You don’t provide me with a desk to work I’m just going to stand around doing squat.
No desks, no strategy: Experts say government's latest return-to-office order ignores reality
- Thread starter hamermill
- Start date
You don’t provide me with a desk to work I’m just going to stand around doing squat.
We are heading that way at my big company. 8K employees in Canada and 92K globally.
Already we are at 3 days in the office a week.
We have a hot desking arreangement.
Sucks, but means you can sit down anywhere, and sort of get to work.
Rumour is that every other week once 4 days you must work a monday and friday in the office in the same week every other week
Otherwise we will not have room if everyone turns up and takes every Friday out of the offiice.
My group's present on office anchor days are MTW, so the ocassional Friday instead of Thursday no sweat off my back.
Already we are at 3 days in the office a week.
We have a hot desking arreangement.
Sucks, but means you can sit down anywhere, and sort of get to work.
Rumour is that every other week once 4 days you must work a monday and friday in the office in the same week every other week
Otherwise we will not have room if everyone turns up and takes every Friday out of the offiice.
My group's present on office anchor days are MTW, so the ocassional Friday instead of Thursday no sweat off my back.
Remote working has saved the government tens of millions in utilities and maintenance not to mention the resale value of the real estate. It's a bad move.
I disagree. I've seen first hand the productivity loss and lack of efficiency inherent to wide scale WFH arrangements. Many private professionals can pull it off (particularly contractors since deliverables are more important than hours), but not the larger masses. Add in the fact that government workers are ALREADY notoriously lax at their jobs on average, and it's a recipe for a bloated, yet still ineffective workforce. "Bloated and ineffective" was the hallmark of Trudeau's government, so I can understand why Carney's trying to undo that.
Research shows that remote work productivity is generally equal to or higher than in-office work, with roughly 90% of employees reporting the same or better output. While studies suggest a 7% to 13% average increase in productivity at home due to fewer distractions and eliminated commutes, hybrid models often offer the highest gains (10-20%) by balancing collaboration with focused, individual work.
Nonsense.
People spend hours in commuting, to get to work downtown and when they arrive they are already tired.
They end up packing up by 3:30PM after 5 or 6 hours in office.
Remote work is by all measures more efficient and more productive.
The real reason they are asking employees to get back in the office is because the City needs revenue.
With the recent real estate crash, the city isn't getting property tax or land transfer tax revenue anymore.
So they want people commuting, using TTC, using local businesses occupying buildings etc.,
The productivity and creativity reasons are merely public facing corporate mumbo jumbo.
Pros and Cons, advantages and disadvantages, as almost always the case the best answer is somewhere in the middle, but who does or even likes middle?!?!
I can easily see the downsides of fully remote WFH, but the office can FOR SURE be a very inefficient place also, at least in my experience - Hybrid is best, but more "boring" and less money-making correct?
I can easily see the downsides of fully remote WFH, but the office can FOR SURE be a very inefficient place also, at least in my experience - Hybrid is best, but more "boring" and less money-making correct?
Yes, I've heard this argument before, but whenever the person who makes the argument links to the relevant studies, they're either funded by corporations who provide WFH software services, or else self-reported by employees who clearly have a vested interest in working from home. It's an absolutely insane take to say there's fewer distractions from work at home.
Through my work, I have the opportunity to get a bird's eye view of multiple companies who have engaged in WFH policies since COVID hit. Not a single one of them function better now than before COVID. The people working from home have no idea what's going on at-location, which is inherent to the job they're doing. Other employees have a hard time getting in touch with them. When something needs to be addressed ASAP, it can't. And suddenly there's a need for ~30% more staff to do the same work load that was previously being done. Every single one of the companies I work with have had to increase their indirect-to-direct workforce as a result of these WFH policies, and one by one they're slowly unwinding them because of the damage done to their businesses.
This logic is why Jeff Besos fired 1/3 of Washington Post...bunch of lazy crybabies...
None of this is true in the real world.
You just made this shit up. lmfao.
You're basing your non-belief on absolutely nothing. But it's not like I can convince you otherwise. I'm not going to out myself on TERB just so you'll know who I do business with and what I've seen.
So you go on not believing, it doesn't change reality.
Yup. There may be some businesses that allow their office workers to clock out whenever they feel like it, specifically in some industries, but the majority would fire those employees for not being there from 9-5 or whatever the mandated office hours are. "Being tired" is the most pathetic excuse I've seen.This logic is why Jeff Besos fired 1/3 of Washington Post...bunch of lazy crybabies...
Like I said...lazy crybabies...I bet you some of those "reporters" / "journalists" get paid to "cover" protests...i also heard they got 19 people covering climate change...who the fuck needs 19 people to do the same article on it...lmao.
No, I base it on actual experience.
I work both remotely and in person, and I see my client's workplaces and workforce, go through the issues described in the OP.
Infact on Wednesday last week I had to work out of the break room at one of my client's offices, because of lack of desk space.
I see my clients workforce and people I work with, commuting from Kitchener, Oakville, and other places, over 1.5 to 2 hours one way, in the middle of winter, arrive in office by 9:30AM only to leave office at 2 to 3:30PM.
You on the other hand are basing it out of some articles you've read online.
OTOH, I've seen these same folks respond promptly and deliver on time, when they work from home.
Your statements are not reflective of ground realities.
I'm not the one who brought "MAGA" to this conversation...you did...all I said was Besos fired 1/3 of Washington Post for being lazy. your TDS made it political my friend.
Did you even read my post? I'm basing it out of my personal experience in manufacturing facilities I work with.
I'm not sure what industry you're in that allows its office workers to work a 4.5-hour workday (9:30 to 2:00) and call it an 8-hour day.
No, absolutely not.
You are not paid to show up to work.
You are paid to deliver work.
Infact, WFH employees deserve and get bonuses, hikes etc the same.
Then you'd need to preface it with industry, although am not sure which manufacturing facility job allows/allowed people to work from home anyway, given you couldn't manufacture from home.
I am referring to office jobs that rely on a computer and internet connection.
