Working From Home Megathread

average_runner

recyclops wrote: »

yep we were one of them, sadly due to a number of different factors not everyone can avail of these solutions, some staff don't have space in their shared rental property for the desks, chairs etc we provide.

And they will probably want to go back to the office.



A solution for all will be achieved

zebastein

AdamD wrote: »

This comment comes up every time and implies that people who enjoy the social aspect of their work must not have social lives otherwise, its complete nonsense. I have a very active social life, but sitting in my bedroom from 9-5 every day with no in-person social interaction is grim to me.

Antares35 wrote: »

Good point and I agree. It's as nonsensical as the other side of the coin where people imply that those of us who like working from home are some kinds of hermits who don't want to go out and interact with others.

Sorry that was not what I meant to imply. I just mentioned two opposite examples, but I don't want to mean that it is all black or white. I just wanted to give one example of why someone would want/need social interactions at work, but that is not the only reason. If you are a social person, then it is obvious that you are looking for social interactions in all aspects of your life, work included.


I have a mixed personal experience: my first job in Dublin gave me very good friends and my future wife, in this job I was allowed to WFH but I did not want to.

Then I changed for another job with a longer commute and a very silent office where people were just coming, working, eating at their desk and leaving as soon as possible. If I had been able to WFH 100% in this job I would have done it, because I did not see any interest being in the office.
Next month I will start a new job with a remote onboarding. I really want to go to the office as soon as possible as I think it speeds up the process and you 'blend' more easily in a company when you meet the people.



Sometimes I wonder if there will be a social interest going to the office in an hybrid world. It takes time to get to know people, so I am not sure about the concept of a social distanced "hot desk" where you sit next to someone different every day you go to the office. If teams decide to all go to the office on the same day to meet, it makes sense, but going in an office to sit on a random desk next to people you don't know and you don't work with directly, I am not convinced.

average_runner

recyclops wrote: »

You shouldnt at all, but are they only happy in your job because they're sitting in their house, why didnt they leave earlier?

Maybe before commute was just accepted, now they see it differently and they have a choice. Plus people change their view on their job pretty often

zebastein

zebastein wrote: »

Sometimes I wonder if there will be a social interest going to the office in an hybrid world. It takes time to get to know people, so I am not sure about the concept of a social distanced "hot desk" where you sit next to someone different every day you go to the office. If teams decide to all go to the office on the same day to meet, it makes sense, but going in an office to sit on a random desk next to people you don't know and you don't work with directly, I am not convinced.

I don’t think that hotdesking is specifically tied to Covid and WFH. It’s been on the increase for years....I haven’t worked in a non hotdesking office for nearly a decade at this stage and I know from talking to friends that it was becoming increasingly the norm in larger companies pre pandemic

ByTheSea2019

I think if it's hotdesking and poeple choosing individually which days to go in, you'll get people just going for a change of scene or a quiet space a bit like students deciding whether to study in their room or the college library.

hmmm

zebastein wrote: »

Sometimes I wonder if there will be a social interest going to the office in an hybrid world. It takes time to get to know people, so I am not sure about the concept of a social distanced "hot desk" where you sit next to someone different every day you go to the office. If teams decide to all go to the office on the same day to meet, it makes sense, but going in an office to sit on a random desk next to people you don't know and you don't work with directly, I am not convinced.

Neither am I. I don't see what the point is in bringing people into an office if they are less productive at work as a consequence, and I don't think it brings much in the way of social/networking benefits.

I suspect where we will end up is people working from where-ever they prefer, but having formal team get-togethers which are more social than work, e.g. going for dinner together every few weeks. A big increase in the social budget, paid for with part of the money saved from reducing the number of overall desks.

Mrs OBumble

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It is an attitude that is not reflective of an international business, that’s for sure. Even before the pandemic I had met very few of the people i wrk with and we get on great. And our new hires and grads are integrated into the organisation just fine. I don’t mind at all....even in the office my colleagues are just my colleagues, not my best friends.

I've worked with an MNC with colleagues all over the world, and Irish companies with colleagues in other countries.

We delivered successful projects.

But did I trust the lads in Mexico / India /Poland / US? Nope. I did far more formal checks than make sure they were working and delivering than I would for a local collocated team.

If I heard that one of them was leaving or sick or had a parent died, was I sad? Was I happy if they got promoted? Did I put any effort into coaching them on areas they were interested in growing into? Nope, I just asked the local manager from that office what resource would be covering while they were out.




It's great that you think your hew hires and grads are integrated just fine. Have you actually asked them? What has your retention rate been?

