5 ms·

My wife works for the state. Her team’s productivity soared during the 8 months they spent working from home. Once they were forced back to the office, 6 of he

My wife works for the state. Her team’s productivity soared during the 8 months they spent working from home. Once they were forced back to the office, 6 of her peers quickly left. She and one other person are the only ones who remain. Productivity fell greatly even before her peers left. She only continues to work because she needs ~18 more months to be fully vested in their retirement system. Then she is leaving as well and she will probably just remain at home until she finds something she enjoys. Her managers know that they are capable of being far more productive while at home, but they don’t seem to care. Part of me believes it’s “cruelty is the point” but I’m also aware that the director of her state agency is a conservative who has been trying to “starve the beast” once he took over. He has found the most effective way to starve it as all of the young people are leaving to go to the private sector. Once my wife leaves, the entire state will have exactly one employee to handle her workload. Edit: The worst part is the fact that the other side of her hallway is nothing but empty offices because those people are allowed to work from home. However, she works under a different director and he refuses to allow it. So it’s quite literally one man ruining it for the rest of them.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Thlom 4y ago
In my team most of us are back in the office now. Luckily we still have the option to work from home, so when that is more convenient I'll work from home, but most days I'll be at the office. Never really got the hang of working from home.
- yrgulation 4y ago
  “ Never really got the hang of working from home.” And thats fine. Everyone should have the option of whichever way works for them. The only issue is that many of those who prefer on site want it imposed on everyone else.
  - whatarethembits 4y ago
    Exactly. The ones who prefer to go in want to drag everyone along with them, which makes me irrationally angry when they try to come up with “objective” reasons for why on-site is better than WFH. You do you and leave me alone.
  - Thlom 4y ago
    Agreed. Still would like those that WFH to come in to the office occasionally though, even if just to say hi. :-)
eachro 4y ago
What is her team responsible for?
- hollywood_court 4y ago
  They analyze field reports from other scientists. 100% of her work is done at her PC. When she’s at the office she has to deal with her lower morale in addition to the random coworker stopping by to chat or her manager interrupting her in various ways. During her WFH time, she alway completed her work by 10am each morning. Now she struggles to complete it by 5pm while being in the office. The folks that left had many years to go until they were vested. Since she only has a short time remaining, she decided to stick it out.
  - ianai 4y ago
    I've heard similar reports. I've also directly suffered very malignant management in the past before covid. We're talking people who were outright awful to the business and some who were ultimately fired. There needs to be better management of management.
    - treis 4y ago
      On the flip side there is nothing about an office that should turn ~1 hour of work into a day.
      - ianai 4y ago
        The interruptions absolutely do add up. My suspicion too is office bound work probably suffers from work being added on amounting to whole other jobs. Every job I’ve had as a professional has been essentially multiple jobs not reflected in the pay nor job description.
        treis 4y ago
        Don't buy it. Yes, interruptions add up. They don't add up to 7 hours a day. I mean look at your story. Your wife's team quit and the office is empty. There's hardly anyone there to interrupt her. Someone going from a 8 hour workday in the office to a 1 hour workday at home is sandbagging it. There's no two ways around it. Let them WFH and off come the sandbags because they can get that time back. Put them back in the office and the sandbags come back because there's no incentive for them to work any faster. They're stuck in the office for 8 hours no matter how much work they do.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
intrasight 4y ago
A friend of mine works for the state. She was told to return to the office. The office is in another city. She is having to buy a condo in that city in order to make that feasible.
- hollywood_court 4y ago
  My wife commutes 45 mins each way. It’s awful because it’s so dangerous. Her office is in a dangerous area and the interstate she uses to commute is known for its deadly wrecks.
rhexs 4y ago
No one is owed a remote job. Unfortunately, if you work for the state, it is highly likely you don't have the skills and leverage to force the issue as most of the positions are just supporting some sort of bureaucracy and fundamentally have to exist because a lobbyist at one point got a law passed. State jobs, like it or not, are often effectively just political appointments. Also keep in mind that you can't fire or terminate anyone, ever, in the state, so there's also a chance leadership feels this is the first time they can turnover roles that aren't doing much or meeting their goals. That's a very rare opportunity. If you think "rest-and-vest" is bad in tech, you ain't seen anything when it comes to government. Imagine jobs where no one has accomplished anything in a decade or more. Of course you immediately jump to some sort of conspiracy though.
- hollywood_court 4y ago
  You made quite a few assumptions there. She’s a microbiologist. There aren’t any private sector jobs for her around this area unfortunately. It’s either the state or the university (also the state). She applied and went through the interview process just like anyone else. There was no “political appointment.” She isn’t allowed to work from home simply because one individual doesn’t like it. Her director refuses to allow it while the director in charge of the other side of the hallway does allow it. It’s the result of one man imposing his will on others.
  - mxuribe 4y ago
    > ...It’s the result of one man imposing his will on others. This comment almost sounds like the kind of thing one sees in non-gov corporate america! :-)
- tomrod 4y ago
  > it is highly likely you don't have the skills and leverage to force the issue as most of the positions are just supporting some sort of bureaucracy and fundamentally have to exist because a lobbyist at one point got a law passed. State jobs, like it or not, are often effectively just political appointments. This tells me you haven't met or worked with very many people in state or federal jobs. I feel like this needs reasonable pushback. SOME of the leadership positions are political appointments. The majority of employees are a highly skilled workforce supporting a specific mission of that particular state agency. And "can't fire or terminate anyone, ever, in the state" is a bit off as well.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Thlom 4y ago

