

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

This is the kind of stuff that happens when you let end users have admin rights to install software.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-nhs-test-and-trace-unaffected-by-cyber-attack-at-serco-firm-says-12204747

I genuinely haven't seen that kind of setup for about 15 years. Are you talking about a developer machine that is segregated from the main corporate network?

I've only had 1 device where I couldn't install anything at all (public sector), everything else is normally install with an acknowledgement of what it's for. My last two machines have been a free for all. The software mouse movers are generally running in an exe so don't actually need installing.

Resting an optical mouse on a watch with a second hand is a nice alternative if you wear one, and was what I had to do in the place where I couldn't download anything.

H8GHOTI

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Nice - just throw 30% of your colleagues under a bus without a care. It's not a zero sum game, where the 30% having difficulties are balanced out. If 30% of your employees are having difficulties, that's a problem.

...

Once offices reopen fully & the 30% are able to return, they are welcome to get back on the bus.

I only asked a question, gave no opinion. Let’s be honest, if someone else wrote it, the headline could have read WFH suits 70% of people.

How would you feel if those 70% were surveyed in the future & said their well-being is worse after returning to the office? As long as the 30% are happier, that’s ok.

Once lockdown is over just leave people choose whatever they want. Ideal scenario.

Sam Hain

timeToLive wrote: »

Teams goes 'away' pretty quickly. Like getting a cup of tea, answering the door, talking to your coworker (spouse), going to the bathroom, reading a document while not touching the mouse, getting some water, thinking, stretching, phone call, eating a snack, looking after a pet, looking after a child, helping them with their schoolwork, cooking their lunch, getting them a snack

That's not working from home, that's doing some work in-between home duties.

AndrewJRenko

a_squirrelman wrote: »

I get you, no it's not a developer machine, when not in the office it's just connect with a vpn and you log in to the systems/applications you need.

Do you use Citrix or something to access your office applications? I'm trying to understand whether the applications installed on your the computer have access to your corporate resources. I'm presuming it is a corporate device and not your own personal computer?

beauf

Sam Hain wrote: »

That's not working from home, that's doing some work in-between home duties.

.....and we are right back to the your only working if someone can see you at a desk....

kippy

beauf wrote: »

.....and we are right back to the your only working if someone can see you at a desk....

Work/productivity can be very difficult to actually define when you get down to the nitty gritty.
But yes traditionally you are being paid to be 'present' in the very first instance.

Cluedo Monopoly

Many people install Teams on their phones so they could be anywhere and still active.

I think monitoring people using online tools is poor management and creates a negative culture. Very old fashioned and controlling. I can understand how some middle managers dislike WFH. People will always find a way to game those systems.

Performance should simply be results driven. Teams should be self organising and team members should be accountable to their team. People know when they're not pulling their weight.

beauf

kippy wrote: »

Work/productivity can be very difficult to actually define when you get down to the nitty gritty.
But yes traditionally you are being paid to be 'present' in the very first instance.

I've found that rarely it is difficult to measure productivity. Unless a job actually requires a body. It's one of the worst ways of measuring productivity. The main advantage is it requires the lease effort from whomever is managing it.

Dyr

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

Many people install Teams on their phones so they could be anywhere and still active.

I think monitoring people using online tools is poor management and creates a negative culture. Very old fashioned and controlling. I can understand how some middle managers dislike WFH. People will always find a way to game those systems.

Performance should simply be results driven. Teams should be self organising and team members should be accountable to their team. People know when they're not pulling their weight.

Offiice 365 uses your activity in Office 365 to try create productivity metrics for each user. Most companies are unaware of it, which is good because its a crap way to judge productivity. I would spend very little time using Office apps, I'd actually spend more time using Office admin tools

Dyr

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

This is the kind of stuff that happens when you let end users have admin rights to install software.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-nhs-test-and-trace-unaffected-by-cyber-attack-at-serco-firm-says-12204747

I genuinely haven't seen that kind of setup for about 15 years. Are you talking about a developer machine that is segregated from the main corporate network?

You're a few years behind the curve so, becoming more common for end users to be given admin priviligees to local devices as companies implement zero trust networks and move more towards cloud solutions for applications and data.

The down side is the user knows if they bork their device its just going to be reimaged and they'll start from scratch again.

Cluedo Monopoly

Bambi wrote: »

You're a few years behind the curve so, becoming more common for end users to be given admin priviligees to local devices as companies implement zero trust networks and move more towards cloud solutions for applications and data.

The down side is the user knows if they bork their device its just going to be reimaged and they'll start from scratch again.

