- 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
re: WFH Survey: 7 in 10 remote workers hold multiple jobs. 37% hold two "full-time" jobs.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:02 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:02 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:In your office, yes. It's a matter of working until the work is done.
This concept of "full time means 40 hours" has died at forward-thinking businesses. Full time means handling your full load, whether that takes 20 hours one week or 70 the next.
Not so in the Federal workplace. There the workload is generally far more consistent. In that environment, if workers can reliably fulfill job tasks in half the allotted time, job requirements obviously need to be revised.
2
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:03 am to NC_Tigah
And still in debt.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:06 am to KRS
quote:The Federal Government generally doesn't.
I can assure you if companies have just a GOOD" IT "
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:09 am to POTUS2024
quote:
If they're getting their work done - who cares? I keep saying this, the idea that there will be a magical change in govt if people go to an office is dumb.
bless your heart.....if they are getting their work done, then they don't have near the amount of work to do. On average, working from home cost over 50% of efficiency. It is called government waste.
Sounds like YOU are one of those abusing the system working from home.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:13 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
if workers can reliably fulfill job tasks in half the allotted time, job requirements obviously need to be revised.
but they have been revised...downward...lol. Massive government waste. But, that is coming to an end thankfully. All this work smart, do your work in half the time, then have half the time to jack off.....not what leaders make. People who want to move up, really make something of themselves, would be doing twice as much as the next person....but with the way the government is now, you have supervisors that are so useless, that they would not even reward the high achievers...for it would make themselves look bad.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:28 am to Mandtgr47
Yeah, it's less about people working two jobs, and more about people pretending to work two jobs.
And if one job has to be let slide, which one do you think it will be? That nice, safe government job.
And if one job has to be let slide, which one do you think it will be? That nice, safe government job.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:30 am to BigBinBR
quote:
What you can’t do is say you are working the same 9a-5p for two companies and “double dip” as a W2 employee.
So you're talking about hourly employees billing one hour worked to 2 companies?
I don't see how your statement is correct with salaried employees, but if you have a law to cite I'll read it.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:30 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
In your office, yes. It's a matter of working until the work is done.
Not so in the Federal workplace.
When did we limit this to just federal employees?
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:31 am to meeple
quote:
Not a second job, but I heard one gov employee say that nothing will change. While working from home she got everything done on Tuesday-Thursday so she didn’t have to do much on Mondays and Fridays. Has kids.
How is that possible to get your 40 in on 72 hours?
And probably makes $150k+ per year.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:31 am to Gee Grenouille
quote:
If the company doesn’t have a clause against it, good for the worker. I’m happy for them.
The obvious question is why are they being paid for full time work if we don’t need them for full time work? You aren’t going to be delusional and say all these people are doing twice as much work, lol. That is not what’s happening.
This post was edited on 2/2/25 at 9:32 am
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:33 am to POTUS2024
quote:
If they're getting their work done - who cares? I keep saying this, the idea that there will be a magical change in govt if people go to an office is dumb. Govt was a wreck before covid when everyone worked in an office. It's still a wreck. The senior people would perhaps benefit from being in the office, but that's it.
When your job is not created by market conditions but a government top down mandate, then taxpayers should care if these people are only working 50% of the time. Their pay should have halved if they're only working 3 days per week.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:34 am to NC_Tigah
That sounds like total BS to me.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:35 am to Jorts R Us
quote:
You would need to expand the field to look at other means of reporting income. W2 would be the obvious starting point, though.
I think yall agree. W2 is the start not the start and finish. Just an easy way to identify most of the major offenders.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:37 am to NC_Tigah
The anger that some people have toward remote work is quietly indicative of how fricked we really are.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:38 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Unless your office is limited to just federal employees, "we" didn't.
In your office, yes. It's a matter of working until the work is done.
Not so in the Federal workplace.
---
When did we limit this to just federal employees?
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:40 am to meeple
quote:
How is that possible to get your 40 in on 72 hours?
Because there was never 40 hours of work to do in the first place.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:41 am to Sofaking2
quote:
The obvious question is why are they being paid for full time work if we don’t need them for full time work? You aren’t going to be delusional and say all these people are doing twice as much work, lol. That is not what’s happening.
The real question being left unasked is, how do we even measure what efficiency is for these people?
When they say "working efficiently" they just mean they're doing the tasks they've been assigned by some government mandated program in which only the government performs.
As far as if that task has any real world impact is largely ignored as nobody really knows, they're just waiting at the spicket of money to get an easy gig with low expectations.
It's the same ilk that believes good grades builds societies and counts for competency. No, competency is a measure separate from grades.
Our hyper credentialed and institutionalized society has lost all sense of what real work actually looks like.
This post was edited on 2/2/25 at 9:43 am
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:52 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:That's misapplied critique.
The anger that some people have toward remote work is quietly indicative of how fricked we really are.
In your company, you're going to know point-blank who your most productive employees are, regardless of WFH status. It might well be the company's higher performing elements are WFH. If that's the case, you might encourage WFH across the board.
Whether you're correct in your move or not, the competitive marketplace officiates the result. Wrong decision, and you lag the competition. Right decision, and your company outperforms. The government lacks the latter elements.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 9:53 am to NC_Tigah
It was generalized.
Posted on 2/2/25 at 10:42 am to tiggerthetooth
quote:
The obvious question is why are they being paid for full time work if we don’t need them for full time work? You aren’t going to be delusional and say all these people are doing twice as much work, lol. That is not what’s happening.
The original conversation referenced WFH employees, not government WFH employees. I stated "good for them if they can do it" was in reference to the private labor force. If I can get all the tasks assigned to me done in 4 hours as a private employee it should be my right to have another job, unless there's a clause against it that I've agreed to.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News