In my team most of us are back in the office now. Luckily we still have the option to work from home, so when that is more convenient I'll work from home, but most days I'll be at the office. Never really got the hang of working from home.

yrgulation 4y ago
“ Never really got the hang of working from home.” And thats fine. Everyone should have the option of whichever way works for them. The only issue is that many of those who prefer on site want it imposed on everyone else.
- whatarethembits 4y ago
  Exactly. The ones who prefer to go in want to drag everyone along with them, which makes me irrationally angry when they try to come up with “objective” reasons for why on-site is better than WFH. You do you and leave me alone.
- Thlom 4y ago
  Agreed. Still would like those that WFH to come in to the office occasionally though, even if just to say hi. :-)

eachro 4y ago

What is her team responsible for?

hollywood_court 4y ago
They analyze field reports from other scientists. 100% of her work is done at her PC. When she’s at the office she has to deal with her lower morale in addition to the random coworker stopping by to chat or her manager interrupting her in various ways. During her WFH time, she alway completed her work by 10am each morning. Now she struggles to complete it by 5pm while being in the office. The folks that left had many years to go until they were vested. Since she only has a short time remaining, she decided to stick it out.
- ianai 4y ago
  I've heard similar reports. I've also directly suffered very malignant management in the past before covid. We're talking people who were outright awful to the business and some who were ultimately fired. There needs to be better management of management.
  - treis 4y ago
    On the flip side there is nothing about an office that should turn ~1 hour of work into a day.
    - ianai 4y ago
      The interruptions absolutely do add up. My suspicion too is office bound work probably suffers from work being added on amounting to whole other jobs. Every job I’ve had as a professional has been essentially multiple jobs not reflected in the pay nor job description.
      - treis 4y ago
        Don't buy it. Yes, interruptions add up. They don't add up to 7 hours a day. I mean look at your story. Your wife's team quit and the office is empty. There's hardly anyone there to interrupt her. Someone going from a 8 hour workday in the office to a 1 hour workday at home is sandbagging it. There's no two ways around it. Let them WFH and off come the sandbags because they can get that time back. Put them back in the office and the sandbags come back because there's no incentive for them to work any faster. They're stuck in the office for 8 hours no matter how much work they do.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

intrasight 4y ago

A friend of mine works for the state. She was told to return to the office. The office is in another city. She is having to buy a condo in that city in order to make that feasible.

hollywood_court 4y ago
My wife commutes 45 mins each way. It’s awful because it’s so dangerous. Her office is in a dangerous area and the interstate she uses to commute is known for its deadly wrecks.

rhexs 4y ago

No one is owed a remote job. Unfortunately, if you work for the state, it is highly likely you don't have the skills and leverage to force the issue as most of the positions are just supporting some sort of bureaucracy and fundamentally have to exist because a lobbyist at one point got a law passed. State jobs, like it or not, are often effectively just political appointments. Also keep in mind that you can't fire or terminate anyone, ever, in the state, so there's also a chance leadership feels this is the first time they can turnover roles that aren't doing much or meeting their goals. That's a very rare opportunity. If you think "rest-and-vest" is bad in tech, you ain't seen anything when it comes to government. Imagine jobs where no one has accomplished anything in a decade or more. Of course you immediately jump to some sort of conspiracy though.

hollywood_court 4y ago
You made quite a few assumptions there. She’s a microbiologist. There aren’t any private sector jobs for her around this area unfortunately. It’s either the state or the university (also the state). She applied and went through the interview process just like anyone else. There was no “political appointment.” She isn’t allowed to work from home simply because one individual doesn’t like it. Her director refuses to allow it while the director in charge of the other side of the hallway does allow it. It’s the result of one man imposing his will on others.
- mxuribe 4y ago
  > ...It’s the result of one man imposing his will on others. This comment almost sounds like the kind of thing one sees in non-gov corporate america! :-)
tomrod 4y ago
> it is highly likely you don't have the skills and leverage to force the issue as most of the positions are just supporting some sort of bureaucracy and fundamentally have to exist because a lobbyist at one point got a law passed. State jobs, like it or not, are often effectively just political appointments. This tells me you haven't met or worked with very many people in state or federal jobs. I feel like this needs reasonable pushback. SOME of the leadership positions are political appointments. The majority of employees are a highly skilled workforce supporting a specific mission of that particular state agency. And "can't fire or terminate anyone, ever, in the state" is a bit off as well.