Also interested to note that something which only applies to some people does count as an advantage of WFH, but something that doesn't apply to everyone is dismissed as a disadvantage. Sauce, goose, gander, as they say.

hots

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

If I heard that one of them was leaving or sick or had a parent died, was I sad? Was I happy if they got promoted? Did I put any effort into coaching them on areas they were interested in growing into? Nope, I just asked the local manager from that office what resource would be covering while they were out.

You're probably not suited to working in a team accross multiple locations.

wes

I was watching a video on the history of offices last night, and it was interesting to see how things went from the invention of cubicles to the open office. The open office is actually bad for productivity due to distractions, which cubicles mitigated somewhat. The open office has won out due to being able to cram more people into office space.

Once companies figure out that WFH is much cheaper, and that it works, it will be the way to go. Now in this instance it just so happens to be good for productivity for most people as well. IMO, most companies offering some kind of WFH will be the norm going forward, as it will save companies a lot of money.

AndrewJRenko

Antares35 wrote: »

Not everyone had the luxury. In any event you wouldn't catch me dead (or perhaps I would be) cycling anywhere near Dublin city centre. I don't have a death wish.

I did have a walking commute for a while when I lived near town, and it was lovely in the spring and summer, and kept the weight down and generally benefited my health. In the dead of winter, it wasn't so nice being lashed on.

Funny how people make a big deal about the dangers of cycling when far more people are killed in vehicles or on foot.

As for winter, they have this great invention now called raingear. Using a 1-4 tonne metal cage as a raincoat doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

average_runner wrote: »

Amount of complaining on the cycle forum about cycling to work, its no fun either.

How can walking to work be enjoyable with all the fumes in the city? Surely working from home could enable you to get out for a nice cleaner walk and cycle at that.

I think you'll find that most of the 'complaining' on the cycle forum is about cycling in general, and not cycling to work. Having said that, cycling in general is great fun and very healthy, once you don't get too upset by the occasional homicidal maniac.

As for fumes, motorists pick up more fumes than cyclists.

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I've worked with an MNC with colleagues all over the world, and Irish companies with colleagues in other countries.

We delivered successful projects.

But did I trust the lads in Mexico / India /Poland / US? Nope. I did far more formal checks than make sure they were working and delivering than I would for a local collocated team.

If I heard that one of them was leaving or sick or had a parent died, was I sad? Was I happy if they got promoted? Did I put any effort into coaching them on areas they were interested in growing into? Nope, I just asked the local manager from that office what resource would be covering while they were out.

I think this perfectly encapsulates the attitude of middle managers who struggled to justify their roles in the world of WFH.

Antares35

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Funny how people make a big deal about the dangers of cycling when far more people are killed in vehicles or on foot.

As for winter, they have this great invention now called raingear. Using a 1-4 tonne metal cage as a raincoat doesn't make a whole lot of sense.


I think you'll find that most of the 'complaining' on the cycle forum is about cycling in general, and not cycling to work. Having said that, cycling in general is great fun and very healthy, once you don't get too upset by the occasional homicidal maniac.

As for fumes, motorists pick up more fumes than cyclists.

I'm not "people" I am simply one person stating that I would not be comfortable cycling the roads in Dublin city centre. That is not me "making a big deal" it is me making a personal decision for myself not to engage in what I think is a risky exercise. Hope that's ok with you Andrew

Mrs OBumble

Deleted User wrote: »

I think this perfectly encapsulates the attitude of middle managers who struggled to justify their roles in the world of WFH.

The funny thing is, while I've done some project management, I haven't been a "middle manager" since coming to Ireland. Even before then, I was only reluctantly in manager roles - I'd far rather be a worker.

Of the four countries I listed, I know for a fact that stuff assigned to people in two of them would not have been done if we didn't monitor certain things daily, and get the project sponsor to hassle their local manager a couple of times. With WFH, we'll see more, not less, of this type of behaviour as the companies are burned by project that don't deliver and things aren't noticed quickly.



This thread over in Work Problems points to another interesting twist: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058178505

Looks like there's not absolutely clarity over the legality of recording on-line video platform (Zoom etc) calls. There are interesting questions regarding these recordings if people's children get into the picture. Liability if the pictures get mis-used in any way could be very interesting indeed.


And I heard of another difficult scenario today: middle-age person lives-in with parents, one of who has dementia. There's always a caregiver or the other parent with them. But it's a small house, and a loud voice asking "what time is it" every 2 minutes can be heard on most calls. Despite this, the company has said "you must work from home for now". Apparently colleagues aren't as sympathetic about interruptions from dementia patients as they are about children or cats.

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Of the four countries I listed, I know for a fact that stuff assigned to people in two of them would not have been done if we didn't monitor certain things daily, and get the project sponsor to hassle their local manager a couple of times. With WFH, we'll see more, not less, of this type of behaviour as the companies are burned by project that don't deliver and things aren't noticed quickly.

