Musk For PM

[the other bob wilson]

It's intresting to read the comments of those who have been fortunate to have a job where they can chose to work from home or go into ones office perhaps we should consider not everyone gets that luxury and many manual workers apply a wonderful attitude to working day In and out in factories, hospitals, vehicles etc , wonder if there's any analysis to see which part of our workforce has the better lifestyle and mental strength and better work performances ???

Should the fact that some can’t work from home mean that those who can should be stopped from doing so? As for the question you ask at the end, it’d be very hard to come up with “base” values which would satisfy everyone that such comparisons were valid.

This matter is quite straightforward to me, the desire to cut back on or cease home working is driven very much by the Tory party and their media lackeys and at the heart of it seems to be mistrust of those who work from home based on their opinion that they won’t work as hard. I must admit that there will be some cases where they’d be right as well, but I’ve mentioned a few times on here that one of the trade offs for working from home I had to make was I had to accept a ten per cent increase in my annual targets and I think they’d be surprised at how many in target related jobs would be able to attain that if given the opportunity of home working.

[JamesWales]

Should the fact that some can’t work from home mean that those who can should be stopped from doing so? As for the question you ask at the end, it’d be very hard to come up with “base” values which would satisfy everyone that such comparisons were valid.

This matter is quite straightforward to me, the desire to cut back on or cease home working is driven very much by the Tory party and their media lackeys and at the heart of it seems to be mistrust of those who work from home based on their opinion that they won’t work as hard. I must admit that there will be some cases where they’d be right as well, but I’ve mentioned a few times on here that one of the trade offs for working from home I had to make was I had to accept a ten per cent increase in my annual targets and I think they’d be surprised at how many in target related jobs would be able to attain that if given the opportunity of home working.

I don't think anyone should be actively prevented, more discouraged. I've said all along, it's not a few days at home thats the issue (in my opinion), but the scenario of people wholly working from home and never engaging, developing personal interactions etc. I think long term that is very bad for people, particularly earlier on in their career - indeed, I'd say it's actually completely unfair on those entering the workforce to be denied the access to more senior members of staff. There definitely are examples of some people doing very little too, which they wouldnt have gotten away with before - only a minority but still. In fact, I think some are working harder to compensate.

Nonetheless, as with most things, we have our individual responsibilities and our collective ones. If WFH does drive up inequalities, then thats a bad thing, right? It's easy to see how it does. In our office we would have people from all backgrounds, some from salubrious homes in Llandaff, some from shared student houses - all were treated equally in the office. Now the generally wealthier, generally more senior staff are less often in (if at all in some cases) in their nicer homes and spending money in their local area - less mixing, less engagement, less cross-fertilisation of different sections of society.

It's bad news, and sowing the seeds for a hell of a lot of future problems I'm telling ya!

Anyway Bob, even if you personally like it, does it not cause you some concerns if that action does help to drive up inequalities within society?

[the other bob wilson]

I don't think anyone should be actively prevented, more discouraged. I've said all along, it's not a few days at home thats the issue (in my opinion), but the scenario of people wholly working from home and never engaging, developing personal interactions etc. I think long term that is very bad for people, particularly earlier on in their career - indeed, I'd say it's actually completely unfair on those entering the workforce to be denied the access to more senior members of staff. There definitely are examples of some people doing very little too, which they wouldnt have gotten away with before - only a minority but still. In fact, I think some are working harder to compensate.

Nonetheless, as with most things, we have our individual responsibilities and our collective ones. If WFH does drive up inequalities, then thats a bad thing, right? It's easy to see how it does. In our office we would have people from all backgrounds, some from salubrious homes in Llandaff, some from shared student houses - all were treated equally in the office. Now the generally wealthier, generally more senior staff are less often in (if at all in some cases) in their nicer homes and spending money in their local area - less mixing, less engagement, less cross-fertilisation of different sections of society.

It's bad news, and sowing the seeds for a hell of a lot of future problems I'm telling ya!

Anyway Bob, even if you personally like it, does it not cause you some concerns if that action does help to drive up inequalities within society?

Others have remarked on your habit of thinking that just because you say something you believe it to be an absolute truth that trumps what anyone else may think - it’s not like that in real life you know, no one is right all of the time and you’re making a lot of assumptions there.

You only have to look at who is coming out against working from home to see it’s become politicised as the usual subjects try to start another of their culture wars. Working from home, shouldn’t be seen as a political matter when it can often be something that can benefit employer and employee alike. It doesn’t work for everybody, but in my case, it was mutually beneficial and I know that the vast majority of staff at my old office work more from home now than in the office with management and employees both happy for the situation to continue (or they were a year or so ago at least before the likes of Rees-Mogg started making it an issue). In my case, I think I had the best of both worlds because I was required to come into the office for one and a half days a week and I found my time in work to be more enjoyable than when I was there full time.

