This whole story hits home for me. I had to investigate and even tune in to the morning shows to watch others talk about it.
Marissa Mayer has announced, through Yahoo HR, that the underdog tech company will discontinue work-from-home options in June of this year.
So, if you read the article you see that Yahoo may be in a unique circumstance. They are a creative and collaborative tech company who has a bloated, widespread team that, according to some, abuses telecommuting options.
As I write this I am in my pj's, doing laundry, saving money on parking and a dog walker for the day and working from home*.
I will put in abnormal hours (3 hours here, 1 hour there, 5 hours there), but still get everything done - and then some. I will have the ability to run errands in the city without the headache of the Saturday or post-5 PM rush. I will let my dog stay out of the crate all day and enjoy breaks where I can do the dishes, cook a healthy meal for dinner, run or exercise (and yes, blog for myself) and STILL GET THE JOB DONE.
I'm all for maximizing our options with technology while making workers happy.
And if that means that you can work from home, God bless it.
And if that means that you cannot be trusted to work from home, then you must report to the office (but why are we hiring people we can't trust, I wonder?).
There are certainly people in my company that may be abusing work from home time. For goodness sake, there was a man who worked in Guam for years and still couldn't come to a tele-meeting prepared.
I think telecommuting should be done with much oversight. Be demanding. Hold people accountable. Don't let their work-from-home options get in the way of good work. And maybe even only allow telecommuting on a case-by-case basis (which is what my company does).
I think it's a good idea to let workers stay home for the cable guy or an out-of-town appointment when necessary (which Mayer says will still be possible at Yahoo), even if they don't get a regular work-from-home day.
So what do you think? Is telecommuting a good idea? Are people misusing that option and giving it a bad name at your company?
*I should note that I have to work from home because some of the sights I have to manage for my job are blocked at work and my company does not like the option of giving me exclusive rights to access them in the office.
2 comments:
Wow...I have lots of thoughts on this! The work from home concept is so foreign for me and I can only imagine. How great for those who have the option!
Your "Why hire those who we cannot trust" thought is right on, but unfortunately, the trustworthy are outnumbered around my workplace. (And I would only consider management, being able to trust the entire hourly work force is a different beast.)
I also find it extremely ironic that your company would privilege you with work from home rights before free internet rights. Seems like a much bigger responsibility and treat, but works well for you!
Excited to hear about the car :)
-RMill
@R.Mill-
Yes, I can imagine that it's hard to have complete trust in a large, hourly workforce and that a lot of jobs don't make telecommuting possible.
The reason I get the privileged to work from home but NOT have free internet usage is because those liberties are not controlled by the same entities. My direct boss can give me telecommuting privileges, but another corporate power and different department control internet privileges. Basically, my boss trusts me and sees the value in what I need to do at home enough to loosen the reigns. But IT (or rather, Finance, as they are the puppeteer in this instance) don't or won't.
There are certainly bigger office politics involved in my situation - ones that go all the way to the top and create huge rifts. I'm lucky to get some freedoms out of it, even if it doesn't make complete sense.
Post a Comment