I have full admin rights to my work laptop. I can install whatever I like. Same for all my colleagues.

An Ri rua

Sam Hain wrote: »

That's not working from home, that's doing some work in-between home duties.

No, in fairness, that's working from home during Level 5 restrictions where kids are off, households can't mix etc.

beauf

Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »

I have full admin rights to my work laptop. I can install whatever I like. Same for all my colleagues.

That's becoming rare. Tbh a lockdown desktop wasn't uncommon 20 years ago. Most of our office doesn't have admin rights.

beauf

wes wrote: »

You don't need admin rights.......

Also a powershell script would probably do the job on windows.

You need permissions. Local or otherwise. If you circumvent its a disciplinary matter usually. It's the modern way. The majority of people are safer not having rights tbh..

Dyr

beauf wrote: »

That's becoming rare. Tbh a lockdown desktop wasn't uncommon 20 years ago. Most of our office doesn't have admin rights.

Its kinda the opposite, it was common over 20 years ago to let users have local admin permissions but about 20-15 years ago it became the norm for users not to be given administrative rights. Its started changing back in the last few years as security layers are often now outside the local device so local admin rights are making a comeback for users.

beauf

Like I said thats not been my experience. Very popular now with so many using the cloud. It just eliminates so many issues caused by users breaking their machines.

Thats me

Microcontroller 3-5 euro cost could help you to simulate hardware mouse which will appear to the system identical to your usual mouse.
On the other hand, this will not resolve the problem which someone would try to resolve by simulating a mouse.

beauf

I have teams on my mobile and it comes though to my Smart Watch. I deliberately set it up like that so I wouldn't miss notifications. Its on office hours, so out of hours I get no notifications. I can be busy with something else and not able to answer a call.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

All the tweet says us that 30% have had their well being suffer since they started working from home. It doesn't say that working from home was the cause. There has been a lot more going on since working from home started that could be responsible for the drop in well being. If there was no covid, schools and child care never closed and things were normal these people might not have seen their well being suffer if they were working from home.

Exactly. During normal times people wouldn't have to home school while also trying to work, or would have outside activities such as sports clubs, book clubs, social meet ups, cinemas, theatres, choir practise, voluntary work available to help keep their job in perspective.

AndrewJRenko

Bambi wrote: »

You're a few years behind the curve so, becoming more common for end users to be given admin priviligees to local devices as companies implement zero trust networks and move more towards cloud solutions for applications and data.

The down side is the user knows if they bork their device its just going to be reimaged and they'll start from scratch again.

What corporates in Ireland are using this approach?

c68zapdsm5i1ru

kippy wrote: »

Work/productivity can be very difficult to actually define when you get down to the nitty gritty.
But yes traditionally you are being paid to be 'present' in the very first instance.

Which needs to change, now that we have increasingly sophisticated technology to enable people to remain connected while not necessarily being in the same place. Stubbornly sticking to a work model that made sense in the 50s, 60s and 70s and takes no account of the huge societal and global changes since then makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

timeToLive

Sam Hain wrote: »

That's not working from home, that's doing some work in-between home duties.

Yes.. that's the life we're all living now

AndrewJRenko

An interesting view from that hotbed of revolutionary politics in the Irish Times on the rationale for employers paying WFH costs for employees.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/personal-finance/employers-are-saving-money-and-should-pay-staff-work-from-home-relief-1.4473232?mode=amp

AndrewJRenko

H8GHOTI wrote: »

Once offices reopen fully & the 30% are able to return, they are welcome to get back on the bus.

I only asked a question, gave no opinion. Let’s be honest, if someone else wrote it, the headline could have read WFH suits 70% of people.

How would you feel if those 70% were surveyed in the future & said their well-being is worse after returning to the office? As long as the 30% are happier, that’s ok.

Once lockdown is over just leave people choose whatever they want. Ideal scenario.

That's pretty much what I've been saying all along - that those who can't WFH or don't want to WFH should have the option to do so.

In my case in the public sector, there was little or no movement in this direction. Even back from the good old days of Level 3, with offices being staffed, heated, but only 'essential' staff allowed back in. This level of imposition, the idea that the employer can just take space in the employee's home for their own use, with no option and no compensation just isn't on.

Deleted User wrote: »

I was lucky enough to be working in a Dept that encouraged WFH (at all grade levels) before the pandemic, and was already doing so part time when covid happened. I will continue to do so when its declared safe to return to office based work, - so its nothing to do with my commutes.

I don't know where you're picking your figure of 30% + from, but its not indicative of my department.

