What’s your commute?

[warriorchick]

If I hadn't retired, there is no way I would have come back to the office 5 days a week, because I certainly proved that I didn't need to be in the office to do my job.

[jutaw22mu]

Geez. I actually agree with you that employees who have to commute should get some sort of financial recognition of that time spent. But youre reaction to seeing someone else find a good situation is to lash out and say they should be miserable like me instead of focusing on how you can improve things for yourself and others in your situation.

I was going to reply to this more fully, but that's an awful lot of dot connecting there, my dude.

[jutaw22mu]

Get a better job

I get paid very well to do science all day.  My job is great.

[Uncle Rico]

I get paid very well to do science all day.  My job is great.

Then why do you care about people working from home?

[Silkk the Shaka]

15 minute walk

[jutaw22mu]

Then why do you care about people working from home?

Science and effective drug development involve collaboration.  Which means being present and discussing data in a room...meetings held over Teams often means that people are multi-tasking and not really paying attention (analyzing data, even working in the lab with a headset on--unproductive and unsafe, or dicking around on the internet).  Many great ideas come from 5 minute random encounters in a hallway with other scientists.  Group leaders who are not around because they are working from home (but really grilling with their neighbors at noon on a Tuesday) means that development of junior scientists is stalled because they need managers to be available during the day to answer questions and help with experimental design or with communicating data effectively....this also means that others onsite have to step in to help those folks when it is not the job they are being paid to do.  Someone else is and they are grilling and day-drinking with their neighbors, putting in fence posts, etc.  WFH might work well in other business functions, but in science/drug development/discovery/clinical work it's a complete dud.

So, from what I have seen, WFH is less productive and more work for people onsite without proper compensation for the added work.

[Uncle Rico]

Science and effective drug development involve collaboration.  Which means being present and discussing data in a room...meetings held over Teams often means that people are multi-tasking and not really paying attention (analyzing data, even working in the lab with a headset on--unproductive and unsafe, or dicking around on the internet).  Many great ideas come from 5 minute random encounters in a hallway with other scientists.  Group leaders who are not around because they are working from home (but really grilling with their neighbors at noon on a Tuesday) means that development of junior scientists is stalled because they need managers to be available during the day to answer questions and help with experimental design or with communicating data effectively....this also means that others onsite have to step in to help those folks when it is not the job they are being paid to do.  Someone else is and they are grilling and day-drinking with their neighbors, putting in fence posts, etc.  WFH might work well in other business functions, but in science/drug development/discovery/clinical work it's a complete dud.

So, from what I have seen, WFH is less productive and more work for people onsite without proper compensation for the added work.

Work for a different company.  It doesn't sound like you really are happy at your job

[Pakuni]

So, from what I have seen, WFH is less productive and more work for people onsite without proper compensation for the added work.

I believe studies show that people who work from home work more hours, since they're rolling some/of their commute time into work. So, not really sure working from the office means "added work."

[The Sultan]

I believe studies show that people who work from home work more hours, since they're rolling some/of their commute time into work. So, not really sure working from the office means "added work."

I truly think it depends on the employee. Supervisors generally know who they can trust and who they think are slacking.

[wadesworld]

Science and effective drug development involve collaboration.  Which means being present and discussing data in a room...meetings held over Teams often means that people are multi-tasking and not really paying attention (analyzing data, even working in the lab with a headset on--unproductive and unsafe, or dicking around on the internet).  Many great ideas come from 5 minute random encounters in a hallway with other scientists.  Group leaders who are not around because they are working from home (but really grilling with their neighbors at noon on a Tuesday) means that development of junior scientists is stalled because they need managers to be available during the day to answer questions and help with experimental design or with communicating data effectively....this also means that others onsite have to step in to help those folks when it is not the job they are being paid to do.  Someone else is and they are grilling and day-drinking with their neighbors, putting in fence posts, etc.  WFH might work well in other business functions, but in science/drug development/discovery/clinical work it's a complete dud.

So, from what I have seen, WFH is less productive and more work for people onsite without proper compensation for the added work.

While there are some things that may not be ideal with WFH, it sounds like the biggest issues are hiring and project management issues.

[Pakuni]

I truly think it depends on the employee. Supervisors generally know who they can trust and who they think are slacking.

Can confirm.

[jutaw22mu]

I believe studies show that people who work from home work more hours, since they're rolling some/of their commute time into work. So, not really sure working from the office means "added work."

Yes, this is probably true in many cases. 

However, I was explicitly referencing how in my experience, this does not work in a scientific setting.  Science happens in teams and teams work together when their leaders can guide them in person.  Shaka leading basketball practices over Teams from his home or entrusting his captains to run practices the he outlines for them won't work as well as if he is in the gym that the team is working in. 

