Overemployed Working Remotely? Get Ready To Return To Office | The Real Reason Companies Hate WFH
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 มิ.ย. 2024
- In this video I talk about overemployment and why I think it's one of the largest factors in a company's decision to ask employees back to the office.
Resources:
www.pressreader.com/usa/democ...
www.vaco.com/blog/overemploym...
TOC:
Introduction: 00:00
Reasons why companies want employees back : 00:22
Overemployment : 01:52
Changing Work Dynamics: 04:08
Overemployment Ethics: 05:27
Where is the line: 05:35
Conclusion: 07:33 - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
TOC:
Introduction: 00:00
Reasons why companies want employees back : 00:22
Overemployment : 01:52
Changing Work Dynamics: 04:08
Overemployment Ethics: 05:27
Where is the line: 05:35
Conclusion: 07:33
CEOs: Overemployment in unethical!
CEO's linkedin profile:
CEO
Board Member in 3 other companies
Runs own business
Also running for local office
I was just straight up with my manager and told him I was getting into OE. He said as long as my 2nd job doesn't impact my productivity he doesn't care.
Shortly afterwards I was promoted.
I feel like 37% is way too high. I'd imagine some people have contracts on the side but I doubt that many are doing a second full time W2
Short term over-employment is useful as a defense against misrepresented jobs. Once you find out which one is the best, dump the other after a month or two.
This is a really interesting perspective, and I think there is generally a lot of anxiety jumping into a new job without _really_ knowing whether it's right and the desire to be able to do trial runs of jobs without committing.
its all about the paycheck for me
As long as it's done in a way that's not a war on rural America. All I ask is that the company acknowledge that I live 150 miles from a major city and won't relocate.
I still think WFH is here to stay. I know plenty of executives that would never want to revert. In addition, the newer generation will be expecting this type of work relationship.
Great ideas
It's about control
if companies don't like WFH, who is it that enforced a return to office, is it the workers themselves or their managers ? Likely it is the latter, not the former. Who predominantly does the work that is required to make the things that do the things that make the company work, likely, the former, not the latter. So whichever way you cut it, its all about control or a sense of control. What is making it all worse are workers that work out they don't need to do much work at all and WFH can make that even more easy to (un)achieve leaving those that live by the work ethic to pick up the slack. I've not found many jobs in my time I could do more than one of them as the one is already enough. Devops and SRE is already demanding enough, if a job doesn't utilise me enough, I would need to question myself as to why that is and potentially move on to something that does.
Yes, any time that I've felt under utilized I've mostly just used it as motivation to move to a different company where I am actually being fully utilized.
lack of work was the main reason for me
I think you enter an agreement with the company when you accept a salary position. If the agreement said when you get the day's assigned work done, you are done for the day then you have the legal right to get another job. Otherwise, you do not have that right.
I think suggesting the abuses by CEO as justification for overemployment is just a red herring. The two topics have nothing to do with each other. The employment contracts between a salaried employee looks nothing like that of a CEO. Maybe they should, but the don't.
Thanks for the feedback I appreciate it! I've never seen an employment agreement grant any kind of leniency for doing other stuff after getting your work done. As far as the company is concerned, there's always more work to be done, otherwise why keep you hired.
I'd like to see the employee-employer relationship shift to a new paradigm where employment is more flexible and looks a little more like a freelancer model (as an option for the employee). And maybe companies could adjust pay rates accordingly or dynamically when the backlog of work is low. I'm not sure exactly what it would look like.
@@tech_with_mossInteresting...
Let's say the employer-employee contract allowed for employee more flexibility, and as a result, employees could work for more than one company. Who decides how many companies, which pays your benefits, etc.? Who decides if there is a conflict of interest? Who decides which of multiple projects from multiple companies has the highest priority? What protects company secrets? Who owns the fights to intelectual property? It just seems to open a whole new can of worms.
Why not just go freelance?
I hope you're not a lawyer. It's not illegal to have multiple jobs.
@@napoland9676 I'm no lawyer. LOL!
I have worked with people who are "over employed". In mostly all cases we had to pick up the slak from them because they weren't doing their job as they should have.
The argument for the CEO isn't really a good one. Yes, in most cases the CEO doesn't deserve that kind of money, but please don't work on 2-3-4 places at once if you can't do your job correctly. You ******* your colleges not the company.
That's a really good point I didn't consider. The impact the overemployed have on their colleagues.. If there is work to be done that other members of the team are having to pickup because someone is collecting two full-time paychecks, that doesn't feel right at all.
The successful overemployed wouldnt know they are overemployed. Like myself, I get praise and payrises and tell nobody. The fact you know if someone is overemployed is the sign of an amateur. Some over employed will just take on anything and get fired and move on to the next one. Some of us still take pride in our work and would not let their team down or put themselves in a position to become fired.
Overemployment takes jobs from others seeking work.