AT&T Calls Telecommuters Back To the Cubicle 393
bednarz writes "AT&T is requiring thousands of employees who work from their homes to return to traditional office environments, sources say. 'It is a serious effort to reel in the telework people,' says the Telework Coalition's Chuck Wilsker, who has heard that as many as 10,000 or 12,000 full-time teleworkers may be affected. One AT&T employee says rumors have been circulating since AT&T's merger with SBC that the new upper management is not supportive of teleworking: 'We'd heard rumors to that effect, and all of a sudden we got marching orders to go back to an office.'"
Shadow Layoff? (Score:5, Insightful)
The reality is that, in the current business environment, it is better for your career to be mildly competent but in plain sight that extremely competent but hidden at home.
I hope they all quit! (Score:3, Insightful)
Are they telecommuting over the Internet? (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally... (Score:5, Insightful)
Barring that, how about writing up an article and trying to get it into the New York Times (and other large papers) asking the question: Why is AT&T supporting pollution by requiring 10,000 employees to begin commuting to an office once again? Does AT&T _not_ support a green initiative and want to cut down on its carbon footprint in this world? Does AT&T _not_ support cutting down on vehicle emissions by using the very effective telecommute for work? What does AT&T have against saving the planet?
With the wide variety of people focused on green initiatives, carbon footprinting, greenhouse gases, and trying to save the planet surely some bad press thrown AT&T's way making it look bad on the global stage for, basically, FORCING 10,000+ people to begin commuting to work again after years of working from home... Well, even monopolistic giants can be pimp-slapped in the press. Sometimes.
AT&T - Your world. Delivered. To the NSA.
Re:I hope they all quit! (Score:5, Insightful)
AT&T can't reasonably afford to lay off 10K workers. Thats very expensive.
They know that many of their telecommuting workers have built their lives around telecommuting, meaning they just simply can't start going to work. Many of them might not even have reliable transportation. AT&T knows that of the 12K workers they are telling to come back to work possibly half may just quit. AT&T would love this.
Re:Shadow Layoff? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I hope they all quit! (Score:3, Insightful)
With the notable exception of the research labs.
Re:I hope they all quit! (Score:5, Insightful)
impact (Score:5, Insightful)
Something tells me that the delays in commuting, lost productivity from sick days (most telecommuters work while sick), parking/transportation woes, decreased morale and higher turnover, ATT will slowly report that things probably aren't so bad when a % of workers telecommute.
In fact, I fully expect to see telecommuting plans as a normal part of government recommendations for business during times of terrorism, epidemic or natural disaster. PUtting it bluntly, SBC simply doesn't know where the world is going.
beware of "reconcilling" (Score:5, Insightful)
Translation: out of the three companies which are merging, let's pick the policy that takes the most away from the employees.
Telecommute = Outsourced (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Shadow Layoff? (Score:5, Insightful)
Every firm would be well served to do 100% telecommuting for a period of time, forcing them to re-evaluate how they judge the contributions of their team.
The sad reality is that many shops judge contribution simply by sacrifice and hours, and lots of face time presence, using that as a surrogate for any meaningful metrics at all. This is the root reason why most shops despise telecommuting, and why it's often a negative career step for a worker to undertake: Telecommute and you have to do double, triple, or more what your coworkers are doing to get the same respect, whereas showing up early each day and staying late is often a blanket immunity from any sort of real responsibilities or deliverables.
With rising energy costs, shops will have to start to become accustomed to telecommuting. As others have said, it's particularly hilarious that a company that is a foundational facilitator of telecommuting is the one going against the trend to decentralize.
Re:Shadow Layoff? (Score:5, Insightful)
With rising energy costs, shops will have to start to become accustomed to telecommuting. As others have said, it's particularly hilarious that a company that is a foundational facilitator of telecommuting is the one going against the trend to decentralize.
Re:I hope they all quit! (Score:4, Insightful)
I think that's what the company is trying to accomplish.
Re:Telecommute = Outsourced (Score:5, Insightful)
Please don't take this the wrong way (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't have anything against you personally, but that question makes me want to slap you.
Re:Oh No! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:impact (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Shadow Layoff? (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree.
As a person who receives the phone call when the VPN isn't working, BB isn't communicating, or something else that they need to work from home, I will attest that when you let people work at home they will work all the time and more than they should without proper pay.
