I actually love my current arrangement because I can WFH and go into an office and interact with co-workers. I also have a boss that understands I get up at 4am and work a few hours so that I can be home with my kids in the late afternoon. WFH days I save 45min-1hr on commuting alone and can do things like get my eyebrows waxed during lunch.
Huh? I get my eyebrows threaded during my lunch hour too and I work outside the home.
I actually love my current arrangement because I can WFH and go into an office and interact with co-workers. I also have a boss that understands I get up at 4am and work a few hours so that I can be home with my kids in the late afternoon. WFH days I save 45min-1hr on commuting alone and can do things like get my eyebrows waxed during lunch.
Huh? I get my eyebrows threaded during my lunch hour too and I work outside the home.
I can't get my eyebrows waxed during lunch when I go into the office because it would take longer than an hour to get to the woman who does mine and when I'm at the office I usually have working lunches with clients or peers. The biggest WFH perk is going grocery shopping at lunch
I fail to see what her 2-week maternity leave has to do with any of this. She's the CEO of a major company; if she wanted to take more time off, fine, but she didn't and unless she changed the parental leave policy for every Yahoo worker to allow for no more than 2 weeks off after the birth or adoption of a child, then I'm not sure how her leave is somehow a reflection of this new change.
I guess maybe it's because I don't see how WFH is automatically any more family-friendly than working in an office, and maybe the feeling that it is is why her leave was brought up? If you WFH, I doubt your boss expects you to be simultaneously taking care of your child(ren); I'm under the impression most people who WFH still have another childcare provider (in-home or out).
I think it's because it looks like (whether it's true of not) that she doesn't respect the value of a good work-life balance. She only took 2 weeks maternity leave and now expects people to live at the office. (I know that's not what she said, but it that's how it's being interpreted).
And depending on the situation being able to WFH can be much more family friendly. Yes, if you're at home, your kids (especially small ones) should be in childcare. And even so, if you regularly have a 30-45 (or longer) commute, that's an extra hour+ that you can spend with you kids each day when you WFH. Then when your kids are school age and need less attention, if one of them is sick, being able to WFH means you can stay home with your kid, let them watch tv and still be productive.
I get it. Even when you're not directly engaged in a task, there's a different mindset when you're at the office. You're less likely to call a coworker and say "hey, I was batting around this idea..." than you are to go to their office and discuss it. Being physically together allows for a lot more casual collaboration on unrefined ideas, which is important. Hell, good corporate interior designers plan spaces for exactly this type of interaction.
I hope they remain flexible enough to allow people who will have a hard time with this logistically to WFH part time. But if this is successful in changing the corporate culture, those people should expect to be a little out of the loop and likely not getting promoted over coworkers who are in the office their entire work week.
Stupid. A Lot of their top talent lives in SF and its a shitastic commute fromSF to Sunnyvale. I'm certain many of their employees accepted jobs after being told that they would be permitted to telecommute several days a week. There is a reason Google is known for its benefits -- the tech companies here compete on them. Quality of life is a huge in the Bay Area. Yahoo essentially is saying that its simply not willing to match the work/life offerings of its competitors. It can say goodbye to its talent now.
It also doesn't help the company's image - it already struggles with the fact that its seen as a dated relic of the dot com era.
I also feel for the people who took the job based on location flexibility.
Yes, especially since I'm thinking a lot of these people opted to live out in the more affordable parts of the bay area since they could work from home. Now it could easily be a 1-2 hour commute, and moving closer might not be an option due to the increased housing costs.
I don't give a shit about how Yahoo or it's employees work. I can't believe this is newsworthy, and I'd be pissed as hell if my memo, clearly labled PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL DO NOT FORWARD was published in the media. Whoever forwarded that would be fired so fast.
I fail to see what her 2-week maternity leave has to do with any of this. She's the CEO of a major company; if she wanted to take more time off, fine, but she didn't and unless she changed the parental leave policy for every Yahoo worker to allow for no more than 2 weeks off after the birth or adoption of a child, then I'm not sure how her leave is somehow a reflection of this new change.
I guess maybe it's because I don't see how WFH is automatically any more family-friendly than working in an office, and maybe the feeling that it is is why her leave was brought up? If you WFH, I doubt your boss expects you to be simultaneously taking care of your child(ren); I'm under the impression most people who WFH still have another childcare provider (in-home or out).
