Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
On 17May31:1259+0800, Timothy Sipples wrote: > In some cases more than two parts are possible: A and B1, B2, B3, etc. When > there are more than two parts the broadcast equipment needs to add > location-specific delays to each of the feeds before transmission in order > to synchronize them properly. But it's possible. > > There are some computing analogs to these split orchestral scenarios. I'm still waiting for top session players to remote into the studios such that their local time morning dates are in LA and Nashville and afternoon in Brazil and Paris. Only Brazil cancels, but a call comes in from Sydney for that slot, so it's all good. That evening there is a live freewheeling jazz jam session featuring players no closer to each other than ten thousand killometers. Audio latencies above 20 milliseconds are challenging: https://blog.highfidelity.com/how-much-latency-can-live-musicians-tolerate-da8e2ebe587a -- May the LORD God bless you exceedingly abundantly! Dave_Craig__ "So the universe is not quite as you thought it was. You'd better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can't rearrange the universe." __--from_Nightfall_by_Asimov/Silverberg_ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
W dniu 2017-05-30 o 17:27, Paul Gilmartin pisze: [...] https://www.ted.com/talks/eric_whitacre_a_virtual_choir_2_000_voices_strong ...not symphony, but still remote collaboration. Timothy Sipples quoted A symphony can hardly be performed with everyone working remotely The collaboration is not in real time. It's like getting a thousand postcards and taping them together into a collage. Realtime remote jamming infrastructure is still battling with the speed of light, but in a few decades modulation of entangled atoms separated by hundreds of kilometers will probably trickle down into the high-level musician's home studio infrastructure. Interesting pre-pre-pre-Friday topic. I take SR's prohibition of superluminal communication as absolute. But can a choir be synchronized without transmitting information from one member to another? This seems to reflect the assumption for quantum computing. It is not like choir, it's more like date (boy and girl meeting). While can be done remotely, the direct presence is much more interesting. Of course, everything depends on details. As Lucas mentioned, the value from meetings require the team to be "ethusiastic" or just mitivated to do some common (team) work. Otherwise this won't play. Like a date with wrong person. The same apply to work in office. Open space is the worst case for concetration, however lack of direct presence of coworkoers can also be an obstacle, not to mention not-good-enough connection, laptop display instead of two big LCD monitors, etc. As usually, YMMV. (Disclaimer: my Enlgish is poor, some nuances can be lost in translation. ) -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland == -- Treść tej wiadomości może zawierać informacje prawnie chronione Banku przeznaczone wyłącznie do użytku służbowego adresata. Odbiorcą może być jedynie jej adresat z wyłączeniem dostępu osób trzecich. Jeżeli nie jesteś adresatem niniejszej wiadomości lub pracownikiem upoważnionym do jej przekazania adresatowi, informujemy, że jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie lub inne działanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i może być karalne. Jeżeli otrzymałeś tę wiadomość omyłkowo, prosimy niezwłocznie zawiadomić nadawcę wysyłając odpowiedź oraz trwale usunąć tę wiadomość włączając w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku. This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to hard drive. mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.plsąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, nr rejestru przedsiębiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2016 r. kapitał zakładowy mBanku S.A. (w całości wpłacony) wynosi 168.955.696 złotych. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Well I'm my opinion and not that it seems to really matter. I didn't sign up for this. How would any of you feel if your life and every move was available for A or B or 5,000 others to see day after day for how long? Really. How long has this gone on before you all.started really pressing me for reactions? I didn't sign no contract for this. I.do not get paid a single penny for what I'm out through. So who makes all the money by making sure my life is as miserable as possible? IBM, Apple, Metro PCS, Sprint, ATT, Brighthouse networks? How many deceived me? So Corporations get paid large amounts of money to A) Push people over the edge with all the BS I am fed. Why? Ratings? Is my health costing the state to much money? Cause I don't go to the Dr so everyone is complaining about how much a life night take away some of the billiions they have while I have to resort to foood stamps tomorrow to feed my kids. Keep your damn money and your acts where do I sign the dotted line at to have my right to privacy back? My right to freedom of speech back? You all get to state your opinions no matter how rude or derogatory they are. Im the ass end of every post, video, news feed but oh no if I'm not kidding everyones ass its hell to pay. So, guess what I am over being your puppets. Let someone threaten your life, fteedom, and civil rights to live in peace. Then let them threaten your children. How many of you would still smile and kiss ass? Cause none of you perfect corporate folks ever get upset or vent? I'm gonna pull every device and router out of this house and get a plug in a aLl pbone. Because human slavery is still.illegal in my state and human slavery is what you all have made of me. What happens if one day the crap you all do costs a life? A childs life from being bullied or maybe one day you push me to far? That nakes each one of you sitting in your new homes with your sports car and fancy wives or rich husbands no lesa of a murder than the one I live with. Oh wait or is that another lie? Because if what I read on him today is true you are all worse than murders to know that and quietly stand back and watch it happen to me and my kids. And if you made it up ask your selves how you feel about bringing a mom to rock bottom taking her husband and kids with your stories lies and sales on innocent people and their lives. Id be praying or begging Karma or the Lord was a bit easier in you at judgement tine then the world of jerks out there laughing and betting and making money off tormenting others. Get what you can in now cause all the ways your all able to make money off us goes to the dump tomorrow. Try game day with no players. I didn't sign a contract to work free so I.guess I wouldn't be breaking one one would I. One last request. If your gonns deport me or cps is gonna take my children with our even tellimg me stop posting it. There is not a dang thing that I could do.to sstop it thats been proven.time.and time again. You should all feel ashamed at what your pockets fillimg up has done to my home anf lights. There isnt much better about you then me. Noe is there. Ps stop with the im pregnante headlines. At 34 I had to chiose between wanting anothef baby and my life and thar jokes tasteless. Peace out On May 30, 2017 10:00 PM, "Timothy Sipples" wrote: We're getting deep into the weeds here, but I'd like to point out that even for a live symphonic performance it's technically possible, using today's technologies and limits of physics, to split the orchestra in half and still deliver an excellent live performance. To illustrate how this works, let's suppose the two halves are Orchestra A and Orchestra B. A is in Vienna, and B is in Tokyo, let's suppose. The audience is sitting anywhere -- it can be a live concert broadcast, for example. And let's suppose the conductor is also in Vienna with Orchestra A, with high fidelity audio and video links, unidirectional from Vienna to Tokyo. The conductor and Orchestra A start playing. Orchestra B starts playing a fraction of a second later (assuming the piece calls for a simultaneous start), guided by the same conductor and Orchestra A's musical and other queues. The broadcast is transmitted, live, out of Tokyo from the two feeds and carefully synchronized: one feed remote from Vienna, and one local from Tokyo. As long as the transmission delay from Vienna to Tokyo holds steady, everything works in this example And as long as Orchestra A includes enough of the musicians so that they don't need to rely on any musical or other cues from Orchestra B. Orchestra B can, of course, rely on any/all cues from Orchestra A. In this scenario they would be wearing earpieces or headphones, and they'd have a video screen to watch the conductor and their fellow musicians in Orchestra A. Maybe the members of Orchestra B would be wearing virtual reality goggles. Anyway, the point is that even with live performances, even with speed of light transmission delays, a split orchest
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
