4 ms·
No, they should be educated. Heaven forbid you or I should be fired for the occasional mistake, or lopsided opinion.
by lisasays 3y ago
No, they should be educated. Heaven forbid you or I should be fired for the occasional mistake, or lopsided opinion.
- dymk 3y agoExecutives aren’t making these decisions, from the very top, uneducated about what they’re doing
- ilyt 3y agoThey should start with educating them how to manage remote/hybrid environment, because that's the most likely reason for their opinion. I've worked in all ranges from fully on-site to fully remote and it's all in organization and workflow and I can absolutely see some manager seeing drop in productivity when trying to pretend no changes are needed to be made for remote work.
- gumballindie 3y agoThis is one of those types of “mistakes” that cost people’s mental health, family life, damage the environment and cost their employer talent.
- lisasays 3y agoAs does forced WFH for some people (minus the climate aspects). Or unskillfully conducted WFH (even when everyone agrees in principle). I think it's pretty clear that this is a topic that people have organic, gut-level differences of opinion on -- and not without a very substantial basis (thinking here of the experience of people who hate WFH and find it to be as damaging to their mental health as others find it to be liberating). I'm still in the camp that holds that on balance there are more benefits to WFH, and fewer downsides - provided everyone is on board. But what's needed to bridge the divide is more empathy for the other side - not a bullet to the head of everyone who disagrees with us.
- gumballindie 3y agoI agree with you but it’s usually the onsite crowd that wants _everyone_ else onsite. I am all for mixed setups with some onsite some offsite but i strongly disagree with the anti freedom side (those who want everyone on site).