[JamesWales]

Others have remarked on your habit of thinking that just because you say something you believe it to be an absolute truth that trumps what anyone else may think - it’s not like that in real life you know, no one is right all of the time and you’re making a lot of assumptions there.

You only have to look at who is coming out against working from home to see it’s become politicised as the usual subjects try to start another of their culture wars. Working from home, shouldn’t be seen as a political matter when it can often be something that can benefit employer and employee alike. It doesn’t work for everybody, but in my case, it was mutually beneficial and I know that the vast majority of staff at my old office work more from home now than in the office with management and employees both happy for the situation to continue (or they were a year or so ago at least before the likes of Rees-Mogg started making it an issue). In my case, I think I had the best of both worlds because I was required to come into the office for one and a half days a week and I found my time in work to be more enjoyable than when I was there full time.

A good morning to you too! I do think thats a somewhat unfair ad-hominem at the start there, and somewhat ironic for you to accuse others of politicising it, when it's you thats doing that.

No, my point is to try and find that balance - I don't think 5 days in an office for all iss necessary, but I think 5 days in isolation is also damaging, particularly in the long term.

My question wasn't unfair, I was just asking that whilst it may suit you, do you recognise there is a point when we have to make sacrifices for the common good? ie, even if it works for you, but some damaging outcomes do emerge, should you make a sacrifice to improve that scenario? I mean in terms of training up and socialising younger staff, making sure there is an outlet for conversations to aid mental health, ensuring staff are not lonely, protecting those who may have less appropriate home lives than you. Surely there are things when society is better for people mixing and sharing experiences as opposed to all sitting alone at home?

I have a friend I am currently extremely worried about (he has no interest in CCFC so wont be on here) and his office recently shut. He is very lonely and it's a major contributory factor to a very severe mental health decline.

This stuff is really important.

[the other bob wilson]

A good morning to you too! I do think thats a somewhat unfair ad-hominem at the start there, and somewhat ironic for you to accuse others of politicising it, when it's you thats doing that.

No, my point is to try and find that balance - I don't think 5 days in an office for all iss necessary, but I think 5 days in isolation is also damaging, particularly in the long term.

My question wasn't unfair, I was just asking that whilst it may suit you, do you recognise there is a point when we have to make sacrifices for the common good? ie, even if it works for you, but some damaging outcomes do emerge, should you make a sacrifice to improve that scenario? I mean in terms of training up and socialising younger staff, making sure there is an outlet for conversations to aid mental health, ensuring staff are not lonely, protecting those who may have less appropriate home lives than you. Surely there are things when society is better for people mixing and sharing experiences as opposed to all sitting alone at home?

I have a friend I am currently extremely worried about (he has no interest in CCFC so wont be on here) and his office recently shut. He is very lonely and it's a major contributory factor to a very severe mental health decline.

This stuff is really important.

Well, I mentioned that I came into work one and a half days a week. This was in pre Zoom days, so I suppose it’s possible to never go into your workplace at all these days, but I wouldn’t have wanted that because I agree that you need something more in terms of human interaction. I don’t agree with how you you appear to conclude that it’s not for “the common good” to work from home though because what must be a relatively small number of people surely of those who do it may suffer mental health problems.

If I was in charge of a company that incorporated working from home, I’d insist that all of those who did so should come into work one day a week and I’d try and make it so that everyone was in on the same day - that should help on the social side of things although I’d be expecting a bit more from staff when they were at home to cover for the fact that not much would get done on the day when everyone was in!

[JamesWales]

Well, I mentioned that I came into work one and a half days a week. This was in pre Zoom days, so I suppose it’s possible to never go into your workplace at all these days, but I wouldn’t have wanted that because I agree that you need something more in terms of human interaction. I don’t agree with how you you appear to conclude that it’s not for “the common good” to work from home though because what must be a relatively small number of people surely of those who do it may suffer mental health problems.

If I was in charge of a company that incorporated working from home, I’d insist that all of those who did so should come into work one day a week and I’d try and make it so that everyone was in on the same day - that should help on the social side of things although I’d be expecting a bit more from staff when they were at home to cover for the fact that not much would get done on the day when everyone was in!

As is often the case, but is lost in this form of communication (another reason I am very fond of face-to-face communication), we are probably more in agreement than it first appears.