“You are not allowed to work from home unless we want you working from home” is basically their slogan. It’s so funny how these companies are ok with upper management working from home, or having remote locations in India where they work from home, or when it comes to working overtime/after hours from home. But, can’t do it on a day to day basis. Horrible companies.
We went back to the office, I don’t care because my commute is immaterial BUT now I leave my laptop there, I disassembled the workstation at home and packed it away, I will not work at home now. Teams is on my phone because I don’t put the work email on my phone and needed a way to tell my team if I will be unexpectedly delayed. I don’t open it ever though, and now we have a group text might take it off too.
ETA: I did also delete MS Teams, we have each other’s phone numbers now.
They have the ability to turn off the web access now. My company recently did just that - if I try to access office.com on a personal device, my log in is blocked. Works fine on a company controlled device.
I’m not sure how they tell the difference since it’s through the browser. But my guess would be something to do with the lack of all their security software they load onto company controlled computers that have hooks into everything.
As funny as this is, I’m quite certain if somebody actually tried this in the real world they’d get fired. At will employment means they don’t even have to tell you why you got fired. They’ll just wait a couple of weeks or a month and tell you goodbye.
That’s not true at all in many countries. You can’t just fire someone for no reason. It doesn’t have to be a good reason but you need a reason. Also if someone is fired because of something that is protected under law like pregnancy they can come back and sue.
True. Sorry should have specified in the US they can just say we are letting you go and you’re done. Which as far as I’m concerned is basically a catch all statement of “we aren’t going to tell you why, we are just firing you”.
I worked for a company that trained me that “right to work” meant I could fire someone and tell them it was because I didn’t like the color of their shoes. I suppose that’s an excuse or reason but at that point is there really any difference?
Right to work means they can’t be required to join a union. They / you are thinking of “at will employment”. You may get this confused because some states pass them together.
The employee can still sue. There’s a reason why others say to keep documentation of everything in situations like this. While they don’t have to tell you why you’re fired, if you sue, they still have to provide adaquate reasoning. Can’t really say "I just don’t like the guy anymore’ and have that be sufficient.
There’s no way for us to know who’s really in the right here since we don’t know what the specifics of his employment agreement are. We can just agree that the employer is wrong, and stupid. Why piss off employees that actually do the work?
I don’t think it’s this “all rich jerks own commercial real estate” thing that everyone going on about. I get the feeling it’s more about the managerial/director types. The ones who are maybe well off but maybe not quite rich. My director owns a 150,000 tesla, but I don’t think he’s near well off enough to own an office building.
Anyway, at a certain level and upwards, all you do is meet and talk to people all day. They value face to face communication because that’s a more effective meeting, and builds more rapport with the members.
I think it’s more about manager capability. A person who manages IT, for example, but has little idea what that entails will want people in the office. They have no idea if a given ticket should take 3 hours or 3 days to resolve, so it’s easier to just have their people in the office where they can look at them and verify that they are, in fact, sitting at a computer.
The ideal work environment for me, and I think most people, is one where you’re judged based on what you do and how well you do it, while details like when you do it and where you are when you do it get left to your discretion. Managing someone like that requires skill and knowledge in what they’re doing though.
That’s okay with me, but is there at least one meeting that requires me? Only having managers in the office could allow one to have an office ten times smaller, and no other people are needed there anyway (or live in a thousand miles radius from the office, since all the managers live in the costly city in the costly state, and the most of others are not even in the States)
I personally don’t have an issue with WFH as long as you are getting work done. If you can manage yourself go for it. It is nice to see people face to face once in a while but that doesn’t mean 3 days a week.
I don’t mind walking but sometimes the distances are a but far. I do know a lot of people who ride bikes. Bikes has the benefit of being small and having a place to put a bag. It also probably has to do with air quality as in some places the air is bad.
I couldn’t have done it if I stayed in the states. No judgment on anyone who lives in a structurally car dependent area and doesn’t have a good alternative