I think it's because it looks like (whether it's true of not) that she doesn't respect the value of a good work-life balance. She only took 2 weeks maternity leave and now expects people to live at the office. (I know that's not what she said, but it that's how it's being interpreted).
And depending on the situation being able to WFH can be much more family friendly. Yes, if you're at home, your kids (especially small ones) should be in childcare. And even so, if you regularly have a 30-45 (or longer) commute, that's an extra hour+ that you can spend with you kids each day when you WFH. Then when your kids are school age and need less attention, if one of them is sick, being able to WFH means you can stay home with your kid, let them watch tv and still be productive.
The memo specifically said that the occasional WFH day was still ok (eg. taking care of sick kids or the cable guy). I think they are just doing away with prearranged, regular WFH schedules. Which is their prerogative to do as an employer.
Everyone keeps talking about how Yahoo is going to lose all of their talent over this. What is the job market out there like for people in this industry?
Everyone keeps talking about how Yahoo is going to lose all of their talent over this. What is the job market out there like for people in this industry?
there is a huge shortage of programmers/IT folks in this country. They'll be able to find work if they leave
I don't give a shit about how Yahoo or it's employees work. I can't believe this is newsworthy, and I'd be pissed as hell if my memo, clearly labled PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL DO NOT FORWARD was published in the media. Whoever forwarded that would be fired so fast.
You can't believe it's newsworthy? The Silicon Valley industry is a huge employer and one if its major companies shaking up the corporate culture is a pretty big deal.
Eh. I WFH full time and I can't get upset over this. I only WFH because DH's job moved me across the country and my employer allowed me to stay. The rest of my coworkers are still in the office. It's been 5 years now and every year I'm amazed that they let it continue. If I received this letter I'd be disappointed and hope an exception could be made, but I'd understand.
I hate the assumptions. She has never said she expects others to take a 2 week leave. I did last time and I do not expect others to. That was her CHOICE to do so. End of story.
They're IT and can't figure out how to get people to have face to face time without coming into the office? No wonder they're a relic. IME, it's not like IT types love to work collaboratively. This seems like forced group work for the introverts in grade school.
Whatever, her company, no outrage here. But I agree with ESF that you attract top talent by benefits, and the flexibility of IT work is a primary benefit.
I don't understand the emphasis in collaborating in the hallways and cafeteria. Really? That's a huge thing? It seems so oddly whimsical.
i sort of get it. I talk to my co-workers a lot more when we are sitting next to each other than when we all WFH. Then we only speak if we need something from each other.
I don't understand the emphasis in collaborating in the hallways and cafeteria. Really? That's a huge thing? It seems so oddly whimsical.
It's true for me. I'm a manager at a CPA firm so I spend about 2 days a week in the office, 2 days at a client and a day at home. When I'm in the office and don't know the answer to something I stop in one of my peers offices. When I'm at home I waste lots of time looking for the answer myself.
Post by meshaliuknits on Feb 24, 2013 14:47:38 GMT -5
I sit next to the people in my core team. If I raise my voice slightly the two bosses will hear. We still primarily communicate via IM.
The system I support is regional so the stakeholders very rarely see eachother in person. I wanna say I've see the others once in the last 2yrs. If its important, we meet. Otherwise, webex.
I don't understand the emphasis in collaborating in the hallways and cafeteria. Really? That's a huge thing? It seems so oddly whimsical.
First, tech =/= IT. Our engineers would laugh at that. They kicked IT out and it's the dept nobody wants.
But to the above, I'm in G&A, so it's different than the majority of engineering work. But we have a lot of cross-departmental problems that require buy-off from multiple people. When everyone's in the office, one person comes to you with a question, you may not know the full answer, but you know Bob does, so you pop over to his cube and get the answer. If the initial questioner has a follow up, it's answered right away. I end up being the middle guy in these conversations a lot if it's a finance/audit person asking an operational question. I can interpret and elaborate what the ops person is saying in a way that makes sense to the accountant. This is not the kind of conversation anyone is likely to pick up the phone for a three-way call.
Maybe it's the lack of telephones that's a problem. We operate on VoIP, and no one uses it except where necessary. We're more likely to use Skype IM for a quick question.
Additionally, in my own dept (finance/acctg), people are often working on something that someone else originally put together. When everyone is in the office, it's easy to ask the original author for a sanity check. If you or they are at home, it's easy to just go with your best guess. Since we've had a lot of turnover in the dept, that ends up happening often enough anyways.