For example, I watched as the leader of an assay lab (consisting entirely of junior scientists who don't have PhDs), whose job it is to be there to support those scientists and help with experimental design, who, prior to COVID, was available in his office most of the time to field questions, decided was going to WFH after COVID.  Not only was he inaccessible onsite but he was impossible to reach when he was at home...his scientists became very frustrated at the lack of leadership he was providign and had to turn to our group and other groups for support...Not only did WFH result in diminished productivity of his group, but it impacted other groups (like mine).

As I said, probably works great for a lot of business functions but there are other situations where WFH detracts from profuctivity.

[jutaw22mu]

While there are some things that may not be ideal with WFH, it sounds like the biggest issues are hiring and project management issues.

Yeah, that's probably correct.

[Skatastrophy]

While there are some things that may not be ideal with WFH, it sounds like the biggest issues are hiring and project management issues.

At some companies it's hard to fire people. Those companies suffer from WFH. At early stage companies I can let people go nearly immediately which helps a lot.

[JWags85]

I truly think it depends on the employee. Supervisors generally know who they can trust and who they think are slacking.

Exactly, which is why the one size fits all takes on the debate are so silly.  Ive spoken in favor of flexible hybrid arrangements, and I think it really depends on the employee. 

I'm not a grumbly old boomer, but as a manager I definitely would feel far more comfortable with a WFH employee later in their career with a track record of performance and productivity.  Which is why its amusing to see/hear so many 20 somethings stating how they would only WFH or they are SO MUCH MORE productive at home, which is a red flag for me unless it was specifically a stated remote gig.

If anyone has seen any such studies (not sure if they even exist), but I would love to see any research on 22-34 year olds viewpoints on WFH overlaid with ambition/desired career progression/etc...  I feel like there is a lot of overlap with the pure WFH demands (I deserve my time, etc...) and the "I work to live not the other way around, I don't want to dedicate my life to my job".  Not that it means they are slackers or entirely devoid of passion, but it seems to counter a lot of the "grind in my 20s and early 30s for later success/comfort" mindset I saw a lot in my peer and associate groups that are now 35-45.

[dgies9156]

If anyone has seen any such studies (not sure if they even exist), but I would love to see any research on 22-34 year olds viewpoints on WFH overlaid with ambition/desired career progression/etc...  I feel like there is a lot of overlap with the pure WFH demands (I deserve my time, etc...) and the "I work to live not the other way around, I don't want to dedicate my life to my job".  Not that it means they are slackers or entirely devoid of passion, but it seems to counter a lot of the "grind in my 20s and early 30s for later success/comfort" mindset I saw a lot in my peer and associate groups that are now 35-45.

Brother JWags:

I get really nervous when most of my junior staff is WFH. Yeah, it makes their life easier. They don't have to look presentable. Their dog doesn't have to go to doggie daycare. No commute and day-to-day expenses are far less. But it drives me up the wall.

I have four 20-somethings working for me. Most of them want my job, the sooner I get out of their way, the better. Their idea of corporate culture is something found at the bottom of a yogurt container. It's not about the collective good. It's about how far and fast we can pull them up the ladder.

I'll admit this is the smartest, best educated, most technologically gift generation the world has ever seen. Over the course of their lives, they will, as a generation, do very great things. The world will be a much better place for it. But having a degree and a good head on your shoulders doesn't mean you're an immediate candidate for leadership. That comes with seasoning, getting to know and interact with people and learning how to talk to both friends and strangers.

THAT BEGINS AT WORK!!!!!!!

In today's workplace, we have to interact with diverse people. We have to learn how to deal with diverse problems and, frankly, how to ask for help. What WFHers are missing is interaction with their boss, talking to colleagues and learning how to team to solve a problem. How do they expect to be promoted when their supervisors don't know them? If they're not interacting with people in person, their own prejudices, beliefs and feelings take over and that's not good. Being in an office forces one to confront situations that otherwise one would ignore.

My fear is some 20-something is going to believe that they can solve for their lack of experience with AI. In the process, they'll end up blowing up their world -- if not THE world!

[Uncle Rico]

Brother JWags:

I get really nervous when most of my junior staff is WFH. Yeah, it makes their life easier. They don't have to look presentable. Their dog doesn't have to go to doggie daycare. No commute and day-to-day expenses are far less. But it drives me up the wall.

I have four 20-somethings working for me. Most of them want my job, the sooner I get out of their way, the better. Their idea of corporate culture is something found at the bottom of a yogurt container. It's not about the collective good. It's about how far and fast we can pull them up the ladder.

I'll admit this is the smartest, best educated, most technologically gift generation the world has ever seen. Over the course of their lives, they will, as a generation, do very great things. The world will be a much better place for it. But having a degree and a good head on your shoulders doesn't mean you're an immediate candidate for leadership. That comes with seasoning, getting to know and interact with people and learning how to talk to both friends and strangers.

THAT BEGINS AT WORK!!!!!!!

