My company allows many tech employees to work from home two days a week. I have yet to take advantage of it. I simply don't find myself to be terribly productive when working from home, unless I'm resolving an on-call issue, which is the one case where I do "work from home" (and off hours!).
Not saying anyone else is not productive. It's just not my thing. YYMV! ________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of zMan <zedgarhoo...@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 11:41 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks I hear the "Oh, I don't think I could work at home" all the time. I just smile and say "It's not for everyone", but what I hear them saying is "Damn, I wish my job let me do that!" Mind you, after 15 years, I'm pretty used to it. On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Burrell, Todd <todd_burr...@csx.com> wrote: > I've always said that if you think you need someone in the office so you > can make sure they are working - then you hired the wrong person. Bad > employees will goof off whether they are in the office or at home. And I > get a LOT more done from home than I ever do in the office because there > are no distractions at home like at the office. > > And the old "water cooler" argument about learning a lot from discussions > in the office has a little merit, but not much. Most of the times these > discussions quickly wonder off into personal discussions. > > Todd Burrell | Sr. Mainframe Systems Administrator > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Steve Smith > Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 9:44 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no > thanks > > 1. Purely imaginary. Besides being too random to be useful, those > "meetings" are about family, dogs, and favourite comedies. Business > interaction is often better facilitated with electronic communication (see > your #3). > 2. Purely imaginary. You cannot "see" much of anything. A manager's job > is to get results, not to baby-sit (monitor) their team. If the manager > hires people who need to be constantly supervised, well then, that's on the > manager. > 3. Agreed. Every office I've worked in was apparently designed to prevent > me from concentrating on anything. I'm far, far more productive in my > quiet, distraction-free home office. > > I also liked going to the office (mostly), and seeing everyone. But I was > able to actually work maybe 50% of the time there. > > sas > > > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 2:57 AM, Radoslaw Skorupka < > r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl> wrote: > > > Well, it is not my company, so let's leave the decision to the owners > > and managers they hired. > > > > However if it was my company I would demand to be present in the office. > > Some well justified exceptions apply, but mostly temporarily, and > > everytime final decision would belong to managers, not employees. > > > > Reasons? > > 1. Meetings at the coffee point (and other places) is very big > > opportunity to exchange ideas, thoughts, opinions. > > 2. It is much easier to see and control how the emploee spends a time > > - is he really busy as declared? No timesheet replace it. > > 3. Some people do work more effectively when they have no external > > "disturbants" (a dog, neighbour, postman, favourite comedy on TV...) > > > > BTW: most of my co-workers claim they absolutely prefer to work in the > > office, with the team. > > BTW2: multi-site office is still better than home working, We do have > > good video-chat systems for in conference rooms, except personal a/v > > equipment in every PC. > > > > My 0,02€ > > > > -- > > R.Skorupka > > Lodz, Poland > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > > -- > sas > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email > to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > This email transmission and any accompanying attachments may contain CSX > privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the > intended addressee. Any dissemination, distribution, copying or action > taken in reliance on the contents of this email by anyone other than the > intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email > in error please immediately delete it and notify sender at the above CSX > email address. Sender and CSX accept no liability for any damage caused > directly or indirectly by receipt of this email. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
