4 ms·

Yeah, that also struck bad here.. > work mainly to get paid and do not care to invest themselves beyond what is necessary Dude, I am heavily invested into my

Yeah, that also struck bad here.. > work mainly to get paid and do not care to invest themselves beyond what is necessary Dude, I am heavily invested into my work, but that doesn't mean I need to care for your social deficits - it can, but these should be mostly orthogonal things. Social investment is what I realized I really need to decrease at work, lol I still do it too much even virtually ( what is possible ). Too long I have stuck to bad jobs because of colleagues and bonding.. much better to get this into a more "professional relationship", because you know, while your employer tries to meme the "friendly colleague" he never actually gives a shit.. so turns out better for me to make real friendships outside of work ( yeah, even with colleagues) and use my commute time for other social things - but stop "soft-socializing" with colleagues in office for nothing in the end !)

jalk 4y ago
I read "not care to invest themselves beyond what is necessary" as in meaning invest themselves into the job - not a general statement about the person. I have friends who are like that - they work their expected hours, but don't do anything extra - they don't expect to get raises nor promotions and they are perfectly fine with that. They put their energy into other things (which they can't live off), but they are by no means miserable, lazy or mismanaging their lives
- scrumbledober 4y ago
  but where is the connection between investing yourself into your job and going in to the office? That assumes that you can't work hard from home, which I don't believe to be true.
  - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
    > That assumes that you can't work hard from home, which I don't believe to be true. Where's the analysis of the job to see if it can really be performed ideally remotely. Also, "hard" is a straw man. As a boss I want output not effort and part of being near coworkers is to avoid getting stuck and wasting resources. > where is the connection between investing yourself into your job and going in to the office If I was your coworker or boss and I showed you that connection for the job in question would you admit it and come in?
    - scrumbledober 4y ago
      sending a slack message saying "hey, i'm stuck" is really not that difficult.
    - tdeck 4y ago
      > Where's the analysis of the job to see if it can really be performed ideally remotely. Where's the analysis that says it can't? If you want my ass in the office, shouldn't the burden of proof be on you?
      - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        It's not a burden of proof situation because your boss is paying the bill. But, if it was about who claimed what, the employees are the ones making the claim that "remote work is just as productive".
        tdeck 4y ago
        If it's about the boss's power, they can always just fire people who won't come into the office. If the boss doesn't want to do that, they've got to do the convincing. You either convince people or order them around and live with the morale consequences.
        LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        You're being paid so you can't claim to be outraged at being told to work. If your morale issues aren't handled by your salary then you should simply leave. Investigate contracting. If you need convincing to return the the office you were hired to work in then you probably aren't the type of employee a boss would want to retain.
        tdeck 4y ago
        > Your morale issues aren't handled by your salary then you should simply leave. If you're a "manager", morale issues on the team are your issues. This is basic, obvious stuff; if the manager isn't comfortable thinking about these things, maybe they should leave their job? Again, if you don't like the way an employee works, you can order them to change it. If they don't, you can fire them. But you seem to be under the impression that "I'm the boss" is some kind of rational or moral argument and that employees need to feel a certain way about following your orders and realize that you were right all along. "I'm not threatening, I'm just convincing you with the argument that I'm the boss".

jalk 4y ago

I read "not care to invest themselves beyond what is necessary" as in meaning invest themselves into the job - not a general statement about the person. I have friends who are like that - they work their expected hours, but don't do anything extra - they don't expect to get raises nor promotions and they are perfectly fine with that. They put their energy into other things (which they can't live off), but they are by no means miserable, lazy or mismanaging their lives

scrumbledober 4y ago
but where is the connection between investing yourself into your job and going in to the office? That assumes that you can't work hard from home, which I don't believe to be true.
- LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
  > That assumes that you can't work hard from home, which I don't believe to be true. Where's the analysis of the job to see if it can really be performed ideally remotely. Also, "hard" is a straw man. As a boss I want output not effort and part of being near coworkers is to avoid getting stuck and wasting resources. > where is the connection between investing yourself into your job and going in to the office If I was your coworker or boss and I showed you that connection for the job in question would you admit it and come in?
  - scrumbledober 4y ago
    sending a slack message saying "hey, i'm stuck" is really not that difficult.
  - tdeck 4y ago
    > Where's the analysis of the job to see if it can really be performed ideally remotely. Where's the analysis that says it can't? If you want my ass in the office, shouldn't the burden of proof be on you?
    - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
      It's not a burden of proof situation because your boss is paying the bill. But, if it was about who claimed what, the employees are the ones making the claim that "remote work is just as productive".
      - tdeck 4y ago
        If it's about the boss's power, they can always just fire people who won't come into the office. If the boss doesn't want to do that, they've got to do the convincing. You either convince people or order them around and live with the morale consequences.
        LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        You're being paid so you can't claim to be outraged at being told to work. If your morale issues aren't handled by your salary then you should simply leave. Investigate contracting. If you need convincing to return the the office you were hired to work in then you probably aren't the type of employee a boss would want to retain.
        tdeck 4y ago
        > Your morale issues aren't handled by your salary then you should simply leave. If you're a "manager", morale issues on the team are your issues. This is basic, obvious stuff; if the manager isn't comfortable thinking about these things, maybe they should leave their job? Again, if you don't like the way an employee works, you can order them to change it. If they don't, you can fire them. But you seem to be under the impression that "I'm the boss" is some kind of rational or moral argument and that employees need to feel a certain way about following your orders and realize that you were right all along. "I'm not threatening, I'm just convincing you with the argument that I'm the boss".