That's funny. This week I opted into an hour-long meeting I had no accountability/responsibility for because I wanted to learn about the process they were talking about. Points that it started after my 5:00, or nah -- too expected? I don't know if that behavior qualifies as working from home "working for me." It could be a personality difference. I don't think FT WFH works for me. At all. But I'm the one who opted into an hour-long meeting because I was curious and you're someone who is either in the wrong meetings or uninterested by some of the work or distracted by coronavirus or shit, anything, I don't know, you're a human being too -- But none of my problems with WFH are going to be solved by changing hour long meetings into 30 minute meetings by a long shot. That shit ain't hardly my problem at all.
I get way more measurable shit done from home because my managers don’t have to dedicate a bunch of heads to keeping up appearances. Instead of hosting meeting with 20 people who are there to represent their organization I meet with the 3-4 that matter, we hash shit out and move on. We don’t spend 45 minutes on status safety or the latest company value buzzword. Is it long term sustainable? - no, we can’t train or onboard remotely those people will be useless but short term while we lay off half the company it works fine.
Yeah. I can't imagine effectively onboarding at all with ft wfh. I just think -- if I'd started a new job amidst COVID and FT WFH, I'd be totally lost. It's a whole 'nother struggle for parents with kids at home attempting to work, parent and teach at the same time, too. There's so many ways and reasons wfh most likely isn't working for broad swaths of people. Parents with children at home have such a challenge. Maybe the truth is that work from home isn't going to "work" for most people. It'll be a struggle. Just hopefully a surmountable one. maybe they should've called this article, "WFH Can Be Made Slightly More Tolerable When Employers Allow Sweeping Worker Liberties and Concessions"