And yet all evidence is to the contrary with productivity up or the same for all studies that have looked at WFH during the covid period

Antares35

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And yet all evidence is to the contrary with productivity up or the same for all studies that have looked at WFH during the covid period

Don't be coming around here with your statements of fact you big WFH zealot

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Of the four countries I listed, I know for a fact that stuff assigned to people in two of them would not have been done if we didn't monitor certain things daily, and get the project sponsor to hassle their local manager a couple of times. With WFH, we'll see more, not less, of this type of behaviour as the companies are burned by project that don't deliver and things aren't noticed quickly.
.

While the problem that you describe is undoubtedly real, it’s not cause by WFH. All WFH has done is shone a light on poor hiring and performance management processes.

These kind of problems existed before WFH and if someone needs to be in the office so that they can be kept an eye on, then I would have thought that there should be serious consideration as to whether they should keep their job

Antares35

Antares35 wrote: »

I did have a walking commute for a while when I lived near town, and it was lovely in the spring and summer, and kept the weight down and generally benefited my health. In the dead of winter, it wasn't so nice being lashed on.

I will actually have a walkable commute when we go back to work. First time ever! Yay!

plodder

average_runner wrote: »

Amount of complaining on the cycle forum about cycling to work, its no fun either.

There's a lot of complaining full stop on that forum. That doesn't mean cycling, or cycling to work is not fun.

How can walking to work be enjoyable with all the fumes in the city? Surely working from home could enable you to get out for a nice cleaner walk and cycle at that.

Cycling in the city looks much riskier than it is, though nobody is going to believe that unless they are prepared to try it themselves. And whatever risk there is, is reducing all the time, as car traffic gets reduced and slowed over time.

I hope to WFH/commute once or twice a week by bike going forward and possibly get rid of the second car. It will certainly be used a lot less. Hybrid win/win :pac:

beauf

There was a study that cyclists are exposed least to fumes in a city. Drivers the most. Because cars suck in air exactly where the car on front exhausts.

How far back is that post about cycling I couldn't find it to quote....

ELM327

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I've worked with an MNC with colleagues all over the world, and Irish companies with colleagues in other countries.

We delivered successful projects.

But did I trust the lads in Mexico / India /Poland / US? Nope. I did far more formal checks than make sure they were working and delivering than I would for a local collocated team.

If I heard that one of them was leaving or sick or had a parent died, was I sad? Was I happy if they got promoted? Did I put any effort into coaching them on areas they were interested in growing into? Nope, I just asked the local manager from that office what resource would be covering while they were out.




It's great that you think your hew hires and grads are integrated just fine. Have you actually asked them? What has your retention rate been?

Also interested to note that something which only applies to some people does count as an advantage of WFH, but something that doesn't apply to everyone is dismissed as a disadvantage. Sauce, goose, gander, as they say.

This is why you (and others espousing this type of behavior) are not suited to middle management.

Mrs OBumble

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And yet all evidence is to the contrary with productivity up or the same for all studies that have looked at WFH during the covid period

ALL the evidence?

Some of the articles I've seen lately take a more nuanced view, especially for organisations which want to change how things are done.

And there's a fair body of research around Agile, which mostly says co-location is better than multi-location.

zebastein

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

But did I trust the lads in Mexico / India /Poland / US? Nope.

Is it a problem of working from home or a problem of skills in different offices ?
What I mean is that some companies open an office in Bangalore to cut costs, but by doing so they also get a really unskilled workforce. I worked in different companies that had productivity/quality issues with their Indian offices. It is not a problem of them being remote, it is an issue of having a company willing to cut costs and ok to get people with lower level of skills.



There are challenges inherent to WFH and there are other challenges related to internationalization and companies being bad at opening offices in another region, bringing satellite offices up to speed, managing different languages...



The question I have for your is: would you trust Irish/European colleagues that would start for your company tomorrow and work fully remote ?

a_squirrelman

I had an interview last week for a small tech company.

He has employees in five countries, three of which are non-EU.
Less than 40 people, half of which are in the main office country.
All the staff from outside the head office country were of course onboarded online, those based in the head office country hired during covid were also onboarded online.

Home office policy pre-covid in head office was WFH Monday and Friday but flexible, if you needed more or less it was fine.
He said post-covid people can stay at home all the time if they want, but he will have events and stuff to keep some good vibes and whatever.

Great to see this with small companies, then again he worked in MNCs before, so I guess he is bringing that experience with him.

a_squirrelman

zebastein wrote: »

Is it a problem of working from home or a problem of skills in different offices ?
What I mean is that some companies open an office in Bangalore to cut costs, but by doing so they also get a really unskilled workforce. I worked in different companies that had productivity/quality issues with their Indian offices. It is not a problem of them being remote, it is an issue of having a company willing to cut costs and ok to get people with lower level of skills.