I've been tempted to tell people, "Its 6pm on a holiday... Don't you have a family or something. Sheesh! Do you want to call the server admin who is probaly eating with his family right now and tell him to drive into the office to reboot a fax server who no one is using except you? I mean... Your not even the CEO, a VP, a manager, or even their assistant! Is this really going to cause a loss of money to the buisiness? By doing this do you think you'll get a raise? Or even a pat on the back? This is why I have high blood pressure!"
But I don't say it. Anyways...
I've met plenty of people who work great from home and all the damn time. In fact I wish they would work less so I could spent more time not having to work in the office, but that is just me.
It really depends on if the job requires constant supervising, but over all when you work from home you end up at your job 24/7 unlike me who goes home and turns off my phone for the weekend and doesn't check his email (which is why I won't work a telecommuting job).
The ATT suits have it wrong here. If they want to grind as much productivity out of willing slaves, they just need to hand everyone a laptop, blackberry, a Verizon card, and tell them they are working from home from here on with salary as their pay (not hourly) and no sick time and no vacation (hey you are already at home) and there is no esxcuse for having the deadline missed because you have been at work the entire time.
Which is why I will never work from home. Hopefully I didn't give any CEOs some ideas here.
Re:eating your own dogfood? (Score:5, Insightful)
A big part of the problem isn't _just_ that employees aren't as effective (and let's be honest here, it does take discipline), but that there is a management culture that considers presence as being a very important determiner of effectiveness. Management culture which isn't ready for this sort of change is going to be especially poor at judging how (or if) it works.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that the employees are just as (or more) effective telecommuting than not:
Managing takes skill, and managing a telecommuting workforce takes different skills. I would argue that it also takes more skill, because you have to get a lot of old notions out of your head, and you have to understand work differently than the management mindset of 20 years ago. If your managers aren't willing to embrace that, they're also probably a lot more likely to assume the worst of you despite what effective output you have, because you know as well as I do that in some work environments, effectiveness is measured poorly by people who think that a passing familiarity with Excel and Powerpoint is more than enough to whip up some statistics, usually getting the basic assumptions wrong.
That doesn't make management right in this case, but it does mean that there's a lot of corporate inertia to get beyond. Think of the companies who have really led the charge here - software, marketing for print and television, design work. The larger and less creative an organization is, the more inertia there is to get past when it comes to embracing a different way of understanding the work environment...
To telecommute or not to telecommute (Score:4, Insightful)
The honest truth is that only the foolish ones work 40+ hour weeks. If you're smart, you've positioned yourself so that you only do about 15 hours of work but everybody thinks you work 60+ hours (emails sent during nights and weekends help with this illusion). Telecommuting helps you hide this fact although you still need to be in the office on occassion for socializing and general schmoozing. Out of sight is out of mind and we don't want that come bonus and promotion time. And quite honestly, I don't see it as a badge of honor to work my ass off for my company. I want to enjoy life, not slave for someone else's bonus. The sad irony of this little scenario is that the higher up you advance, the less you generally work. I say this as an engineer who recently moved into marketing and who is right this very moment "working from home." I'm actually about to go for a nice bike ride but I'll first send a few emails asking for schedules from the software group. The software guys will give me a date and I'll forward this to the customer. They will go back to work while I will arrange a nice trip to California where we'll go out and party, talk a little business, and generally make all of our strategic decisions in a bar somewhere in San Francisco.
If you are an engineer with any sort of social skills, get the hell out of engineering and go into sales/marketing. Your technical talents will make you a god, you will decide what projects to do, and you will have a life other than coding and WoW. And if the above didn't convince you, I will just say two words: Marketing Chicks!
It's your life. Don't waste it.
Re:Oh No! (Score:3, Insightful)
ATT/SBC needs to develop a taste for their own dog food, or start making a better product.
Re:Better than telecommuting. (Score:3, Insightful)
And somehow you seem serious. Holodeck technology is predicated on having essentially infinite energy -- so much so that after you've solved the power source for warp engines, and then invented transporter technology, you have enough left over to create the holosystems because it's just a special case of those technologies and the power source you already have.
It requires Heisenberg compensators to overcome sub-quantum issues, photonic and holographic technologies beyond what we've even conceived of, isolinear processors (whatever the hell they are), and CPU and processing capacities we can't even really conceive of. In short, all of the foundational technology in the Star Trek universe. That whole ability to create matter from energy and back again incredibly, astronomically, and absurdly expensive.