I'm an introvert too which is why being in an office actually forces collaboration where as at home I can hide from it. Collaboration is not just asking someone a question. It's long term problem solving that is dependent on getting to know each others strengths and weaknesses and personality.
But that's just me. Everyone is different. I also do not know enough about this field.
Isn't a chat window far easier than placing a phone call or going to find Bob? Especially from an introvert's perspective.
Myself, I know I hate going to find that bastard.
Lol, this is why people come to see me I my cube, and I don't go to find them. Usually it's the first person who suggests going to find Bob. So I'd say I'm like Irish in that as an introvert, being in the office forces me to collaborate in ways that I wouldn't at home.
I also think sbp is onto something with the FOFH idea. If MM really has her shit together, this wasn't an offhand decision. They know who the people are who work from home, and how valuable they are. The memo says their managers have already been in touch. My guess is, that transition is going to be easier for the people they really want to keep, and a little less easy for those who they were hoping to get rid of anyways.
And again, I really think this has shit to do with working parents, outside of commute issues. Normal flex time, sick kids, half a day for a dr appt, cable guy, is explicitly allowed.
Lol, this is why people come to see me I my cube, and I don't go to find them. Usually it's the first person who suggests going to find Bob. So I'd say I'm like Irish in that as an introvert, being in the office forces me to collaborate in ways that I wouldn't at home.
I also think sbp is onto something with the FOFH idea. If MM really has her shit together, this wasn't an offhand decision. They know who the people are who work from home, and how valuable they are. The memo says their managers have already been in touch. My guess is, that transition is going to be easier for the people they really want to keep, and a little less easy for those who they were hoping to get rid of anyways.
And again, I really think this has shit to do with working parents, outside of commute issues. Normal flex time, sick kids, half a day for a dr appt, cable guy, is explicitly allowed.
I get what you're saying except for the last sentence - they actually do discourage / frown upon the cable guy by even feeling the need to mention it and suggesting you use your best judgment in determining whether it's really "necessary"
I agree. I'm surprised that so many people are taking that statement at face value.
honest question - what does Yahoo do now? are they still a bygone search engine or what's their purpose? I will look it up, but the fact that I don't know this off the bat says a lot - unless I am unique here in not knowing.
LOL
I read somewhere that yahoo email was the most popular web based email out there. Gmail isn't it -- it has its holds in the college educated crowd but huge swaths of America use yahoo for email. So yahoo mostly generates content for the interface that its email users use -- ie ads, as well as stuff pulled from the AP and other wire services, like news articles, celeb gossip, etc.
It's share of that market is steadily decreasing, and unlike other companies, it hasn't found a way to drive repeat visits or hook people on new products.
They are increasingly a joke of a company. I know people that have left them for Zynga, you know, the company that makes FarmVille and other shit? When your IT people and brand managers flee to a company that essentially manufactures spam, it may be time to throw in the towel.
It seems there is this perception that people who work from home do a lot of screwing off and aren't working as hard as the people in the office.
I have done both. Right now I WFH and I save 2 hours of commute time, log in after the kids go to bed and work a couple more hours. I guarantee I am a lot more productive than if I was still in the office.
The future is in telecommuting with technology and costs. Why pay for huge expensive offices unless it is a necessity?
I'm sitting on the "putting archaic policies in place to make people so unhappy that they quit so we don't have to do huge layoffs" bench. I've been WFH full time for 7 years and have slowly seen my company strip away WFH benefits that they were initially touting (when I first started it was the push for less office space/cheaper overhead, and now they won't let us charge ANYTHING in and say if we don't like it we can come to the office). It's all part of a grand plan to reduce overhead/ops staff without having to have an official reduction/layoff effort.
I get what you're saying except for the last sentence - they actually do discourage / frown upon the cable guy by even feeling the need to mention it and suggesting you use your best judgment in determining whether it's really "necessary"
I agree. I'm surprised that so many people are taking that statement at face value.
Oh I think they're discouraging it - they're just not forbidding it. They're saying shit happens, but don't take advantage.
Yahoo has been a dying relic for some time now. I'm sure there are plenty who are collecting their paycheck, waiting for the drains to circle, and getting by with what they can. This is the message - we don't need those people.
Google doesn't give all those perks so you can WFH. Apple is the worst, they own your soul. This is actually pretty par for the course for major tech companies that are doing well.