How is workplace?

Cornflakes

Active member
My work place has just gone through so much change in past 18 months of pandemic. Bosses, leader, peers, subordinates...just complete churn. And, it is not like that business is doing bad or the culture is bad. My employer is kind of sought after name in the medical device industry and we do not have hard time attracting good talent.

I feel that we might not be alone in these turbulence. Curious what has been your experience?
 
Like everywhere else, my work place has also gone through a lot of changes. We had the work from home phase from mid March to end of May last year. At the end of May, we started returning to work, 25% at a time and two weeks per shift, due to 14 day inoculation period. Basically, we had teams A, B, C, and D. Team A goes to office for 2 weeks, then team B goes in for 2 weeks, etc. This lasted for about two months, at which point we started 50%, basically teams A+B for 2 weeks, then teams C+D for 2 weeks. This arrangement lasted for a whole year, until July 1st of this year, when we all returned to office. I remember the first day we all came back and it felt a little crowded and overwhelming.

But I would say that the culture and work atmosphere didn't really change. We're a semiconductor company so we're kind of used to flexibility and sudden changes.
 
We have a mix of wfh and on site.  Some of the wfh folks, especially younger workers, have minimal value.  Not entirely their fault.  Can you imagine graduating from college and trying to get OJT while sitting in front of a computer at home by yourself?  And then again, some I think find WFH makes it much easier to slack off.  I don't like WFH for extended periods so I'm on site hammering out the widgets.
 
daedalus said:
We have a mix of wfh and on site.  Some of the wfh folks, especially younger workers, have minimal value.  Not entirely their fault.  Can you imagine graduating from college and trying to get OJT while sitting in front of a computer at home by yourself?  And then again, some I think find WFH makes it much easier to slack off.  I don't like WFH for extended periods so I'm on site hammering out the widgets.
I think it's okay to not like WFH and have thoughts around it. But to say "younger" workers have minimal value with no reasoning behind it is quite harsh. To think workers need to be physically at work to work is quite a ignorant statement. We are all adults. Everyone should know what their responsibilities are and if they do not, that can be addressed separately and generally is bad management tbh. If one decides to "slack" off, it's not because of WFH. It's the individual.
 
sleepy5136 said:
I think it's okay to not like WFH and have thoughts around it. But to say "younger" workers have minimal value with no reasoning behind it is quite harsh. To think workers need to be physically at work to work is quite a ignorant statement. We are all adults. Everyone should know what their responsibilities are and if they do not, that can be addressed separately and generally is bad management tbh. If one decides to "slack" off, it's not because of WFH. It's the individual.
Who says I don't have any reasoning behind it?  I talk to the people who assign them the work they're supposed to do.    There's clearly a higher incidence of "wfh malaise" with younger people than with older people.  Not being online, not returning calls, not responding to emails, just plain MIA, etc.  Maybe the older slackers have already washed out and the younger ones haven't had a chance to be shown the door yet?  Note that I said "some", and yes, it's the individual...but as I said WFH makes it easier to slack off vs. being in the office where folks can stop by and see what you're doing on a regular basis. 
 
daedalus said:
sleepy5136 said:
I think it's okay to not like WFH and have thoughts around it. But to say "younger" workers have minimal value with no reasoning behind it is quite harsh. To think workers need to be physically at work to work is quite a ignorant statement. We are all adults. Everyone should know what their responsibilities are and if they do not, that can be addressed separately and generally is bad management tbh. If one decides to "slack" off, it's not because of WFH. It's the individual.
Who says I don't have any reasoning behind it?  I talk to the people who assign them the work they're supposed to do.    There's clearly a higher incidence of "wfh malaise" with younger people than with older people.  Not being online, not returning calls, not responding to emails, just plain MIA, etc.  Maybe the older slackers have already washed out and the younger ones haven't had a chance to be shown the door yet?  Note that I said "some", and yes, it's the individual...but as I said WFH makes it easier to slack off vs. being in the office where folks can stop by and see what you're doing on a regular basis.
I?m not sure about your company, but there were a ton of layoffs during COVID. I would think it?s not old people that got impacted but rather a mix. So if like you said they were slacking, they would have been impacted by the layoffs. So that already contradicts one of your points. And you literally contradicted yourself towards the end of your statement by saying it?s the individual despite starting off your response as the issue is more so for ?younger? workers.