So, yes, if we had practically infinite cheap, clean energy, then we would have enough left over so that we could eliminate the waste of fossil fuels used in commutes.
I don't mean to dis you here, but why does proposing non-existent sci-fi technology count as actually addressing the problems faced by telecommuters and the company who wants to stop them? It's like saying if we had "Mr Fusion" devices, we could solve the problem of crappy rechargeable batteries -- it's kinda accurate, but it's so far removed from the actual problem as to be not very helpful. Proposing it is almost bordering on the absurd.
Cheers
Re:Personally... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:eating your own dogfood? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Oh No! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Shadow Layoff? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention the company saves money on buildings, cubicles (which are NOT cheap), electric, etc. If a worker has actual work to do it's pretty easy to measure their progress. Either the work gets done or it doesn't. If they're just doing "busy work" then it won't matter if they're doing it here or there...it still won't add up to production.
As a former telecommuter (not with the phone company), I found the concept worked very well as I came in the office twice a week. I sat at a "hotelling" station, my phone transferred back to home (I was supplied with an ISDN line for internet/network access and a phone capable of parking my phone number so where ever I was, my work number would reach me.) I could plan to meet around the days I'd be in to assist co-workers, so I wasn't being pulled away every 5 minutes. Also, my commute was around 60 miles roundtrip, so it saved a lot of gas + wear and tear on the car.
In this day and age with our technology and with the traffic congestion of the big cities, it makes no sense to force everyone to drive into a central location when it's not needed. How many people use chat and email to communicate with co-workers even when they're both in the same office? It's probably pretty rare that you actually need to meet face-to-face, so why not just use the same tools at home?
One problem I did find out (I was part of a pilot program) is that upper management can take you for granted--or that they don't really need you--out of sight, out of mind. If your boss or yourself isn't proactive to make sure they are aware of your contributions, you risk being on the cutting block the next time layoffs come around.
Re:Shadow Layoff? (Score:3, Insightful)
"This is true. Managers tend to overlook those who telecommute full time, even if they do a great job."
Moral of the story - Don't buy that new laptop. Spend the money on $50 shirts instead. They'll pay for themselves with your next pay increase.
Seriously, if you're in tech, and you're in the office, you have to learn to play office politics. When everyone else is doing "nerd casual" (t shirts, blue jeans, runners) go for the nice threads - you'll be noticed and respected. Look at what your boss is wearing - and go half a step up.
Not only will you get more respect, but when you argue that a feature/deadline/whatever is unreasonable, they're more likely to listen. That alone is worth spending the bux, just to save on your own health/wear and tear/peace of mind.
Re:upper management control freaks (Score:3, Insightful)
Our servers have nothing to do with it. The banks are closed Thursday, and open Friday, so on Friday we have to be here and the work we receive in and have to process will be twice normal, which cancels out the holiday the day before.
Developers and managers don't have to concern themselves with the actual production work. They can take the day off. But operations always has to operate. That's why this is the last job I will ever take in operations.
Re:Shadow Layoff? (Score:5, Insightful)
As for "IT conform to the 'non-conformist hippy' bit because they have self-esteem problems", that's laughable. I know it's hard to believe, but there is a geek culture, and there are certain ways that we geeks dress, as with every culture. Looking like a sales person does very little to help your career in IT. Personally when I'm hiring (as I'm a geek in a high position; that scares you doesn't it) I dock people if they show up in a suite and tie; I assume they are trying too hard to cover up some lack of skills.
Here is another thing that may surprise you, most "geeks" have no interest in becoming managers, sales people, or executives. This kind of work isn't a good fit for them, and wouldn't make them happy. Just as reading technical documentation and focusing on complex problems without human interaction for 10 hours a day wouldn't be a good fit for a CEO. Geeks don't aspire to be the slick sales person or the football star, as much as those type people would love to think they do.
They say you should dress for the job you want, not the job you have. I completely agree, thus why I dress like a "non-conformist hippy". I'm sure people like you would love to fire me, but then who would run your world for you?
Re:Shadow Layoff? (Score:1, Insightful)
Don't you realize that lots of perfectly good geeks will (reluctantly) dig out a collar and tie just for an interview because they assume there may be a PHB involved who just won't hire them otherwise? A better method is to dock them if they look comfortable in a collar and tie...