We have done two very detailed surveys of all staff since last March, and 89% were happy to continue working from home and would prefer to continue to do so at least 50% of the time or more when the pandemic has passed. The most popular pattern suggested is 3/4 days WFH and 1 day office based.

Of the other 11% who said they would prefer to be office based, the reasons given were due to complications like juggling childcare while trying to WFH - something that would not be an issue in non-pandemic times. Of that 11% only half of them said they would prefer to be office based, full time, 5 days a week outside of covid.

I, for one, am glad to see the move towards WFH. On of the only hidden positives of this pandemic is that employers who previously would not have considered allowing their employees (especially junior staff) to WFH have been shown that it can work, and it gives most employees a far better work/life balance.

But there will always be the disgruntled few who are disgruntled for the sake of it.

Then there are those who have genuine issues with space or childcare - and as I said, i am sure there will be enough full time office based roles found for those who want them, when it is declared safe for staff to go back to office based work. There will always be admin or customer facing roles, or ISD roles, etc, that require office based staff, and good luck to those who want them.

The 30% figure comes from the article quoted above from Adrian Weckler in the Independent.

I'm actually in agreement with you, in that WFH should absolutely be an option for all staff.

But it shouldn't be an obligation, or a default position, or an assumption. There are many reasons why WFH doesn't work for some people, so employers don't get to impose this in a non-emergency situation.

And you want to punish those staff by forcing them to move role, for no reason other than perhaps them not having a spare room? That's completely unacceptable.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's pretty much what I've been saying all along - that those who can't WFH or don't want to WFH should have the option to do so.

In my case in the public sector, there was little or no movement in this direction. Even back from the good old days of Level 3, with offices being staffed, heated, but only 'essential' staff allowed back in. This level of imposition, the idea that the employer can just take space in the employee's home for their own use, with no option and no compensation just isn't on.



The 30% figure comes from the article quoted above from Adrian Weckler in the Independent.

I'm actually in agreement with you, in that WFH should absolutely be an option for all staff.

But it shouldn't be an obligation, or a default position, or an assumption. There are many reasons why WFH doesn't work for some people, so employers don't get to impose this in a non-emergency situation.

And you want to punish those staff by forcing them to move role, for no reason other than perhaps them not having a spare room? That's completely unacceptable.

WFH was the safest option, even at level 3 and no employer should have been bringing staff in unless absolutely necessary. Look these are extraordinary and scary times and you can't expect every angle to be sorted at the moment. That's unrealistic.

Long term, as you said, the should be choice. If the choice you make decides the area you are assigned to that isn't a punishment. It's a practical decision. People who want to continue working from home may also have to accept a reassignment.

AndrewJRenko

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

WFH was the safest option, even at level 3 and no employer should have been bringing staff in unless absolutely necessary. Look these are extraordinary and scary times and you can't expect every angle to be sorted at the moment. That's unrealistic.

Safest for who, or on what basis?
Is it the safest option if I don't have a decent chair, or a desk that I can fit my legs under?
Is it the safest option if I don't have a safe space to keep my paperwork or to carry out sensitive phone calls away from prying eyes and ears of housemates?
Is it the safest option if I can't afford to keep the heating on all day and am working at a temperature below HSA guidelines?

The decision as to 'what is safest' has been made on a unilateral basis, with no consideration of the other side of the story or the options available.

My desk is sitting there in my heated, lit, serviced office, with no-one else within 30m-40m of my desk btw.

The extraordinary and scary times started 11 months ago. Since then, many employers have adapted their buildings, their facilities, their processes to provide a safe working environment. We're not in the emergency phase now, and there's no excuse for not doing the work to provide a safe working environment.

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

Long term, as you said, the should be choice. If the choice you make decides the area you are assigned to that isn't a punishment. It's a practical decision. People who want to continue working from home may also have to accept a reassignment.

Let's step back a minute. I have a contract of employment for a specific role that sets out my normal place of employment - my office. My employer doesn't get to decide to change either of these at random, just because they can't be arsed working out a safe procedure to let me back into the office. Why would my role NOT be capable of being done in the office when that's where it was being done for years? Staff who don't have the space at home or other facilities to allow WFH cannot be punished.

H8GHOTI

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

...I have a contract of employment for a specific role that sets out my normal place of employment - my office. My employer doesn't get to decide to change either of these at random, just because they can't be arsed working out a safe procedure to let me back into the office. Why would my role NOT be capable of being done in the office when that's where it was being done for years? Staff who don't have the space at home or other facilities to allow WFH cannot be punished.

Post covid restrictions? Is there talk of employers forcing people to WFH against their will?