Yahoo Responds to Work-From-Home Outcry

huffingtonpost.com

1 point·drone··3 comments

Yahoo has significant issues recruiting prime talent and I don't see how this makes things better in that regard.

If there are unproductive employees within Yahoo, the onus should be on their managers to find and address the issue. Merely forcing butts in the seats from 9 to 5 doesn't give you any additional information about who is productive and who isn't.

It's unfortunate because I want Yahoo to succeed, but I see this as a negative move from the standpoint of finding and retaining great people. Mayer will get a fair opportunity to try her ideas out, but everything about this move seems very backwards and small-minded.

It does make me wonder about the comments that people have made in that the effort was designed to "shed dead weight," I really don't see why those people couldn't be directly relieved of their duties?

I'm not against companies having a preference for work-in-the-office (I prefer doing it myself), but it seems awfully dramatic vs. slowly reducing the number of people working from home.

"If there are unproductive employees within Yahoo, the onus should be on their managers to find and address the issue."

But that would be a management decision by the same people who decided to get all their butts in chairs from 9 to 5. There are no out of band managers, they're stuck with who they have.

Unless someone fired those managers. But that would be the CEO, and there are no out of band CEOs, they're stuck with her.

Unless someone fired her, and I guess their board is good at that at least.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com