We're getting deep into the weeds here, but I'd like to point out that even for a live symphonic performance it's technically possible, using today's technologies and limits of physics, to split the orchestra in half and still deliver an excellent live performance. To illustrate how this works, let's suppose the two halves are Orchestra A and Orchestra B. A is in Vienna, and B is in Tokyo, let's suppose. The audience is sitting anywhere -- it can be a live concert broadcast, for example. And let's suppose the conductor is also in Vienna with Orchestra A, with high fidelity audio and video links, unidirectional from Vienna to Tokyo. The conductor and Orchestra A start playing. Orchestra B starts playing a fraction of a second later (assuming the piece calls for a simultaneous start), guided by the same conductor and Orchestra A's musical and other queues. The broadcast is transmitted, live, out of Tokyo from the two feeds and carefully synchronized: one feed remote from Vienna, and one local from Tokyo. As long as the transmission delay from Vienna to Tokyo holds steady, everything works in this example And as long as Orchestra A includes enough of the musicians so that they don't need to rely on any musical or other cues from Orchestra B. Orchestra B can, of course, rely on any/all cues from Orchestra A. In this scenario they would be wearing earpieces or headphones, and they'd have a video screen to watch the conductor and their fellow musicians in Orchestra A. Maybe the members of Orchestra B would be wearing virtual reality goggles. Anyway, the point is that even with live performances, even with speed of light transmission delays, a split orchestra can still create first class live music together. As long as that digital transmission doesn't "wobble" any more than the atmosphere within a single concert hall between the musicians' ears would, and with the other caveats, it all works. This basic approach has been used for live broadcast performances, usually with vocalists in the Orchestra B part. In some cases more than two parts are possible: A and B1, B2, B3, etc. When there are more than two parts the broadcast equipment needs to add location-specific delays to each of the feeds before transmission in order to synchronize them properly. But it's possible. There are some computing analogs to these split orchestral scenarios. Timothy Sipples IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
In my time working from home for 6 years, I experienced both ends of the spectrum and can see both sides of the discussion. One situation was that everyone was geographically dispersed, we collaborated via email, sometime, conference call etc, whatever fit the subject and the size of the group. Since everyone was in the same situation, it seemed to work ok.A differnt situation was where I was the odd person remote, and everyone else was centrally located. I was just one voice on a speakerphone in a meeting room filled with people, and that didn't work out so well. There was also a lot of face to face exchange due to the nature of the environment (sort of a lab setting). Luckily I had a couple of good co-workers that kept me informed and pointed me to the correct people for information. Dana On Thu, 25 May 2017 18:23:56 -0400, Gord Tomlin wrote: >On 2017-05-25 17:32, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >> there is no tool yet invented to completely supplant regular*informal* >> office interaction. As Tom Brennan said, working across from someone invites >> casual*unplanned* communication that can be vital. > >I think what you say is true in an organization where the norm is being >in an office together, and the odd person works remotely. > >When it becomes the norm for people to work remotely, the informal and >unplanned communication tends to migrate to whatever communication >medium a team chooses to use. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
On 17May30:1027-0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > > > Interesting pre-pre-pre-Friday topic. I take SR's prohibition of > superluminal communication as absolute. But can a choir be > synchronized without transmitting information from one member > to another? This seems to reflect the assumption for quantum > computing. > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox#Measurements_on_an_entangled_state Paul, they're working on it: https://phys.org/news/2012-09-km-physicists-quantum-teleportation-distance.html https://www.sciencealert.com/a-new-quantum-teleportation-distance-record-has-been-set Who knows how far the TS crowd has gotten with this research? Naturally there are lots of rumors of deployments of such wireless routers about. So this is not Friday discussion. -- May the LORD God bless you exceedingly abundantly! Dave_Craig__ "So the universe is not quite as you thought it was. You'd better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can't rearrange the universe." __--from_Nightfall_by_Asimov/Silverberg_ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:08:28 +, David L. Craig wrote: >On 17May29:2346-0400, Gabe Goldberg wrote: > >> It's amazing what technology can do: >> http://ericwhitacre.com/the-virtual-choir >> >> https://www.ted.com/talks/eric_whitacre_a_virtual_choir_2_000_voices_strong >> >> ...not symphony, but still remote collaboration. >> >> Timothy Sipples quoted >> >> > A symphony can hardly be performed with everyone working remotely > >The collaboration is not in real time. It's like getting >a thousand postcards and taping them together into a collage. >Realtime remote jamming infrastructure is still battling >with the speed of light, but in a few decades modulation of >entangled atoms separated by hundreds of kilometers will >probably trickle down into the high-level musician's home >studio infrastructure. > Interesting pre-pre-pre-Friday topic. I take SR's prohibition of superluminal communication as absolute. But can a choir be synchronized without transmitting information from one member to another? This seems to reflect the assumption for quantum computing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox#Measurements_on_an_entangled_state -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
On 17May29:2346-0400, Gabe Goldberg wrote: > It's amazing what technology can do: > http://ericwhitacre.com/the-virtual-choir > > https://www.ted.com/talks/eric_whitacre_a_virtual_choir_2_000_voices_strong > > ...not symphony, but still remote collaboration. > > Timothy Sipples quoted > > Steve Smith who wrote: > > > A symphony can hardly be performed with everyone working remotely The collaboration is not in real time. It's like getting a thousand postcards and taping them together into a collage. Realtime remote jamming infrastructure is still battling with the speed of light, but in a few decades modulation of entangled atoms separated by hundreds of kilometers will probably trickle down into the high-level musician's home studio infrastructure. -- May the LORD God bless you exceedingly abundantly! Dave_Craig__ "So the universe is not quite as you thought it was. You'd better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can't rearrange the universe." __--from_Nightfall_by_Asimov/Silverberg_ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Having worked both at home and at the office, my opinions are: 1. Meetings at the coffee point (and other places) is very big opportunity to exchange ideas, thoughts, opinions. - This is true, as long as you have a motivated/enthusiastic tech team. Otherwise, they will talk about ANYTHING other than work (not that it wouldn't add any value though - being brazilian, I tend to value a lot people's inter-relationships). 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. - I've never been a manager, so I don't really know, but I have worked with managers that didn't care about seeing employees (not even close to top contributors) on facebook/youtube in the office during regular work hours. And I also have worked with people that are observably WAY more productive working from home than at the office. That's, in fact, my case, although I recognize the value of being at the office. I agree that if you need watch an employee that closely, you simply hired the wrong person. 3. Some people do work more effectively when they have no external "disturbants" (a dog, neighbour, postman, favourite comedy on TV...) - I found it more distubing to be at the office (too loud, too many people walking around, too "available" for management queries, etc ), than at home. It's a matter of letting people at home (and yourself, of course) know that you're just physically there, but you're simply OFF for everything. --- *Lucas Rosalen* Emails: rosalen.lu...@gmail.com / *lrosa...@pl.ibm.com * LinkedIn: http://br.linkedin.com/in/lrosalen Phone: +48 (71) 792 809 198 2017-05-30 0:46 GMT-03:00 Gabe Goldberg : > It's amazing what technology can do: http://ericwhitacre.com/the-vi > rtual-choir > > https://www.ted.com/talks/eric_whitacre_a_virtual_choir_2_ > 000_voices_strong > > ...not symphony, but still remote collaboration. > > Timothy Sipples quoted > > Steve Smith who wrote: > > > A symphony can hardly be performed with everyone working remotely > > -- > Gabriel Goldberg, Computers and Publishing, Inc. g...@gabegold.com > 3401 Silver Maple Place, Falls Church, VA 22042 (703) 204-0433 > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/gabegoldTwitter: GabeG0 > > > -- > 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
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