Also, what?s your definition of slacking off? I sure hope it?s not because I?m not immediately responding to slack messages. Because I got work to do and the last thing I want to see is a micromanager calling me to distract my progress. I?m sorry, but I would be VERY shocked if people do not get back to you or never reply to your emails. That is not common for any age group. It could well be that expectations were not set and that is on management. I?ve worked with both old and young folks. What you?re saying is complete ludicrous and quite frankly you sound like an annoying micromanager that needs some training. People have their reasonings for not being online or not respond. It?s generally because they are wired in or they mute notifications because they need to WORK.

Great leaders trust their employees and not second guess them unless events occurred that impacted their deliveries. Not being able to ?watch? your employees tells me a lot on how you operate at work. It?s quite scary actually and is one of the contributors of the great resignation that?s happening as we speak.
 
personally, i frequently fail to return calls or respond to emails and my malaise levels are definitely elevated.

idk if i qualify as a "younger worker" any more though. 
 
sleepy5136 said:
I?m not sure about your company, but there were a ton of layoffs during COVID. I would think it?s not old people that got impacted but rather a mix. So if like you said they were slacking, they would have been impacted by the layoffs. So that already contradicts one of your points. And you literally contradicted yourself towards the end of your statement by saying it?s the individual despite starting off your response as the issue is more so for ?younger? workers.

Also, what?s your definition of slacking off? I sure hope it?s not because I?m not immediately responding to slack messages. Because I got work to do and the last thing I want to see is a micromanager calling me to distract my progress. I?m sorry, but I would be VERY shocked if people do not get back to you or never reply to your emails. That is not common for any age group. It could well be that expectations were not set and that is on management. I?ve worked with both old and young folks. What you?re saying is complete ludicrous and quite frankly you sound like an annoying micromanager that needs some training. People have their reasonings for not being online or not respond. It?s generally because they are wired in or they mute notifications because they need to WORK.

Great leaders trust their employees and not second guess them unless events occurred that impacted their deliveries. Not being able to ?watch? your employees tells me a lot on how you operate at work. It?s quite scary actually and is one of the contributors of the great resignation that?s happening as we speak.

Where did I contradict myself?  Everyone is an individual, and a higher % of younger individuals are "out to lunch" way more than the % of older folks.  I'm not micromanaging.  I'm not managing anyone at all; not my job.  We have core hours where everyone is expected to be at work, wherever that may be (a very clear expectation).  MS Teams shows everyone's status.  If someone's job involves being at their computer all day and they're "away" for hours at a time frequently, don't answer their phone or respond to IMs or emails, then yeah, they're  not working (i.e., slacking).  That is the behavior of some individuals as relayed to me by their leads, who I'm friends with, and for the most part, they're fairly young.  The leads are truly frustrated.  My personal observations are that I have found it consistently harder to get a hold of some people more than others, and yes, most have under 5 years experience.  Aside from wfh, the younger people on my on-site team just put in the bare minimum hours.  In at 9, gone by 5.  At least an hour lunch.  Always stopping work and calling in a tech to do things for them.  There's just no sense of urgency.  The rest of us just bang it out and we stay late if the job requires it.  And don't even get me started on which age group tends to spend a lot more time staring at their phones when they're "working" on site. 

We have not had a layoff in a long time, certainly not during COVID.  Lots of work.  I put in >70 hours this week.  Work needs to get done, so some of us step up and put in the hours. 
 
daedalus said:
sleepy5136 said:
I?m not sure about your company, but there were a ton of layoffs during COVID. I would think it?s not old people that got impacted but rather a mix. So if like you said they were slacking, they would have been impacted by the layoffs. So that already contradicts one of your points. And you literally contradicted yourself towards the end of your statement by saying it?s the individual despite starting off your response as the issue is more so for ?younger? workers.

