4 ms·
I think _most_ of employees are not children, but some are incapable of doing work unless someone is constantly supervising them. As a rule they’re also the lea
by ein0p 2y ago
I think _most_ of employees are not children, but some are incapable of doing work unless someone is constantly supervising them. As a rule they’re also the least productive employees in any organization, and the correct solution is to let them go, not breathe over their necks.
- jvansc 2y agoYep, wish my employer saw this the same way. I (mid/senior level IC) have unintentionally found myself responsible for breathing down the neck of a flagrant remote non-worker. Very frustrating as someone who doesn’t really want to be a manager. Feels gross to say, but this field (and beyond?) needs to be better at recognizing who can/can’t be trusted with remote work. Not sure what the answer is though, because I sure as hell don’t want more egregious surveillance and/or a more PIP-happy employer.
- ein0p 2y agoGive it time. If I do another startup, I’m not even going to bother renting an office. For me the answer is pretty obvious, all work that can be remote should be remote. And the situation you’re describing can also happen on-site. I’m in that situation now, where I (a very senior IC, by choice) am expected to both deliver the “IC” stuff, and supervise 3 other people because their manager can’t tell a softmax from a hole in the ground.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]