It's amazing what technology can do: http://ericwhitacre.com/the-virtual-choir https://www.ted.com/talks/eric_whitacre_a_virtual_choir_2_000_voices_strong ...not symphony, but still remote collaboration. Timothy Sipples quoted Steve Smith who wrote: > A symphony can hardly be performed with everyone working remotely -- Gabriel Goldberg, Computers and Publishing, Inc. g...@gabegold.com 3401 Silver Maple Place, Falls Church, VA 22042 (703) 204-0433 LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/gabegoldTwitter: GabeG0 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
1. Pure confirmed. YMMV. 2. Pure observed everyday, YMMV. 3. It depends on many factors, including openspace, which I hate. YMMV. Note, sometimes poeple cannot work as "lonely wolf" the have to cooperate with other folks. If your task is 100% to be done by you with no interactions, then you can pefrom it everywhere, including your garden or bathroom. But what it it's not? The above (and below) are not my imaginations, I've been a manager for 20+ years, used to manage folks onsite and telecommuting as well, so I based my €0.02 worth opinion on my (and not only mine) experience. Of course a devils is in the details, people's characters, office organisation, cultural factors (being in US many times I observed people in the coffee point behave somewhat differently, I cannot describe it exactly, but I feel it), etc. Regards -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland W dniu 2017-05-25 o 15:44, Steve Smith pisze: 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 == -- Treść tej wiadomości może zawierać informacje prawnie chronione Banku przeznaczone wyłącznie do użytku służbowego adresata. Odbiorcą może być jedynie jej adresat z wyłączeniem dostępu osób trzecich. Jeżeli nie jesteś adresatem niniejszej wiadomości lub pracownikiem upoważnionym do jej przekazania adresatowi, informujemy, że jej rozpowszechnianie, kopiowanie, rozprowadzanie lub inne działanie o podobnym charakterze jest prawnie zabronione i może być karalne. Jeżeli otrzymałeś tę wiadomość omyłkowo, prosimy niezwłocznie zawiadomić nadawcę wysyłając odpowiedź oraz trwale usunąć tę wiadomość włączając w to wszelkie jej kopie wydrukowane lub zapisane na dysku. This e-mail may contain legally privileged information of the Bank and is intended solely for business use of the addressee. This e-mail may only be received by the addressee and may not be disclosed to any third parties. If you are not the intended addressee of this e-mail or the employee authorized to forward it to the addressee, be advised that any dissemination, copying, distribution or any other similar activity is legally prohibited and may be punishable. If you received this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software and delete permanently this e-mail including any copies of it either printed or saved to hard drive. mBank S.A. z siedzibą w Warszawie, ul. Senatorska 18, 00-950 Warszawa, www.mBank.pl, e-mail: kont...@mbank.plsąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy XII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, nr rejestru przedsiębiorców KRS 025237, NIP: 526-021-50-88. Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2016 r. kapitał zakładowy mBanku S.A. (w całości wpłacony) wynosi 168.955.696 złotych. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@l
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
"I am most productive when I work from home. They can find me using Lync, or Sametime. " Ditto. I have been working from home for 5 years now, far more productive than I ever was in any office environment. We have team meetings I dial into, and those, along with the weekly status reports, let other people know what I am working on. If we need to have additional project related meetings (software or hardware upgrades) I dial into those. Email is available, and so is Skype. Bobbie Justice Senior z/OS Systems Engineer -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
> On May 26, 2017, at 3:19 AM, Martin Packer wrote: > > > 2 days a week requires commutability. For example, I go to Hursley about > once a fortnight (and none of my team are there at present). It's about 90 > minutes each way, which is OK. Just. > > The rest of the time I'm at home or on the road. > > Cheers, Martin ———SNIP— Each person/company has their own needs if it works for both of you, congratulations. I suppose if all you do is dump analyzing I could see it might work, with some caveats. But the systems programming environments that I have worked in, it doesn’t. At one job they had a person that worked remotely and to be honest I never knew what the person was working on. The big downfall with that situation is that she had a connection that was at best iffy for weeks at a time. The senior had to go out in the field to try and resolve her connection issues, talk about loss of productivity for two people (this occurred 10 times at least in two months). I personally cannot see an installation of a new OS of ever working. As meeting with application types over a problem it the only way I can see it working is with Skype or some such method as to whether you can see each other face to face. Forget about team meetings as there is no sense of teamonship, for example at one place where I worked one of the sysprogs wanted to have the company pay for a class for JAVA. He was turned down (I thought unfairly), I spoke up and suggested that the company review their education policy as it needed to move forward in its thinking, that it wasn’t about just Mainframes and UNIX was melding in now. Once I spoke up the rest of the group backed me up. The boss said he work rethink his position. If we all hadn’t of sensed what was going on in the room the conversation would have ended with the “no”. I suppose if you are a follower then remote working is feasible, I just don’t see it as a long term viable option. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
2 days a week requires commutability. For example, I go to Hursley about once a fortnight (and none of my team are there at present). It's about 90 minutes each way, which is OK. Just. The rest of the time I'm at home or on the road. Cheers, Martin Sent from my iPad > On 26 May 2017, at 09:14, Timothy Sipples wrote: > > Steve Smith wrote: >> A symphony can hardly be performed with everyone working remotely > > If you're thinking of a live concert performance, OK. However, the recorded > music industry doesn't always, or even very often, operate with every > musician in the same room performing at the same time. > > Frank Swarbrick mentioned a two days per week office schedule. That's an > important point. There are many percentages available between 0% and 100% > office v. home office work. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. If an > employer thinks that face-to-face employee "water cooler" interactions are > valuable, OK, but *how* valuable? Can employers capture most or all of that > value if employees are working in an office setting, say, every second full > week every month and working from home offices otherwise? Yes, probably so. > > One of the advantages of reducing office desk space is that it "forces" > employees who ought to be client-facing to be more client-facing, to spend > more and better time with clients. > > Anyway, there are pros and cons to every work arrangement, but working from > home offices >0% of the time often makes business sense. > > > Timothy Sipples > IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA > E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Steve Smith wrote: >A symphony can hardly be performed with everyone working remotely If you're thinking of a live concert performance, OK. However, the recorded music industry doesn't always, or even very often, operate with every musician in the same room performing at the same time. Frank Swarbrick mentioned a two days per week office schedule. That's an important point. There are many percentages available between 0% and 100% office v. home office work. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. If an employer thinks that face-to-face employee "water cooler" interactions are valuable, OK, but *how* valuable? Can employers capture most or all of that value if employees are working in an office setting, say, every second full week every month and working from home offices otherwise? Yes, probably so. One of the advantages of reducing office desk space is that it "forces" employees who ought to be client-facing to be more client-facing, to spend more and better time with clients. Anyway, there are pros and cons to every work arrangement, but working from home offices >0% of the time often makes business sense. Timothy Sipples IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
> On May 25, 2017, at 3:52 PM, Gord Tomlin > wrote: > > On 2017-05-25 12:58, Burrell, Todd 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. > > Well put. > > To add to the above, the time spent traveling to/from the office (it would be > about 8 hours a week for me if I went to the office 5 days a week) is time > just thrown away. > > It's 2017 now, and there are plenty of tools available that provide pretty > immersive collaboration environments. Check out ChatOps as a concept, and > products like Slack, Mattermost or HipChat. Even with more basic products > like Skype or WhatsApp, it is absolutely possible to achieve collaborative > work without physically being in the same building. > > ———SNIP——— I do not know anything about the products you mentioned but if they are like I am guessing, thanks but no thanks. Typing is (to me) intensive and typing up an inquiry about something someone is working on *AND* having to reply is too time consuming. Talk is more spontaneous and with the associated inflections that do not come across in typing (don’t even bring up happy faces to me). Also, I have seen written discusions blow up because the key pad does not come with inflections built in. Just my opinion. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
