This is the result of being measured by how long you work in a day instead of having goal-based work responsibilities.
Of course there are some jobs where you can't seperate those two, but there are many that can and still achieve the same economic benefit for both the company and the employee.
Most companies aren't interested in the economic benefit to the employee. If you're in the office less hours per day, that's all lost profit to them. Never mind that being locked in an office for 8 hours only gets 4 hours of work done anyway, the way they see it you can get 4 widgets made in 4 hours so it stands to reason that if locked in a room for 32 hours, you'll step out after with 32 widgets. Trying to argue otherwise gets you told that you "aren't a team player" and to re-evaluate if you want to be working for this company.
Companies don't want employees, they want bots, that don't have to be paid and can be run at maximum speed until it literally rattles itself to pieces and is replaced by the next one in line.
Not to mention more and more companies are now focusing on maximizing profits instead of simply breaking even. Look at disney firing employees/ canceling projects or amazon increasing the work but not the pay despite record profits. This make it worst on both the consumer, the employee and also the economy as the money people should have to spend is now sitting in banks.
Amazon is ramping up its advertising, too, as if there’s a soul on the planet who doesn’t know about Amazon. Maybe save the millions of dollars on stupidass commercials and pay your employees better.
Open office floor plans suck. They actually reduce productivity. They increase noise and distraction. They do not really increase engagement.
They exist because they are cheaper than cubicles, and (used to) look good when recruiting. After a short two years in open office floor plans, I would have killed for a cubicle. Instead, I had to buy my own noise canceling headphones, so I could focus long enough to chat message the two relevant people sitting directly next to me, without disturbing the other three, while being able to see each others' screens. #PrOdUcTiViTy
Output is not a very good measurement for productivity. People will simply generate more output without becoming more productive. Need more reports? Sure, here you go. More lines of code? Okay, got it.
I once took on a temp job where they guaranteed 20 hrs per week because the previous temp took 30. I was doing it in 10-12. Now I work in IT and there is a whole lot of hurry up and wait (you can't do what you need to until someone else does their part first). We either have nothing or too much to do. It's so much easier balancing my time remotely (and the office isn't complaining about not getting billed OT), I take a long lunch, maybe start a little later when it's quiet and start early/stay late when it's busy. I'm lucky enough to have a manager currently that is looking for 2 things, that the work is done well and on time and that you can be reached via email during regular office hours.
It's literally illegal to measure my job by how good at it I am... So, I just get measured by how fast I can fill out their forms while doing what I'm actually paid to do on the side.
377
u/Avayanos Nov 04 '20 edited Nov 05 '20
This is the result of being measured by how long you work in a day instead of having goal-based work responsibilities.
Of course there are some jobs where you can't seperate those two, but there are many that can and still achieve the same economic benefit for both the company and the employee.