|
|
|
|
|
|
by thejazzman
990 days ago
|
|
|
I sympathize with your frustration, but if your goal is quicker communication, then the employee should be given notice of this issue and subsequently let go from the company if they refuse to comply What if they ignore you in the office? Is that behavior OK there because they at least showed up? I mean this sounds like either a terrible employee (not working or not capable of working), terrible manager (not communicating expectations), or a scape goat excuse because someone wants RTO Humans also tend to be more sympathetic when they remember they're working with another human. Maybe the issue here is that someone is lacking sympathy when they don't see the other human |
|
|
If you enforce RTO, in the worst case, the employee will be pissed and will quit, leading to the same situation as if you fired him (except that it's less risky, less costly, less damageable for the reputation, ...) (the employee can also try to sabotage their work, giving you a better position to fire them smoothly).
Do you also realize that firing someone and the whole process to re-hire someone else is a big waste of time? Why would you do that if you can avoid it?
Also, my illustration is a fixed scenario. I'm talking about a dev who can work relatively efficiently when working at the office, and cannot when remote but don't understand why. It is not about an employee who will "ignore you in the office" (why the hell would they do that, they've never done that before) or "refuse to comply" (they were explained the situation, but they were truly unconvinced by it, which means they did not really change not by insubordination, but because they were not really capable of changing).
So, you talking about "terrible manager" is irrelevant. Terrible managers exist, I've said so earlier. Here, I'm giving a real life reality where it is not the management, it is not a scape goat, it is just people who truly try to make things work.
And maybe they are wrong and there is a better solution. But that's not the point. My point is that someone said "I know it is X". Maybe it is X. But I've observe several devs saying "I know it is X" and I have he proofs that they were wrong.
So, naturally, I ask: I'm ready to believe you, but there is no way for me to know if you are right or wrong, so can you give me element more objective than just "I know it is X", for example an analysis that is smart enough to acknowledge that maybe RTO is sometimes coming from a truly honest desire to make things better.