I am most productive when I work from home. They can find me using Lync, or Sametime. No one comes by just to talk for 5 to 30 minutes, which can be nice however when I'm working on 4 things at once, I don't want to be rude Steve -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 6:03 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks 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 on behalf of zMan 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 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: I
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
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 on behalf of zMan 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 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 re
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Gord Tomlin wrote, in part: > At the end of the day, there's no "one size fits all" solution. Some people > are wired to be able to effectively collaborate remotely, while others just > aren't. But the trend toward remote work is inexorable, except apparently at > IBM. Exactly. And it does change: when I worked at UofW, we had the "bug room", a terminal room where we systems guys all worked together. Every couple of years, someone would say "You guys have offices-why don't you work there and we'll use this room for something else?" and we all said "No way, we're more productive being able to say "Hey, what am I doing wrong here..." and the like. Nowadays, with broadband, IM, etc., I would argue that I'm more productive working from home here by far. But some people will find they want/need the separation: "Now I'm in the office working"/"Now I'm home, not working". Since I work for a California company, it *is* hard to turn it off at night... -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
On 2017-05-25 17:32, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: there is no tool yet invented to completely supplant regular*informal* office interaction. As Tom Brennan said, working across from someone invites casual*unplanned* communication that can be vital. I think what you say is true in an organization where the norm is being in an office together, and the odd person works remotely. When it becomes the norm for people to work remotely, the informal and unplanned communication tends to migrate to whatever communication medium a team chooses to use. It's generally a good idea to establish a group chat that includes all team members...call it "Water Cooler" if that feels good. There's the added bonus that everything can be saved. I don't normally see stenographers hanging around the real water cooler to record what spills out. ;) At the end of the day, there's no "one size fits all" solution. Some people are wired to be able to effectively collaborate remotely, while others just aren't. But the trend toward remote work is inexorable, except apparently at IBM. -- Regards, Gord Tomlin Action Software International (a division of Mazda Computer Corporation) Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
I don't want to appear to be lobbying for a position I don't necessarily hold, but as I said earlier, there is no tool yet invented to completely supplant regular *informal* office interaction. As Tom Brennan said, working across from someone invites casual *unplanned* communication that can be vital. War story. I once got a call from an auditor (!!!) saying that he had just started a JES2 audit in another data center and found that one of the JES2 PROCLIB data sets was missing. Say what? Impossible! I logged on there and sure enough, it was nowhere to be found. Contacted a colleague who worked there daily. He had received a request from an application group to delete a procedure library that they owned but no longer needed for testing. My colleague, the nicest most accommodating guy you can imagine, obliged. He was not a JES2 guy, but he knew how to satisfy a client. All of this transpired miraculously within a few hours. No intervening JES2 restart. Problem fixed before disaster hit. I can't prove it of course, but I believe that if we had been in the same proximity, I would have caught wind of what was happening in time to intervene. He had not contacted me because he didn't think there would be a problem. That's the rub. Colocation is as much about what you learn accidentally that can save your bacon. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Gord Tomlin Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 1:52 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks On 2017-05-25 12:58, Burrell, Todd 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. Well put. To add to the above, the time spent traveling to/from the office (it would be about 8 hours a week for me if I went to the office 5 days a week) is time just thrown away. It's 2017 now, and there are plenty of tools available that provide pretty immersive collaboration environments. Check out ChatOps as a concept, and products like Slack, Mattermost or HipChat. Even with more basic products like Skype or WhatsApp, it is absolutely possible to achieve collaborative work without physically being in the same building. -- Regards, Gord Tomlin Action Software International (a division of Mazda Computer Corporation) Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
On 2017-05-25 12:58, Burrell, Todd 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. Well put. To add to the above, the time spent traveling to/from the office (it would be about 8 hours a week for me if I went to the office 5 days a week) is time just thrown away. It's 2017 now, and there are plenty of tools available that provide pretty immersive collaboration environments. Check out ChatOps as a concept, and products like Slack, Mattermost or HipChat. Even with more basic products like Skype or WhatsApp, it is absolutely possible to achieve collaborative work without physically being in the same building. -- Regards, Gord Tomlin Action Software International (a division of Mazda Computer Corporation) Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Notwithstanding as adamant as I previously was, different jobs and tasks do call for different levels of personal interaction. A symphony can hardly be performed with everyone working remotely; conversely, it could hardly be created by anyone not completely free of distraction and interaction. So far as I can tell. I'm hardly qualified to listen to a symphony, much less either of the above. sas On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Doug Fuerst wrote: > Amen to all of this. It is far more productive to work from home. And I > have never had an issue in collaboration with my colleagues; we have > managed to collaborate no matter the distances involved between us. > And from the employer standpoint, most of us these days are older, and > less prone to up and move wherever for a 6 or 12 month project. We are > older, have ties to our communities, and are just not as likely to move > around as at least I was in the past. > > > Doug > d...@bkassociates.net > > > > > -- Original Message -- > From: "zMan" > To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu > Sent: 25-May-17 1:41:54 PM > 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 >> 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, n
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Amen to all of this. It is far more productive to work from home. And I have never had an issue in collaboration with my colleagues; we have managed to collaborate no matter the distances involved between us. And from the employer standpoint, most of us these days are older, and less prone to up and move wherever for a 6 or 12 month project. We are older, have ties to our communities, and are just not as likely to move around as at least I was in the past. Doug d...@bkassociates.net -- Original Message -- From: "zMan" To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Sent: 25-May-17 1:41:54 PM 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 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 dam
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
I've been working mostly at home for 4 years now, and I have to say there are a LOT of distractions (ZZ). Of course I wouldn't want to trade it for an office again, but I can certainly see some of the downsides of having people outside of any sphere of control for their alleged 8 hours a day. And Skip's remark is so important: I worked in the cubicle across from him for probably 15 years, and I couldn't count all the times I'd be talking to someone about a problem or plans, and he would overhear and chime in with new ideas or a solution. You don't get that remotely except by the rare chance everyone is on the phone at the same time. Burrell, Todd 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. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
