4 ms·

While interviewing candidates for a critical role in my organization, the recruiter mentioned that she is finding it hard to get good candidates who want to com

by akudha 2y ago

While interviewing candidates for a critical role in my organization, the recruiter mentioned that she is finding it hard to get good candidates who want to come to office. And yet, management stuck to "minimum 3 days from office" rule. We are also "gently reminded" often and another rule about showing your face on video. My previous team lead was a super smart guy and pleasant to work with, in the 1.5 years that I worked with him, I saw him once on camera. It didn't matter to him or me to see each other's face. The only people it seems to matter are the suits, who go around nitpicking everything making life miserable for everyone. Sure, it is nice to have human connection and seeing people on camera helps, but if someone doesn't want to be on camera, why push them? The sarcasm ("someone is having a bad hair day"), the threats ("camera or else...") - it just reeks of pettiness and stupidity. None of this makes any sense. My job is to write code, I am not a model for toothpaste or eyelashes or lipstick or razor or whatever. Just leave me alone so I can do the tasks that I was hired for. I don't think COVID changed the work culture much, except exposing some corporate lies ("you gotta haul your ass to the office to be effective" etc). The more we think things are changing, the more they are staying the same.

baq 2y ago
> We are also "gently reminded" often and another rule about showing your face on video. I'm actually buying this being 100% remote. We had more than a couple of folks who never showed their faces except for the first interview, never attended any face to face meeting (company sponsored travel and accommodation) and in one case a dude posted a daily update from his second (or third, or seventh) company on our channel by mistake and was pissed off he's getting fired. I'll take the video if this means I can stay 100% remote otherwise they'll announce RTO and I don't even have an office to go to in my country.
- ghaff 2y ago
  I don't think you always have to be on camera and a cell call is sometimes just fine. But, given that we have the technology, especially for genuinely interactive calls, I agree that people should generally default to video on. And, to the degree that there are face to face offsites, I think you need a really good reason not to attend--and "I don't want to" is not that good reason.
- devsda 2y ago
  If you believe not being on video is enough for going back to RTO and if you comply, they will just find another absurd reason to go back to RTO.
  - baq 2y ago
    I just want them to not have reasonable reasons.
- akudha 2y ago
  Lets say 10% of people have a side job. Are we gonna put stupid rules in place and piss off the other 90%? That dude who posted updates on the wrong channel? He deserves to get fired. That said, lets say he was doing his job well and he was posting the right updates to the right company channel, then why does anyone care if he has 1 job or 10? Sure it is ethically dubious - so is not providing raises, not keeping up promises, withholding promotions for no reason etc (one of my team mates was hired at a very low salary with the promise that they will pay market rate after 6 months, it has been more than a year now, they refuse to honor their promise. He is fantastic and still gets treated like this). Ethics works both ways. Suppose person A is sharp and fast and finishes his work in 4 hours while person B takes 8 hours for the same set of tasks. Is A going to be paid twice as B? In knowledge work, why does anyone care if a person works 2 hours a day or 20, as long as they finish their work in the agreed upon time?
  - A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y ago
    << Are we gonna put stupid rules in place and piss off the other 90%? If one is to believe Linkedin crowd, yes. I have long stopped trying to understand that frame of mind. I simply accept that it exists and plan around people with those perspectives.
Viliam1234 2y ago
Before COVID, I worked for an international company, with people from various countries often working in the same team together. It happened that in my team, I was the only guy from my country. So whenever I needed to talk to my teammates, I had to make a call. And yet, it seemed very important for the managers that I come every day to the office and make those calls from there, rather than from my home. They couldn't make even the excuse about people being in the same room, because we obviously were not. But if you make the rules, you do not really need an excuse. Then COVID came, and impossible things became possible overnight. Now they are gradually becoming impossible again. Except that more people are pissed off, because they remember that it used to be possible.

by akudha 2y ago

baq 2y ago

> We are also "gently reminded" often and another rule about showing your face on video. I'm actually buying this being 100% remote. We had more than a couple of folks who never showed their faces except for the first interview, never attended any face to face meeting (company sponsored travel and accommodation) and in one case a dude posted a daily update from his second (or third, or seventh) company on our channel by mistake and was pissed off he's getting fired. I'll take the video if this means I can stay 100% remote otherwise they'll announce RTO and I don't even have an office to go to in my country.

ghaff 2y ago
I don't think you always have to be on camera and a cell call is sometimes just fine. But, given that we have the technology, especially for genuinely interactive calls, I agree that people should generally default to video on. And, to the degree that there are face to face offsites, I think you need a really good reason not to attend--and "I don't want to" is not that good reason.
devsda 2y ago
If you believe not being on video is enough for going back to RTO and if you comply, they will just find another absurd reason to go back to RTO.
- baq 2y ago
  I just want them to not have reasonable reasons.
akudha 2y ago
Lets say 10% of people have a side job. Are we gonna put stupid rules in place and piss off the other 90%? That dude who posted updates on the wrong channel? He deserves to get fired. That said, lets say he was doing his job well and he was posting the right updates to the right company channel, then why does anyone care if he has 1 job or 10? Sure it is ethically dubious - so is not providing raises, not keeping up promises, withholding promotions for no reason etc (one of my team mates was hired at a very low salary with the promise that they will pay market rate after 6 months, it has been more than a year now, they refuse to honor their promise. He is fantastic and still gets treated like this). Ethics works both ways. Suppose person A is sharp and fast and finishes his work in 4 hours while person B takes 8 hours for the same set of tasks. Is A going to be paid twice as B? In knowledge work, why does anyone care if a person works 2 hours a day or 20, as long as they finish their work in the agreed upon time?
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y ago
  << Are we gonna put stupid rules in place and piss off the other 90%? If one is to believe Linkedin crowd, yes. I have long stopped trying to understand that frame of mind. I simply accept that it exists and plan around people with those perspectives.

Viliam1234 2y ago

Before COVID, I worked for an international company, with people from various countries often working in the same team together. It happened that in my team, I was the only guy from my country. So whenever I needed to talk to my teammates, I had to make a call. And yet, it seemed very important for the managers that I come every day to the office and make those calls from there, rather than from my home. They couldn't make even the excuse about people being in the same room, because we obviously were not. But if you make the rules, you do not really need an excuse. Then COVID came, and impossible things became possible overnight. Now they are gradually becoming impossible again. Except that more people are pissed off, because they remember that it used to be possible.