- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 3/16/23 at 9:42 am to wadewilson
That was a past job. And no, I was back to my original salary.
They way they got around this was they hired me as a contract employee. So with my signed document, they only had to legally pay me what was on the paper.
Unfortunately, contracts are the heart and soul of that industry and many people have been screwed by it.
They way they got around this was they hired me as a contract employee. So with my signed document, they only had to legally pay me what was on the paper.
Unfortunately, contracts are the heart and soul of that industry and many people have been screwed by it.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 9:48 am to tigercraig
quote:
Seems like a lot $11/hr McDonald workers in here. If any of my people refused to respond “after hours”they’d be gone in a heartbeat
Seems to me that you manage a bunch of people who can't find a job with a better work/life balance
Posted on 3/16/23 at 9:53 am to 0x15E
I am not sure how many people here read the full memo from Zukerberg to the Meta employees when he announced another 10k cuts of staff. Inside it was a very telling paragraph tied to their internal research on work from home.
If Meta is floating it now as a preliminary finding, they are signaling to the rest of the employees that fully remote is probably a thing that isn't going to be offered company-wide forever.
This goes back to the fact that remote work tends to have a productivity loss tied to the delay in communication and more distractions than on-site. Combine that with the massive IT and infrastructure costs and the sunk facilities cost and remote costs are outweighing the benefit of keeping the workforce happy.
I am not anti-work from home. I am anti the one size fits all mentality that people use with it and the steadfast belief that working from home is always more productive and the expectation that the employees receive the same compensation.
quote:
In-person time helps build relationships and get more done
We’re committed to distributed work. That means we’re also committed to continuously refining our model to make this work as effectively as possible. Our early analysis of performance data suggests that engineers who either joined Meta in-person and then transferred to remote or remained in-person performed better on average than people who joined remotely. This analysis also shows that engineers earlier in their career perform better on average when they work in-person with teammates at least three days a week. This requires further study, but our hypothesis is that it is still easier to build trust in person and that those relationships help us work more effectively.
As part of our Year of Efficiency, we’re focusing on understanding this further and finding ways to make sure people build the necessary connections to work effectively. In the meantime, I encourage all of you to find more opportunities to work with your colleagues in person.
If Meta is floating it now as a preliminary finding, they are signaling to the rest of the employees that fully remote is probably a thing that isn't going to be offered company-wide forever.
This goes back to the fact that remote work tends to have a productivity loss tied to the delay in communication and more distractions than on-site. Combine that with the massive IT and infrastructure costs and the sunk facilities cost and remote costs are outweighing the benefit of keeping the workforce happy.
I am not anti-work from home. I am anti the one size fits all mentality that people use with it and the steadfast belief that working from home is always more productive and the expectation that the employees receive the same compensation.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 9:54 am to Epic Cajun
quote:I think answering the phone at 6:27pm on a Tuesday makes a lot of people feel cool/important
Seems to me that you manage a bunch of people who can't find a job with a better work/life balance
Posted on 3/16/23 at 9:55 am to stelly1025
quote:
I don't understand why companies are pussyfooting with this. If you want your workforce in the office than tell your employees show up or resign.
You don't know why organizations would like to reduce turnover of skilled employees?
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:02 am to Salmon
quote:
I'm never technically "off", unless I'm on vacation or something.
So I'll take calls, answer emails "after hours", but its also understood that if I need to leave the office early or come in late some days to take care of personal things, nobody will care.
ditto. my boss knows he can call any time, but he also knows i won't answer if i'm occupied and respects that. i used to have anxiety about not answering a call after 5, but we've talked about it and we're good.
i'd prefer he text first, but he's 65 and set in his ways on not liking to text.
that being said, i've worked from home for 10+ years and while some work can be strenuous, i have a pretty good setup.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:07 am to AbitaFan08
We were working from home before working from home was cool, I doubt we have space at the office.
I haven't been "in" for over six years
I haven't been "in" for over six years
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:09 am to AbitaFan08
quote:
If you were told working from home was no longer allowed, how would you feel about receiving work requests after business hours? I find it hypocritical that a company would tell you working from home is not an option while sending work requests outside of normal business hours and expecting employees to respond quickly.
Depends on my role and compensation.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:11 am to Epic Cajun
quote:
You don't know why organizations would like to reduce turnover of skilled employees?
How skilled are they if they can't show up to work? I am sorry but that don't fly and these skilled employees are replaceable.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:16 am to stelly1025
quote:
How skilled are they if they can't show up to work? I am sorry but that don't fly and these skilled employees are replaceable.
Dated arse mindset. Employers are replaceable too and the skilled employees aren't the ones taking a financial hit when they leave.
If you treat employees like a commodity, you are going to get shitty employees and costly high turnover.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:21 am to stelly1025
quote:
How skilled are they if they can't show up to work? I am sorry but that don't fly and these skilled employees are replaceable.
So, only people who work from an office are skilled?