> On May 25, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Burrell, Todd wrote: > SNIP- > 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 One place where I worked it was a walled off area from the computer room. Many times after shooting a bug we shared the issue via discussions albeit at someones desk or in the general office. It kept everyone up to date with others and so it decreased discovery time. I can’t tell you the number of duplicate issues showed up. It saved everyone time by discussing it aloud. The other thing that was interesting, we all knew when there was an issue with MVS as we would ask each other over the wall if anyone else is having the same problem. We would walk out the door and down the hallway where the computer was and we took over from the operators in an attempt to figure out what the problem was. One of us looked at any allocation issues and try and see if he was able to alleviate the issue. One of us looked at the console history to see if anything was happening there. One of (usually the most inexperienced) would look at issues with disk drives and the MSS. We all used a loud voice as the computer room was not silent. We talked out issues over the noise. We generally came to the same conclusion and walked back to the console. At that point the person manning the console was in charge and he listened as we gave our opinions. He decided what to do force cancel a job or whatever. He also was the person to get set up for a standalone incase it was needed. The group always had input during these times. One person made the decision and we all went with it. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
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 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
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
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
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
I don't want to undermine anyone's desire for independence, but I'm sympathetic to Radoslaw's sentiments. There is an advantage to regular proximity. I can't count the number of times I've overheard colleagues discussing an issue of that impinges on me. The problem with depending on any sort of overt communication--using whatever technology--is that you yourself have to know what to communicate. That is a one-sided perspective. I've been on both ends of this issue: a manager type with distributed reports and a trench rat located in the hinterland. I would be reluctant to dictate a concentrated configuration, but I have experienced its benefits as well as the downside of dispersion. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Steve Smith Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 6:44 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):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
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
1 and 2 - Totally agree 3 - 75% Thank You, Len Sasso System Administrator RDC - 327 Columbia TPKE, Rensselaer NY 12144-4400 t: +1.518.257.4209 | m: +1.518.894.0879 len.sa...@csra.com | www.csra.com Follow us on Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn CSRA Think Next. Now. -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 electronic message transmission contains information from CSRA that may be attorney-client privileged, proprietary or confidential. The information in this message is intended only for use by the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. If you believe you have received this message in error, please contact me immediately and be aware that any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. NOTE: Regardless of content, this email shall not operate to bind CSRA to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of email for such purpose. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
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
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
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
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
We have the same with folks flying in from WA and TX on a regular basis - but also confuse them as half of us are in Pleasanton and half in Phoenix. And since I moved to Phoenix they are conflicted as to which Manager to grace with their physical presence (My peer stayed back in CA). Jerry Whitteridge Manager Mainframe Systems & Storage Albertsons - Safeway Inc. 623 869 5523 Corporate Tieline - 85523 If you feel in control you just aren't going fast enough. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Jesse 1 Robinson Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 8:11 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks We are fortunate enough to still have a monthly sync-up meeting with IBM account folks. At the meeting last week, one person in the room flew into LA from Chicago, another from Boise. These were both one-day visits. Having such an enormous territory to cover seems wacko, but this is the current configuration before further consolidation. A real head scratcher. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Edward Finnell Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 6:44 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks RFID's? Who was it Watson, Sr. wanted to have everyone tattooed for census purposes? Was not well received. In a message dated 5/23/2017 7:58:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time, stars...@mindspring.com writes: So if there are six co-located locations, how is one Manager supposed to over see everyone in their chair if the manager is in City A but employee is in City B. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Warning: All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the corporate e-mail system, and is subject to archival and review by someone other than the recipient. This e-mail may contain proprietary information and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
My Opinion, not sure if it matters is I would love to have a job. Period. Anywhere. I ended up on IBM for help because I have no where else to turn and things seem to just be getting worse. For what it matters. I am not some soft wear programming genius. I use what very, very, limited internet I am allowed through a network that honestly has created more problems then answers. It is not fair to be left in the dark and have all these actions happen that direcrly involve me and my children and never get an answer, or at least a solid one on how I can be included to at least be able to give a statement or be involved in things being held against me. I am on no pitty party please believe that but if anyone could put there selves in my shoes even for a day with all the fix this, account for that, when it actuallity I have no clue what I am needed for or why. So I search for answers to the mail, various contracts I come across someone else at home has clear knowledge of just not me. Its very hard not to feel targeted. Especially when I do reach out in the community I am always shut down. What am I left to do? Really? Just let whats coming happen and for the simple reason I tried to stand up against the corrupt ones. Tanya Pike On May 23, 2017 9:18 PM, "Edward Gould" wrote: > > On May 23, 2017, at 6:41 PM, Steve Beaver wrote: > > > > As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots > of > > folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks > > > > Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso > announced > > that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to > "co-locate" > > or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked primarily > > from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. > > > > For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of IBM > > workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 million > a > > year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square feet. > > > > IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the > six > > cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, of > one > > month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to > recruit > > replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not > > abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, > "there > > are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less > disruptive > > for everyone, myself included.” > > > Can’t speak for other cities but in Chicago, There is/was a building > that housed mostly IBMers for at least 30 years that I remember. The > address was 1 IBM Plaza. > It used to house IBM education/marketing and a data center (we IPLed the > first version of MVS there late one night (or was it morning?)) I spent > many weeks there in various IBM classes over the years. > A couple of years ago I went past the place and it looked deserted (and > somewhat dirty). > I had a few friends that worked for IBM over the years and they moved to > the East Coast and West Coast. > I keep in touch a little with one now EX IBMer he was in G-burg and then > the west coast. > I was extremely disappointed with IBM over the last say 20+ years. What > was once excellent Marketing people were reduced to call centers and it > showed to the customer. > We were an excellent customer of IBM and ordered the latest equipment > available and really got over the top engineering support and marketing > support. IBM once in a while would bring customers through our data center > to show off any new equipment. > When we had major issues with IBM equipment the place was overrun with IBM > types helping out and making good suggestions. One time our brand new 168MP > wasn’t quite dead on delivery but close to. IBM showed that they supported > the customer when a jet flew in from the east coast with about 20 IBM > types. They problem was found a part was supplied that fixed the issue (too > long of a tri lead wire going into the High speed buffer). Talk about > unreproducible S0C4’s. > > Then IBM started to go down little by little not as good support as they > used to have. People seemed to be leaving IBM faster than they could hire. > They tried to sell me a remote education class and I balked a little. I > finally got them to not charge the company if I found it was > unsatisfactory. The second day of the class I walked out and went to the > person in charge and told them to refund the money and to make sure they > specified in the education catalog if it was remotely taught. I stayed away > from all rem