Also, what?s your definition of slacking off? I sure hope it?s not because I?m not immediately responding to slack messages. Because I got work to do and the last thing I want to see is a micromanager calling me to distract my progress. I?m sorry, but I would be VERY shocked if people do not get back to you or never reply to your emails. That is not common for any age group. It could well be that expectations were not set and that is on management. I?ve worked with both old and young folks. What you?re saying is complete ludicrous and quite frankly you sound like an annoying micromanager that needs some training. People have their reasonings for not being online or not respond. It?s generally because they are wired in or they mute notifications because they need to WORK.

Great leaders trust their employees and not second guess them unless events occurred that impacted their deliveries. Not being able to ?watch? your employees tells me a lot on how you operate at work. It?s quite scary actually and is one of the contributors of the great resignation that?s happening as we speak.

Where did I contradict myself?  Everyone is an individual, and a higher % of younger individuals are "out to lunch" way more than the % of older folks.  I'm not micromanaging.  I'm not managing anyone at all; not my job.  We have core hours where everyone is expected to be at work, wherever that may be (a very clear expectation).  MS Teams shows everyone's status.  If someone's job involves being at their computer all day and they're "away" for hours at a time frequently, don't answer their phone or respond to IMs or emails, then yeah, they're  not working (i.e., slacking).  That is the behavior of some individuals as relayed to me by their leads, who I'm friends with, and for the most part, they're fairly young.  The leads are truly frustrated.  My personal observations are that I have found it consistently harder to get a hold of some people more than others, and yes, most have under 5 years experience.  Aside from wfh, the younger people on my on-site team just put in the bare minimum hours.  In at 9, gone by 5.  At least an hour lunch.  Always stopping work and calling in a tech to do things for them.  There's just no sense of urgency.  The rest of us just bang it out and we stay late if the job requires it.  And don't even get me started on which age group tends to spend a lot more time staring at their phones when they're "working" on site. 

We have not had a layoff in a long time, certainly not during COVID.  Lots of work.  I put in >70 hours this week.  Work needs to get done, so some of us step up and put in the hours.
we can agree to disagree.

1. Going out to lunch is not a younger or older folks type of thing. Everyone should be eating lunch.
2. working smart > working hard. Working 70+ hrs does not mean anything. A lot of it has to do with poor planning unless you're in the tax or an industry that requires to work OT.
3. Working 40 hrs also doesn't mean one is "slacking". You get paid to work 40 hr weeks. You work more, that is on you my friend. Maybe ask your company to compensate for your extra hours? Maybe ask for a raise? Don't try to act as if working more than 40 is the norm. This is coming from someone that has worked OT before but I definitely do not make that the norm. Nor do I push that on my reports for it to be the norm either.
4. Working long hours is not healthy for your body and also your mental health. If you choose not to care about your well being, that is also on you. Don't try to drag others into your workaholic life style.
5. Please don't use your own social circle to generalize "younger" workers working habits. Your social circle, is your social circle. It does not depict the entire society. If you would like to make this type of statement, show me data points and facts to support your ignorant statement. Last time I checked, WFH has caused way more burnout than ever before. Your little social circle seems to not be the norm unfortunately.


WFH Burnout Articles: https://www.today.com/health/working-home-wearing-you-out-do-avoid-burnout-t183426https://hbr.org/2021/01/help-your-team-beat-wfh-burnouthttps://www.themuse.com/advice/work-from-home-burnout-coronavirus-pandemic

Do I need to post more? Oh wait, are these articles now referring to teams that have "older" and not "younger" folks? (sarcasm)
 
For someone who's not sure about my workplace, you seem pretty sure about my workplace.  Please, do post more. 
 
3. Working 40 hrs also doesn't mean one is "slacking". You get paid to work 40 hr weeks. You work more, that is on you my friend. Maybe ask your company to compensate for your extra hours? Maybe ask for a raise? Don't try to act as if working more than 40 is the norm. This is coming from someone that has worked OT before but I definitely do not make that the norm. Nor do I push that on my reports for it to be the norm either.

