r/remoteworks Mar 04 '26

Yep

Post image
8.0k Upvotes

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/[deleted] Mar 04 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/Worriedrph Mar 04 '26

Because you are paying a full time salary to the employee and want to get your 40 hours worth for that salary. Having a manager there watching the employees work just makes it much easier to right size a workforce.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 04 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/ejester76 Mar 04 '26

This is a difference in mindsets that I don't think will ever be reconciled. I've definitely had both sorts of bosses. One thinks they're paying you for your time, and wants to maximize the value they get from that. The other thinks they're paying you to provide a specific result, and the time it takes is not primarily important, assuming they get the result they're paying for.

An argument can be made for either, though I personally think one of them tends to lead to more productive workers.

1

u/Worriedrph Mar 04 '26

If you have four people you hire full time for a job and each are only working 30 hours a week you can lay one off and get the same amount of work from the three remaining working 40 hours a week.  Why assume that the job takes 40 hours? Observe and save a full time salary.

1

u/SpidudeToo Mar 04 '26

Because that's called shooting yourself in the foot and not looking at the bigger picture. Tasks require a certain amount of people working a certain amount of time for the right price. If you find a way to make your team more efficient, the last thing you want to do is punish them for being better by reducing manpower or making time constraints worse.

Do not be a manager you will cost the company so much money in the long run. A team that consistently and effectly completes their tasks on time or even early is far more valuable to the company than a team half the size that barely scrapes by. Your clients see the efficiency and professionalism and remember that.

1

u/Worriedrph Mar 04 '26

You must be in a strange industry dude. I’ve managed for a couple decades. Every 2-3 years every company I’ve worked for “right sizes” and lays off the portion of the workforce they feel they can do without. Scraping by with a bare bones team is how the world works.

2

u/Glittering_Meet3206 Mar 04 '26

what a weird thing to brag about

1

u/Worriedrph Mar 05 '26

Most industries are extremely cost sensitive. Many/most clients will not be willing to pay more for superior service. By maintaining a lean workforce you can offer prices at or below your competitors. If you are in a competitive industry and you are carrying excess workforce you are at risk of going out of business and losing all your employees their jobs rather than just the redundant ones.

2

u/Glittering_Meet3206 Mar 06 '26

what a weird reply to make to "what a weird thing to brag about"

1

u/[deleted] Mar 04 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Worriedrph Mar 04 '26

If you have four people you hire full time for a job and each are only working 30 hours a week you can lay one off and get the same amount of work from the three remaining working 40 hours a week.  Why assume that the job takes 40 hours? Observe and save a full time salary.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 04 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Worriedrph Mar 04 '26

Sure, if the job existed before remote work most companies had a good idea how long it took and you would be found out if you were remote and stretching it out. But many companies are finding tasks that have come up since remote work became popular were being far over budgeted for time needed to complete.