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
I spend a long weekend in that building every six months because Smith Bucklin--the company that manages SHARE conferences--moved there from the old Allstate building a few years ago. We go there for conference planning. The building is in good shape and fully occupied as far as I can tell. I remember the wind well from my first trip there for a JES2 class in a distant early spring. From the window, a gorgeous sunny day with clear blue sky. Then step outside. Yikes. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Karl S Huf Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 9:09 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks The building is still there at 330 N Wabash. I remember attending many, many classes there. If you were lucky/unlucky enough to be in a classroom on the east side of the building it was very difficult to concentrate as the views of the Wrigley Building, Tribune Tower, and the locks opening and closing between the Chicago River and Lake Michigan were quite distracting. A lot of us remember it most for the intense winds that were there - so intense that the building's plaza had a series of stanchions and ropes to provide people a way to anchor themselves and literally pull themselves to/from the building's entrance. The building is classified as a landmark and was designed by Ludwig Mies Van Der Rohe; most students of architecture consider it a masterpiece. IBM sold it a little over 20 years ago and moved out a little over 10 years ago (now in the Hyatt Center on Wacker & Monroe). The building is now mixed use with a boutique hotel (Langham) taking up the lower floors and the AMA the rest. ___ Karl S Huf | Senior Vice President | World Wide Technology 50 S LaSalle St, LQ-18, Chicago, IL 60603 | phone (312)630-6287 | k...@ntrs.com Please visit northerntrust.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is confidential, may be privileged and is meant only for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender ASAP and delete this message from your system. NTAC:3NS-20 P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Edward Gould > Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 11:08 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXT] Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no > thanks > > > On May 23, 2017, at 6:41 PM, Steve Beaver > wrote: > > > > As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like > > lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks > > > > Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso > > announced that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to > "co-locate" > > or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked > > primarily from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. > > > > For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of > > IBM workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 > > million a year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square > feet. > > > > IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the > > six cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal > > document, of one month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says > > she plans to recruit replacements for those employees from the six > > co-located locations-not abroad. "If what I were trying to do was > > reduce headcount," she says, "there are much simpler and easier ways > > to do that, which would be less disruptive for everyone, myself included.” > > > Can’t speak for other cities but in Chicago, There is/was a building that > housed mostly IBMers for at least 30 years that I remember. The address was > 1 IBM Plaza. > It used to house IBM education/marketing and a data center (we IPLed the > first version of MVS there late one night (or was it morning?)) I spent many > weeks there in various IBM classes over the years. > A couple of years ago I went past the place and it looked deserted (and > somewhat dirty). > I had a few friends that worked for IBM over the years and they moved to the > East Coast and West Coast. > I keep in touch a little with one now EX IBMer he was i
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
The building is still there at 330 N Wabash. I remember attending many, many classes there. If you were lucky/unlucky enough to be in a classroom on the east side of the building it was very difficult to concentrate as the views of the Wrigley Building, Tribune Tower, and the locks opening and closing between the Chicago River and Lake Michigan were quite distracting. A lot of us remember it most for the intense winds that were there - so intense that the building's plaza had a series of stanchions and ropes to provide people a way to anchor themselves and literally pull themselves to/from the building's entrance. The building is classified as a landmark and was designed by Ludwig Mies Van Der Rohe; most students of architecture consider it a masterpiece. IBM sold it a little over 20 years ago and moved out a little over 10 years ago (now in the Hyatt Center on Wacker & Monroe). The building is now mixed use with a boutique hotel (Langham) taking up the lower floors and the AMA the rest. ___ Karl S Huf | Senior Vice President | World Wide Technology 50 S LaSalle St, LQ-18, Chicago, IL 60603 | phone (312)630-6287 | k...@ntrs.com Please visit northerntrust.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is confidential, may be privileged and is meant only for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender ASAP and delete this message from your system. NTAC:3NS-20 P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Edward Gould > Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 11:08 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXT] Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no > thanks > > > On May 23, 2017, at 6:41 PM, Steve Beaver > wrote: > > > > As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like > > lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks > > > > Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso > > announced that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to > "co-locate" > > or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked > > primarily from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. > > > > For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of > > IBM workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 > > million a year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square > feet. > > > > IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the > > six cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal > > document, of one month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says > > she plans to recruit replacements for those employees from the six > > co-located locations-not abroad. "If what I were trying to do was > > reduce headcount," she says, "there are much simpler and easier ways > > to do that, which would be less disruptive for everyone, myself included.” > > > Can’t speak for other cities but in Chicago, There is/was a building that > housed mostly IBMers for at least 30 years that I remember. The address was > 1 IBM Plaza. > It used to house IBM education/marketing and a data center (we IPLed the > first version of MVS there late one night (or was it morning?)) I spent many > weeks there in various IBM classes over the years. > A couple of years ago I went past the place and it looked deserted (and > somewhat dirty). > I had a few friends that worked for IBM over the years and they moved to the > East Coast and West Coast. > I keep in touch a little with one now EX IBMer he was in G-burg and then the > west coast. > I was extremely disappointed with IBM over the last say 20+ years. What was > once excellent Marketing people were reduced to call centers and it showed to > the customer. > We were an excellent customer of IBM and ordered the latest equipment > available and really got over the top engineering support and marketing > support. IBM once in a while would bring customers through our data center > to show off any new equipment. > When we had major issues with IBM equipment the place was overrun with > IBM types helping out and making good suggestions. One time our brand new > 168MP wasn’t quite dead on delivery but close to. IBM showed that they > supported the customer when a jet flew in from the east coast with about 20 > IBM types. They problem was found a part was supplied that fixed the issue > (too long of a tri lead wire going into the High speed buffer). Talk about > unr