Major nit, if you are a salaried employee, you are not paid for 40 hours, you are paid to complete a professional job not working 40 hours.  Or 60 hours, or 20 hours.

Under law they cannot be paid less than the minimum wage for the hours worked.
 
daedalus said:
For someone who's not sure about my workplace, you seem pretty sure about my workplace.  Please, do post more.
I am very confident that you using your little tiny social circle to generalize an entire generational working group is ignorant. That's all my point is really. And hearing all your stupid micromanagement comments is quite hilarious.
 
Always with the name calling and attempts at belittling. A marker for the generation.  Eyephone has a compatriot. ;D ;D >:D
 
sleepy5136 said:
2. working smart > working hard. Working 70+ hrs does not mean anything. A lot of it has to do with poor planning unless you're in the tax or an industry that requires to work OT.
3. Working 40 hrs also doesn't mean one is "slacking". You get paid to work 40 hr weeks. You work more, that is on you my friend. Maybe ask your company to compensate for your extra hours? Maybe ask for a raise? Don't try to act as if working more than 40 is the norm. This is coming from someone that has worked OT before but I definitely do not make that the norm. Nor do I push that on my reports for it to be the norm either.
4. Working long hours is not healthy for your body and also your mental health. If you choose not to care about your well being, that is also on you. Don't try to drag others into your workaholic life style.
5. Please don't use your own social circle to generalize "younger" workers working habits. Your social circle, is your social circle. It does not depict the entire society. If you would like to make this type of statement, show me data points and facts to support your ignorant statement. Last time I checked, WFH has caused way more burnout than ever before. Your little social circle seems to not be the norm unfortunately.
There will be a point later on in one's career where the working smarter > working hard doesn't apply, because you'll be working smart the entirety of the time (and not due to 'poor' planning)

Because I got work to do and the last thing I want to see is a micromanager calling me to distract my progress.
And at some point, it's not just a micromanager, it could be c-level executives, still won't pick up the call? 
 
I see both sides of this.

I actually think monitoring software is good for remote workers it the expectation is for them to be at their stations during X hours of the day.

But if the job is more of a performance based position, then quality/quantity of work will have to be the litmus.

Upper management always touts the benefit of collaboration but doesn't require to be in-office 8 hours a day, 5 days a week... and with all the video/chat tools, that can be done remotely just as well.

Covid did force some dynamics though... for years, people have wanted to work remote and there were always excuses as to why it was not possible, but then when the pandemic made it somehow possible... coming back raised a lot whys and well... resignations.

But let's be honest... everyone wants to WFH, but not everyone can actually work well from home.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
I see both sides of this.

I actually think monitoring software is good for remote workers it the expectation is for them to be at their stations during X hours of the day.

But if the job is more of a performance based position, then quality/quantity of work will have to be the litmus.

Upper management always touts the benefit of collaboration but doesn't require to be in-office 8 hours a day, 5 days a week... and with all the video/chat tools, that can be done remotely just as well.

Covid did force some dynamics though... for years, people have wanted to work remote and there were always excuses as to why it was not possible, but then when the pandemic made it somehow possible... coming back raised a lot whys and well... resignations.

But let's be honest... everyone wants to WFH, but not everyone can actually work well from home.
That is definitely true. And this type of claim is not targeted towards an age group. I?ve seen ?slackers? in all age groups and when daedalus started targeting a specific age group as being the main culprit with no data points what so ever, that becomes the issue.
 
daedalus said:
OK millennial.  Just calling it like I see it.  Maybe grow some thicker skin.

It's interesting to me how Baby Boomers were criticized heavily by their elders - for instance, being blamed for losing the Vietnam War, along with the sex and drug excesses of the hippie movement - yet now they are repeating the same pattern by coming down hard on their own kids.

Whatever happened to, like, peace, and make love not war, man?  You were supposed to have expanded your mind using LSD and marijuana, but somehow became a close-minded generation of scolds (at least some did).
 
Back
Top