Inviting employees back to the office – if you dare
functionize.com
functionize.com
Worked from home for a few years in the old days but wasn't really disciplined to be very productive. Now I am.
There are things that face to face meetings are more efficient at, some don't.
I really hope companies would adopt more WFH friendly attitude.
I really think HN is just super introverted or many were stuck in some toxic office culture.
I've always liked my coworkers in the various places I worked and being in their physical presence at work is a pro for me, not a liability.
Once stuff returns to normal I'm going to get a gym membership. lol.
Meaning: if my boss would tell me "come back to work at the office" and I would reply "nah, I'm scared that I might get infected" but then my boss would basically in/directly force me to, wouldn't my boss/company become responsible/accountable for me getting ill (if I and maybe some of my colleagues would then get ill)?
I admit that it might then become a quite complex situation (e.g. demonstrate through tracing that the spread occurred inthe office, what were the consequences, etc...), but probably a boss/company should think twice about pushing its employees to go back to the office, or not?
So get back to work and die for the Man!
[1] https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-07-29/covid-empl... [2] https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s4317/BILLS-116s4317is.pd...
This is one of those grey zones I was thinking of => if the boss/employer wouldn't have a valid reason not to allow its employees to work remotely (e.g. because s/he doesn't trust them and therefore wants to supervise them personally), such a "push" could be considered irresponsible?
As far as remote work, if the company has any remote employees in any position similar to yours, they will have an extremely difficult time justifying in person being a job requirement.
https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/enforcement-guidance-reas...
https://www.businessinsider.com/gop-liability-protection-pro...
a) the employer was not following any guidelines for coronavirus
b) exposure was caused by gross negligence or willful misconduct
c) the plaintiff suffered actual harm from the exposure to coronavirus.
I added emphasis on any--in the event of conflicting guidelines, the employer needs only follow one of them. So if any jurisdiction in the chain says "it's a-ok to pack your employees without masks!", there's no liability for the employee if they follow that, even if the locality says "wear masks! social distance!"
While I don't know the details of occupational health and safety laws, I have to imagine there's a general-purpose "unsafe working conditions" action that can be brought even in the absence of specific regulations (I don't readily see one in the US code, but I'd expect at least some states would go that far). This would preclude such suits under pretty much any situation; in particular, you have to actually be exposed to coronavirus and can't merely show that the environment is unsafe.
The other issue is that if someone comes to work sick with any infectious disease, liability would get shifted to the employer, which means that would give the employer a right to impose policies that could be draconian. For example, why wouldn’t an employer have a right to inspect your home. They suspected you weren’t engaging in good cleaning practices? After all, since liability would be on the employer if you showed up to work and got people sick (even if asymptomatic,) then they’d have a duty to supervise you 24/7. Or how about an employer firing you for attending a protest, or not wearing a mask outside of work? If there is potentially tens of millions in liability at stake, an employer would have to monitor employees 24/7, perhaps even employing private contractors tracers to keep tabs on people in order to ensure infections didn’t originate in the workplace. A plaintiff’s attorney can be a powerful force. “Don’t use hairdryers in the shower” is a good example of the impact of plaintiff’s attorneys against common sense.
Morale is low because it feels outright unethical when highly WFH-able offices are reopening while other businesses are still hemorrhaging money due to being forcibly closed. A community has a fixed transmission risk budget if it wants to keep the virus subdued and that allowable risk should be allocated on need, not based on first come first served.
Every time I think, well would be nice to go back into the office, I think about all the wasted time just getting to one and I am disabused of the notion rather quickly.
Also, it's a lot easier for me to finish what I'm doing before answering a chat than it is to finish what I'm doing and answer someone standing next to me. Although I'm known for putting a finger up in the air at them and making them wait.
Sure, we get asked if we 'have any symptoms', have our temperatures are taken at the front desk, and we're required to wear a mask going in/out of the building...but other than that, it's business as usual.
The office my wife works in, they won't let anyone come back. They can work from home, which is fine-but she's tired of being cooped up. She had to sneak in on a weekend to get some devices for testing.
They are considering opening back up in the fall, and would be requiring everyone to wear a mask the entire time they are in the building.
We're going out to eat in restaurants again, we're all still going grocery shopping (where I've never see anyone cleaning anything), malls are open, so what's the big deal with going back to work?
You're exposing yourself to those places for very brief periods of time. Why should I equate feeling safe walking into a building with open doors and windows for less than 20 minutes, to sitting in a closed office with HVAC running all day for 8+ hours?
Moreso, why should I feel obligated to go back to the office because your wife is tired of being cooped up?
I'm fine with clingy extroverts going to the office if they need to socialize that badly. I'd rather not be demanded to make a return just because.
But shouldn't it be a 3 foot radius? Or about 28 square feet.
Because if everyone had a 6 foot radius people would be separated by 12 feet.
Running into a store for 10 minutes is very different from spending 8 hours in an enclosed space.
Where I am (Bay Area), restaurants are outdoor only.
Last I was there I picked up all my things so I don't even have any designated physical space there anymore, and I love it.