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Amen all around. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Nightwatch RenBand Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 8:05 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks The problem with working remote has always been one of management. Basically, managers, still after all these years, do not know how to manage and evaluate actual employee performance, and that applies to workers sitting right next to the manager as well as remote workers. And in this technical age, how many managers even know what their workers DO? One of my rules is: If you cannot DO your subordinates job, you cannot manage them. The cost savings to the company as well as to traffic reduction, commuting time elimination, pollution, improvement in quality of life etc has been proven repeatedly. -- 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
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
We are fortunate enough to still have a monthly sync-up meeting with IBM account folks. At the meeting last week, one person in the room flew into LA from Chicago, another from Boise. These were both one-day visits. Having such an enormous territory to cover seems wacko, but this is the current configuration before further consolidation. A real head scratcher. . . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Edward Finnell Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 6:44 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks RFID's? Who was it Watson, Sr. wanted to have everyone tattooed for census purposes? Was not well received. In a message dated 5/23/2017 7:58:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time, stars...@mindspring.com writes: So if there are six co-located locations, how is one Manager supposed to over see everyone in their chair if the manager is in City A but employee is in City B. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
The problem with working remote has always been one of management. Basically, managers, still after all these years, do not know how to manage and evaluate actual employee performance, and that applies to workers sitting right next to the manager as well as remote workers. And in this technical age, how many managers even know what their workers DO? One of my rules is: If you cannot DO your subordinates job, you cannot manage them. The cost savings to the company as well as to traffic reduction, commuting time elimination, pollution, improvement in quality of life etc has been proven repeatedly. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
> On May 23, 2017, at 6:41 PM, Steve Beaver wrote: > > As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots of > folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks > > Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso announced > that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to "co-locate" > or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked primarily > from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. > > For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of IBM > workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 million a > year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square feet. > > IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the six > cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, of one > month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to recruit > replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not > abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, "there > are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less disruptive > for everyone, myself included.” > Can’t speak for other cities but in Chicago, There is/was a building that > housed mostly IBMers for at least 30 years that I remember. The address was 1 > IBM Plaza. It used to house IBM education/marketing and a data center (we IPLed the first version of MVS there late one night (or was it morning?)) I spent many weeks there in various IBM classes over the years. A couple of years ago I went past the place and it looked deserted (and somewhat dirty). I had a few friends that worked for IBM over the years and they moved to the East Coast and West Coast. I keep in touch a little with one now EX IBMer he was in G-burg and then the west coast. I was extremely disappointed with IBM over the last say 20+ years. What was once excellent Marketing people were reduced to call centers and it showed to the customer. We were an excellent customer of IBM and ordered the latest equipment available and really got over the top engineering support and marketing support. IBM once in a while would bring customers through our data center to show off any new equipment. When we had major issues with IBM equipment the place was overrun with IBM types helping out and making good suggestions. One time our brand new 168MP wasn’t quite dead on delivery but close to. IBM showed that they supported the customer when a jet flew in from the east coast with about 20 IBM types. They problem was found a part was supplied that fixed the issue (too long of a tri lead wire going into the High speed buffer). Talk about unreproducible S0C4’s. Then IBM started to go down little by little not as good support as they used to have. People seemed to be leaving IBM faster than they could hire. They tried to sell me a remote education class and I balked a little. I finally got them to not charge the company if I found it was unsatisfactory. The second day of the class I walked out and went to the person in charge and told them to refund the money and to make sure they specified in the education catalog if it was remotely taught. I stayed away from all remotely taught classes. Then somewhere around 1995 I found I needed to ask a person who has had experience with encryption and key handling. (this was a 1-800 number) I was told I was going to have to pay IBM to get an answer about their product, I answered back I guess you don’t want to sell new hardware anymore and I hung up) Then a few years laterI had some questions about hardware and was told the same thing. I only called IBM when we had a service contract. Even the IBM software (parts of it anyway) broke every IBM rules there was. That was enough for me. Good bye IBM it was nice for a while, not so much anymore. Ed -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
RFID's? Who was it Watson, Sr. wanted to have everyone tattooed for census purposes? Was not well received. In a message dated 5/23/2017 7:58:40 P.M. Central Daylight Time, stars...@mindspring.com writes: So if there are six co-located locations, how is one Manager supposed to over see everyone in their chair if the manager is in City A but employee is in City B. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
So if there are six co-located locations, how is one Manager supposed to over see everyone in their chair if the manager is in City A but employee is in City B. Does not make sense. Especially if they saved 100 Million by having these workers remote to start with. Crazy Lizette -Original Message- >From: Doug Fuerst >Sent: May 23, 2017 4:58 PM >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >Subject: Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks > > I wonder if or when they will give this one and Ginny Rometty their >walking papers. IBM has been faltering for years. Maybe a change in the >senior ranks would be in order. > >Doug Fuerst > > > >-- Original Message -- >From: "Steve Beaver" >To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu >Sent: 23-May-17 7:41:00 PM >Subject: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks > >>As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots >>of >>folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks >> >>Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso >>announced >>that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to >>"co-locate" >>or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked >>primarily >>from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. >> >>For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of >>IBM >>workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 >>million a >>year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square >>feet. >> >>IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the >>six >>cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, >>of one >>month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to >>recruit >>replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not >>abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, >>"there >>are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less >>disruptive >>for everyone, myself included." >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
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