In today's workplace, we have to interact with diverse people. We have to learn how to deal with diverse problems and, frankly, how to ask for help. What WFHers are missing is interaction with their boss, talking to colleagues and learning how to team to solve a problem. How do they expect to be promoted when their supervisors don't know them? If they're not interacting with people in person, their own prejudices, beliefs and feelings take over and that's not good. Being in an office forces one to confront situations that otherwise one would ignore.

My fear is some 20-something is going to believe that they can solve for their lack of experience with AI. In the process, they'll end up blowing up their world -- if not THE world!

They can't do much worse than previous generations

[Pakuni]

Brother JWags:

I get really nervous when most of my junior staff is WFH. Yeah, it makes their life easier. They don't have to look presentable. Their dog doesn't have to go to doggie daycare. No commute and day-to-day expenses are far less. But it drives me up the wall.

I have four 20-somethings working for me. Most of them want my job, the sooner I get out of their way, the better. Their idea of corporate culture is something found at the bottom of a yogurt container. It's not about the collective good. It's about how far and fast we can pull them up the ladder.

I'll admit this is the smartest, best educated, most technologically gift generation the world has ever seen. Over the course of their lives, they will, as a generation, do very great things. The world will be a much better place for it. But having a degree and a good head on your shoulders doesn't mean you're an immediate candidate for leadership. That comes with seasoning, getting to know and interact with people and learning how to talk to both friends and strangers.

THAT BEGINS AT WORK!!!!!!!

In today's workplace, we have to interact with diverse people. We have to learn how to deal with diverse problems and, frankly, how to ask for help. What WFHers are missing is interaction with their boss, talking to colleagues and learning how to team to solve a problem. How do they expect to be promoted when their supervisors don't know them? If they're not interacting with people in person, their own prejudices, beliefs and feelings take over and that's not good. Being in an office forces one to confront situations that otherwise one would ignore.

My fear is some 20-something is going to believe that they can solve for their lack of experience with AI. In the process, they'll end up blowing up their world -- if not THE world!

Why oh why is a generation that watched their parents treated as the ultimate fungible resource - mass layoffs, downsizing, pension raiding, offshoring, wage stagnation, etc. - not more loyal to their corporate overlords and the collective good?
It's a real head-scratcher.

[brewcity77]

Mine is about 15 minutes when there's no traffic (weekends), 20-22 minutes in rush hour, and 45 minutes when I have to drive to Cudahy first to drop the kid at daycare. Return is usually 15-20, again depending on weekend or weekday.

[dgies9156]

Why oh why is a generation that watched their parents treated as the ultimate fungible resource - mass layoffs, downsizing, pension raiding, offshoring, wage stagnation, etc. - not more loyal to their corporate overlords and the collective good?
It's a real head-scratcher.

I'm part of that generation and I get what you are saying.

But here's the difference: Sooner or later, you build your skills so you add value. You develop streams of revenue ad you know what's profitable and what isn't. You find people who can mentor you and sponsor you for the next step in an organization.

Sometimes, the process takes a few years. Sometimes, a few decades and through several employers. I won't say how many employers I've had, but it's mroe than you think. You dust yourself off when things don't work, figure out why and move on.

[rocky_warrior]

this does not work in a scientific setting
[clip]
the leader of an assay lab [clip] Not only was he inaccessible onsite but he was impossible to reach when he was at home...his scientists became very frustrated at the lack of leadership
[clip]
profuctivity.

You had a bad (WFH) leader.  I work mostly R&D with a few other people.  Mostly WFH.  We're all available to bounce ideas off of during work hours, and it works great. 

But I am going to start using "profuctivity".

Agree with you (and others) that newer employees can often need on-site mentoring.

[jutaw22mu]

 
But I am going to start using "profuctivity".

Ope, buying reading glasses would be admitting there is a problem...

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I was going to reply to this more fully, but that's an awful lot of dot connecting there, my dude.

I was reacting to your blanket statement that WFH should be scrapped altogether. In your subsequent posts you've made it clear that you were speaking about your own specific situation, not all

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I see a lot of comments about WFH not collaborating or knowing their team. I'm one of two fully remote employees in a team of 35ish fully in the office employees. I manage 7 a group of seven. I'm in near constant contact with the rest of the team and I would say i know most of them pretty well. Silly example but i recently won a team trivia where everyone submitted fun facts about themselves and we had to match the fact to the coworker. As a positive from WFH, there is always some pretty drama about office assignments,  break room cleanliness, and other office annoyances that I'm insulated from.

Yes,  it's easy to fall into certain traps if youre WFH but that doesn't mean you have to.  I'm more connected and more productive now then I ever was at the office.  Won't be that way for everyone but theres a reason only sith deal in absolutes.

And Brother Dgies, we don't want you to die, just retire already

[PointWarrior]

" i recently won a team trivia where everyone submitted fun facts about themselves and we had to match the fact to the coworker


I think that was an episode on "The Office"