There are challenges inherent to WFH and there are other challenges related to internationalization and companies being bad at opening offices in another region, bringing satellite offices up to speed, managing different languages...



The question I have for your is: would you trust Irish/European colleagues that would start for your company tomorrow and work fully remote ?

Yes, it is most definitely not a WFH issue. Where I work now we had issues with our counterparts in India.
So much so that a handbook for dealing with the cultural differences was given to us so we knew better how to deal with them. Making sure things were confirmed by email being one of the most basic, because a "Yes" on a call didn't necessarily mean they were saying yes to the deadline for example.

beauf

beauf wrote: »

There was a study that cyclists are exposed least to fumes in a city. Drivers the most. Because cars suck in air exactly where the car on front exhausts.

How far back is that post about cycling I couldn't find it to quote....

That’s right. Been studied extensively in London. Unless you have a new, high spec car with a HEPA filter you are literally sucking in exhaust fumes for the entire commute

beauf

Deleted User wrote: »

That’s right. Been studied extensively in London. Unless you have a new, high spec car with a HEPA filter you are literally sucking in exhaust fumes for the entire commute

I thought it interesting there was one in the Zoe.

https://www.mann-hummel.com/en/oe-products/stories-en/providing-clean-air-even-in-heavy-traffic/

beauf

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

ALL the evidence?

Some of the articles I've seen lately take a more nuanced view, especially for organisations which want to change how things are done.

And there's a fair body of research around Agile, which mostly says co-location is better than multi-location.

We have developers who work together in a Agile like process, but remotely. They effectively work in a meeting all day. I have only done a little of that personally.
But I have worked on a few implementation on large or critial IT infrastucture projects where we have 10 or so various technical people all collaborating simultaneously over a few hours remotely.
TBH I though it was more effective.

I'm not saying it works for everyone. But you seem to looking for fringe cases, or sweeping generalizations, that can't possibly be true for everyone.

I've posted here several times showing my place is currently operating off the following tiered system on a 5 day week basis

Tier 1 - 5 days onsite - Permanent desk/hot desk - Production staff and those involved in operations, manufacturing, site management
Tier 2 - Up to 2 days onsite - Hot desk only - Support roles for the above
Tier 3 - 0 day onsite - All other roles

So where I'm working just announced yesterday that as the vaccines are rolled out worldwide, different sites will gradually return to being open as opposed to restricted access based on the above tiers. Part of the announcement was that the above tiers are staying with tier 3 changing from 0 days onsite to 0-1 days onsite which basically means those 100% WFH have the ability to come onsite should they choose to do so.

For my site they are looking at only going back to 60% of office staff being back onsite at any given time, spread across the 3 tiers above. They are also looking to see what can be done to allow some of the tier 1 folks move to tier 2 by utilizing various tech options.

They have no intention of going back to 100% onsite for any of the global sites and are instead looking at converting some office space to R&D/manufacturing/cleanrooms etc.

This is all going to be done on a trial period once all sites are reopened however they stated that they would like to go lower than the 60% onsite number and the trials will be used to see how best to do that for all the various roles.

The impression seems to be that they want to get to the current level, which is just below 30% across the company being onsite but they want to do it in a more controlled manner than covid allowed and put some data around which roles don't work as well around WFH and what the options might be to improve the situation for those roles.

The most valuable real estate is the production floor so if they can do away with offices at sites and convert the space to production/R&D/cleanrooms, it looks like they will.

Hurrah for forward looking employers :D:D:D

Dyr

beauf wrote: »

We have developers who work together in a Agile like process, but remotely. They effectively work in a meeting all day. I have only done a little of that personally.
But I have worked on a few implementation on large or critial IT infrastucture projects where we have 10 or so various technical people all collaborating simultaneously over a few hours remotely.
TBH I though it was more effective.

I'm not saying it works for everyone. But you seem to looking for fringe cases, or sweeping generalizations, that can't possibly be true for everyone.

The funny thing about Agile, is if you have a Venn diagram of people who use the term and people who understand what the term actually means there would be an area with very little overlap

wes

beauf wrote: »

We have developers who work together in a Agile like process, but remotely. They effectively work in a meeting all day. I have only done a little of that personally.
But I have worked on a few implementation on large or critial IT infrastucture projects where we have 10 or so various technical people all collaborating simultaneously over a few hours remotely.
TBH I though it was more effective.

I'm not saying it works for everyone. But you seem to looking for fringe cases, or sweeping generalizations, that can't possibly be true for everyone.

Co-location pretty doesn't work for any organization at scale. My company tried that before we went with hybrid WFH. We rarely work with people in the same time zone, and the tools do a fine job of letting us work together.