IBM will never say for a while Sent from my iPhone Sorry for any grammar problems > On May 23, 2017, at 19:51, Paul Gilmartin > <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > >> On Tue, 23 May 2017 18:41:00 -0500, Steve Beaver wrote: >> >> As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots of >> folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks >> > "Lots"? I see no numbers. Citation needed? > >> Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso announced >> that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to "co-locate" >> or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked primarily >> from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. >> >> For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of IBM >> workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 million a >> year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square feet. >> >> IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the six >> cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, of one >> month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to recruit >> replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not >> abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, "there >> are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less disruptive >> for everyone, myself included." > > -- gil > > -- > 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
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
On Tue, 23 May 2017 18:41:00 -0500, Steve Beaver wrote: >As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots of >folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks > "Lots"? I see no numbers. Citation needed? >Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso announced >that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to "co-locate" >or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked primarily >from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. > >For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of IBM >workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 million a >year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square feet. > >IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the six >cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, of one >month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to recruit >replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not >abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, "there >are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less disruptive >for everyone, myself included." -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Every organization in the world needs a good house-cleaning and god knows the Federal Government needs a major cleaning. However in the scheme of things 2,600 people are not many out of 380,000. And probably most of them are going to IBM's retired payroll. As Peter said they may not be selling much, however the patent royalties are astronomiocal Steve -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353 Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 7:16 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks Classic Type-A uptight managerial style. "If I can't see you then you must not be working, because I wouldn't be!" Sheesh. When will they learn to judge people by what they accomplish rather than how often they are seen. Then again, these are "marketing" (i.e., sales) employees. Given how much less IBM seems to be selling, maybe the housecleaning could be good for IBM. My sympathies are still with the workers though. Peter -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Steve Beaver Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 7:41 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso announced that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to "co-locate" or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked primarily from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of IBM workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 million a year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square feet. IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the six cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, of one month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to recruit replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, "there are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less disruptive for everyone, myself included." -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. -- 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
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Classic Type-A uptight managerial style. "If I can't see you then you must not be working, because I wouldn't be!" Sheesh. When will they learn to judge people by what they accomplish rather than how often they are seen. Then again, these are "marketing" (i.e., sales) employees. Given how much less IBM seems to be selling, maybe the housecleaning could be good for IBM. My sympathies are still with the workers though. Peter -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Steve Beaver Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 7:41 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso announced that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to "co-locate" or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked primarily from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of IBM workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 million a year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square feet. IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the six cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, of one month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to recruit replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, "there are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less disruptive for everyone, myself included." -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
Crazy. Just crazy. Memo to IBM: Telecommuting is the future. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Steve Beaver Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 4:41 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso announced that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to "co-locate" or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked primarily from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of IBM workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 million a year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square feet. IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the six cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, of one month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to recruit replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, "there are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less disruptive for everyone, myself included." -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
I wonder if or when they will give this one and Ginny Rometty their walking papers. IBM has been faltering for years. Maybe a change in the senior ranks would be in order. Doug Fuerst -- Original Message -- From: "Steve Beaver" To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Sent: 23-May-17 7:41:00 PM Subject: Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso announced that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to "co-locate" or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked primarily from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of IBM workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 million a year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square feet. IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the six cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, of one month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to recruit replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, "there are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less disruptive for everyone, myself included." -- 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
Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks
As we all know IBM has started the no more Remote work. Looks like lots of folks in marketing said thanks but no thanks Earlier this year, IBM's Chief Marketing Officer Michelle Peluso announced that the U.S. marketing division's 2,600 employees would have to "co-locate" or collaborate onsite from one of six cities. Those who worked primarily from home would have to move to one of the cities or quit IBM. For decades, IBM embraced remote work. Eight years ago, 40 percent of IBM workers worldwide telecommuted. As a result, it saved about $100 million a year in the U.S. and had reduced office space by 78 million square feet. IBM remote workers who choose to resign rather than move to one of the six cities will be paid severance, according to an IBM internal document, of one month's base salary, the standard at IBM. Peluso says she plans to recruit replacements for those employees from the six co-located locations-not abroad. "If what I were trying to do was reduce headcount," she says, "there are much simpler and easier ways to do that, which would be less disruptive for everyone, myself included." -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