Any employee is replaceable, but there are costs associated with replacing that employee. In my field you'd be hard pressed to find someone with experience/credentials that will be willing to work from an office 5 days per week. Most organizations were moving people in my position to remote work even before COVID. It works for both the employee and employer. As an employer you aren't constrained to only hiring people in your location and can hire the best employee you can afford, and as an employee you have many more opportunities as you can live where you want and your job opportunities are not tied to a specific location. Some job postings are requiring 25% onsite time, but they are willing to fly you out and put you up in a hotel for that one week per month, I guess they are doing that for someone who is unskilled
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:21 am to stelly1025
quote:
How skilled are they if they can't show up to work? I am sorry but that don't fly and these skilled employees are replaceable.
for a lot of skilled employees the employers are easily replaceable.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:25 am to stelly1025
quote:
How skilled are they if they can't show up to work? I am sorry but that don't fly and these skilled employees are replaceable.
Fire all those lazy bums then. In fact, put in the job posting that you require 5 days in-office and no PTO (since that's for slackers too). I'm sure the applications will come rolling in
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:30 am to laxtonto
quote:
If Meta is floating it now as a preliminary finding, they are signaling to the rest of the employees that fully remote is probably a thing that isn't going to be offered company-wide forever.
The entire meta situation reads like they needed staff ASAP, ran the numbers on the cost of hiring remote workers, as well as the cost of layoffs, determined that it would cost less money to hire and fire remote workers in the span of 18-24 months than it would cost to deal with being shortstaffed in that same timeframe.
There is no part of me that believes Meta values in person relationships. Zuckerberg values whatever weirdo shite to which he's transcended, because when you get that big you're no longer a human. His lieutenants value appeasing him. Their underlings value not losing their jobs, meaning profits at their helm over anything else.
That's my opinion on it with no knowledge whatsoever.
This post was edited on 3/16/23 at 10:31 am
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:52 am to GreatLakesTiger24
quote:
the whole exempt/non exempt, salary/hourly thing seems like bullshite to me the vast majority of the time
are you really no longer hourly if you don't have unlimited PTO? if you have to report time worked or not worked to your employer, how are you not hourly? you're hourly but don't get paid past 40 hours/week.
Yup. And you've had guys in here claim that salaried employees don't have set hours. You simply work until the job is done. But for many employees, that is bullshite.
If your job requires you to be in the office from M-F 8-5, then you have set hours. I have friends who worked salaried jobs where they were expected to work those set hours, but also expected to frequently work evenings and weekends as well, you know, for the good of the company.
When it comes time for when work is less busy, and they've finished what they needed for the day before lunch. It doesn't matter, they still need to be at the desk until 5, and management will trip if they even wanted to leave 15 minutes early.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 10:57 am to Odysseus32
quote:
The entire meta situation reads like they needed staff ASAP, ran the numbers on the cost of hiring remote workers, as well as the cost of layoffs, determined that it would cost less money to hire and fire remote workers in the span of 18-24 months than it would cost to deal with being shortstaffed in that same timeframe.
There is no part of me that believes Meta values in person relationships. Zuckerberg values whatever weirdo shite to which he's transcended, because when you get that big you're no longer a human. His lieutenants value appeasing him. Their underlings value not losing their jobs, meaning profits at their helm over anything else.
And you've got to factor in the bias of justifying that massive campus Meta owns.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 11:10 am to wadewilson
quote:
And you've got to factor in the bias of justifying that massive campus Meta owns.
I'm sure it comes to the mind a bit, but I'm less inclined to believe that this plays into it.
Meta owns the campus, regardless if people are there or not. The resources/depreciation/etc. are going on the books regardless if its being utilized to capacity.
If people are doing good work remotely, Meta will let them continue to do good work remotely. I don't see how they'd be able to sell the asset, or if they'd even want to do as much. Who needs a campus built and designed for Meta other than Meta? MAYBE Amazon could do something with it.
My thought is that most people don't do their best work if they are remote, and Meta identified that they're losing value somewhere that could be captured if people were working in office. I am sure that those capable of doing remote work (probably those who were working remotely before 2020) will still be working remotely while everyone who doesn't have the discipline to work remotely will be forced back into office. Executives know they will lose a certain % of the workforce, and I'm sure they've budgeted for it.
I can't imagine the idiocy of losing valuable employees just because you fall victim to sunk costs. If a company as valuable, with as much to lose as Meta, forces people back into the office, there's a reason. I advocate for those workers who truly believe they work better remotely to leave. It will be a lot more difficult to find remote work than it was 18 months ago, but those jobs still exist. Just be sure you can take that loss if it doesn't pan out.
Posted on 3/16/23 at 11:20 am to AbitaFan08
I think a hybrid work culture is evolving where there will be a combo of working in office and from home.
The evolution will be dependent on the business and job requirements for that business. That is what is evolving now.
Some jobs will be perfectly fine to be remote while other won’t
The evolution will be dependent on the business and job requirements for that business. That is what is evolving now.
Some jobs will be perfectly fine to be remote while other won’t
Posted on 3/16/23 at 11:26 am to stelly1025
quote:
How skilled are they if they can't show up to work? I am sorry but that don't fly and these skilled employees are replaceable.
I don't get this. In fact it makes sense to me that the higher quality employees are the ones that don't have to be watched over or even be in office to do quality work.
Page 11 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News