2 ms·

When you look into it that doesn't really sound like an option unless you work for yourself.

coldtea 2y ago
Or for an employer that respects basic decency. Btw, something rarely mentioned: not all employers are corporate behemoths with busy bodies in management constantly envisioning new ways to crap on developers. There are startups with no surveillance and IT red tape, and tons of smaller employers without the surveillance, office politics, bureucracy, and general bullshit.
theGeatZhopa 2y ago
It is an option. It's called trust. If employer doesn't trust you - take your things and run as fast as possible from that jerk employer. There are other employers who value their employees. It's like that. Metrics, checking if the employee is working - this is all illegal in Europe. Even what Microsoft do with the office (offering detailed insight into the accounts) can't be used under European legislation. Just to make a point in my thinking. If surveillance, then at work. No one has the right to tell me what I do in my home, even if I get paid for it.
- wseqyrku 2y ago
  For the record, I'm not opposing any of that, I'm just making a point. Not all the employees can prove it or even be concerned about it. Perhaps it never occurred to them exactly because they trust the employer (the reason is irrelevant to that effect). So it can and will happen whether you (not you personally) like it or not so with WFH the question is that which one do you prefer.
  - coldtea 2y ago
    >So it can and will happen whether you (not you personally) like it or not so with WFH the question is that which one do you prefer. No, with WFH the question is if you'll accept a WHF employer that practices it, or if you'll instead work for one that doesn't.
    - wseqyrku 2y ago
      > the question is if you'll accept a WHF employer that practices it, or if you'll instead work for one that doesn't. * Provided you trust the one that claims they do. The original question doesn't need an asterisk so it may be perceived negatively. My point is that you may never know even if there's a law for it, unless you actually hear companies getting busted left and right, there's a fair chance that it is happening in your blind spot. If everything is going smooth, you may want to decide on your answer to that question.
      - coldtea 2y ago
        >The original question doesn't need an asterisk so it may be perceived negatively. My point is that you may never know even if there's a law for it, unless you actually hear companies getting busted left and right, there's a fair chance that it is happening in your blind spot. If everything is going smooth, you may want to decide on your answer to that question. For WHF, if they don't ask you to install corporate remote management/spyware crap, then you do know. It's not like they'll hack into your laptop.
  - theGeatZhopa 2y ago
    Actually, in Europe all employees enjoy the same laws. They don't have to prove it. It's rather the employer has to tell the reason why something happens (like devalue a employee, discontinue contract/fire). No employer/manager do this, because mo one wants to be fined/fired by their superiors and the law is very clear about that. Also, employees have possibilities to go to court and the chances are not very low they get their right. So, it's not even an option for employers to do it in the hidden. I'm happy, that it won't happen. Not now and not soon. -> In Europe. I can say that with very confidence. If someone want to change that, democracy of European people will win. I answered your question. If surveillance then only in office, never ever in my home. No matter what. I also wouldn't work from home in the case surveillance is mandatory for a certain employer
- jarule 2y ago
  [flagged]

Or for an employer that respects basic decency. Btw, something rarely mentioned: not all employers are corporate behemoths with busy bodies in management constantly envisioning new ways to crap on developers. There are startups with no surveillance and IT red tape, and tons of smaller employers without the surveillance, office politics, bureucracy, and general bullshit.

theGeatZhopa 2y ago

It is an option. It's called trust. If employer doesn't trust you - take your things and run as fast as possible from that jerk employer. There are other employers who value their employees. It's like that. Metrics, checking if the employee is working - this is all illegal in Europe. Even what Microsoft do with the office (offering detailed insight into the accounts) can't be used under European legislation. Just to make a point in my thinking. If surveillance, then at work. No one has the right to tell me what I do in my home, even if I get paid for it.

wseqyrku 2y ago
For the record, I'm not opposing any of that, I'm just making a point. Not all the employees can prove it or even be concerned about it. Perhaps it never occurred to them exactly because they trust the employer (the reason is irrelevant to that effect). So it can and will happen whether you (not you personally) like it or not so with WFH the question is that which one do you prefer.
- coldtea 2y ago
  >So it can and will happen whether you (not you personally) like it or not so with WFH the question is that which one do you prefer. No, with WFH the question is if you'll accept a WHF employer that practices it, or if you'll instead work for one that doesn't.
  - wseqyrku 2y ago
    > the question is if you'll accept a WHF employer that practices it, or if you'll instead work for one that doesn't. * Provided you trust the one that claims they do. The original question doesn't need an asterisk so it may be perceived negatively. My point is that you may never know even if there's a law for it, unless you actually hear companies getting busted left and right, there's a fair chance that it is happening in your blind spot. If everything is going smooth, you may want to decide on your answer to that question.
    - coldtea 2y ago
      >The original question doesn't need an asterisk so it may be perceived negatively. My point is that you may never know even if there's a law for it, unless you actually hear companies getting busted left and right, there's a fair chance that it is happening in your blind spot. If everything is going smooth, you may want to decide on your answer to that question. For WHF, if they don't ask you to install corporate remote management/spyware crap, then you do know. It's not like they'll hack into your laptop.
- theGeatZhopa 2y ago
  Actually, in Europe all employees enjoy the same laws. They don't have to prove it. It's rather the employer has to tell the reason why something happens (like devalue a employee, discontinue contract/fire). No employer/manager do this, because mo one wants to be fined/fired by their superiors and the law is very clear about that. Also, employees have possibilities to go to court and the chances are not very low they get their right. So, it's not even an option for employers to do it in the hidden. I'm happy, that it won't happen. Not now and not soon. -> In Europe. I can say that with very confidence. If someone want to change that, democracy of European people will win. I answered your question. If surveillance then only in office, never ever in my home. No matter what. I also wouldn't work from home in the case surveillance is mandatory for a certain employer
jarule 2y ago
[flagged]