Best Buy Follows Yahoo in Banning Remote Work 317
bednarz writes "Is telecommuting the new scapegoat for poor performance? Best Buy, in the midst of a corporate restructuring, has canceled its flexible work program and expects corporate employees to put in traditional 40-hour work weeks at the retailer's headquarters (they used to be able to work whenever and wherever they wanted). The announcement comes on the heels of Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer's decision to end telecommuting, which ignited a firestorm of criticism. It also follows news of Best Buy's plans to lay off 400 corporate workers as part of a plan to cut $725 million in costs and restructure its business. This could signal the beginning of a trend, or be an indication that telecommuters need to actively justify their preference for working outside the office."
Re:Terrible move by a dying entity (Score:5, Interesting)
It's just a way to lay people off without having to pay severance.
wondering aloud... (Score:4, Interesting)
I just wonder if any agreements were made with employees at either Yahoo or BB that they would be allowed to do a certain amount of their work remotely.
Again.. it goes back to the current American belief that it's okay for a corporation to break their word or contract with an individual but absolutely wrong when it's vice versa...
What firestorm (Score:3, Interesting)
Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer's decision to end telecommuting, which ignited a firestorm of criticism.
There was no firestorm, just whining from unproductive Yahoo employees and media parasites.
Perhaps they didn't get the memo, but Google (which is what Yahoo wishes it was, and is where every Yahoo employee wishes he/she was working at) doesn't allow telecommuting either. Marissa was just putting in place policies that worked for Google.
Re:Terrible move by a dying entity (Score:5, Interesting)
There is no need for evidence, it's pretty obvious that if you tell your employees who live 1,000 miles away to either come into the office or quit, a good number of those will quit.
To the contrary, what is the evidence that remote employees perform worse than local? Why do we need more office space and people commuting generating pollution and congestion on our roads?
What industry do you work in and what occupation? I'm sure certain fields are more workable remote than others.
The problem with having it be a "justifiable accommodation for an especially good performer" is that everyone thinks that they are good performers and everyone will think they deserve it. It's either all or nothing.
OT: /. drives traffic to corporate sister site (Score:5, Interesting)
Should Slashdot include a disclaimer when linking to a corporate sister?
In case you don't know, Slashdot is owned by Dice Holdings (see the bottom left of the page you are reading), which also owns this link from the front page story:
http://news.dice.com/2013/03/05/yahoos-telecommuting-policy-could-find-fanboy-ceos/ [dice.com]
Re:Terrible move by a dying entity (Score:5, Interesting)
It used to work out well for me. My kids were in daycare, which ran from 8:30am (not a minute before), until 5pm (punctual pick up). So I delivered them in the morning, put in most of a day's work before picking them up in the afternoon, then put in some more time in the evening after they were in bed. Meanwhile my wife could work a regular office job where she was expected to be in the office 8:30pm - 5pm, with a 45 minute commute on top of that.
Re:Terrible move by a dying entity (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know what labor laws you have in California or Minneapolis, but changes in the terms of your employment that require you to relocate are usually legally treated as a layoff if you chose not to take up the relocation.
Re:Terrible move by a dying entity (Score:5, Interesting)
Any management that tries these techniques needs to be fired by the shareholders immediately. The people who leave voluntarily when pushed by these types of harassment are always the most valuable ones, who funnily enough find it easy to get a job elsewhere. The ones you're left with are the ones who are pulling you down in the first place (along with the management team, who are obviously deficient if they think reducing headcount is all that matters in saving their ass).
It bears a name: it's called Dead Sea effect [brucefwebster.com].
After a while, you know for sure which employees you don't want to have: the ones that are still with you... So the best you can do: fire them and close the business.
Re:Terrible move by a dying entity (Score:5, Interesting)
But now that they will be forced to work at their HQ, no user will ever complain anymore!
Yeah, the shock change in the corporate culture as thousands of telecommuters either relocate, lose their job, or suddenly start seeing people in real life that they'd largely only interacted with online will surely not have any significant impact on business process.
Reminds me of another company I worked at where an executive declared that 2/3rds of all IT must be outsourced, and then fled for "unspecified personal reasons" from their position nine months later. Meanwhile, the IT infrastructure fell down around everyone's heads, and the replacement workers, having been suddenly thrust into positions without any knowledge transfer or documentation by the previous crew, struggled to reinvent the wheel to disasterous effect.
Whenever you see an executive make a bold and unseasonable move in the company that promises to have far-reaching implications, and there isn't a clear and unambiguous reason for it beyond "I read it in a trade mag!" or "everyone else is doing it!" I have one word for you: Run. Run fast. Run very fast. Run like you're in Pompeii on volcano day, because baby, shit's about to get hot and explosive in short order and you don't wanna be one of the screaming villagers on fire n shit when it happens.