A Fifth of Telecommuters Work Less Than An Hour Per Day 323
MrCrassic writes "Working at home isn't vacation...or is it?" Quoting an article in The Register: "Almost one in five Americans who work from home only clock in for an hour or less a day, according to a survey, while a third stay in their pyjamas. Forty per cent of telecommuters say they work between four and seven hours, 17 per cent are doing the bare minimum and just 35 per cent are working eight or more hours, the CareerBuilder survey of 5,299 people revealed. ... Stay-at-home workers also said getting dressed for the day was far too strenuous: 41 per cent of women and 22 per cent of men — a third in total — stayed in their PJs."
So? (Score:5, Insightful)
How would it be any different if those employees were in the office? I'd bet they'd still only work one hour a day. And heck, if they are being given work that only takes an hour to complete (as opposed to not doing all the work they've been given) then more power to them. They can spend more time with their families and not waste time and gas commuting or being in the office.
This kind of reminds me of the study that found only a small percentage of soldiers actually fired their weapons at the enemy during combat.
So, 75% work comparably to office workers? (Score:5, Insightful)
From what I've seen, office workers are really working 4-7 hrs mostly, too.
So 75% of people work at home like they work in the office. Seems like telecommuting can be made to work well enough if you do productivity monitoring.
And heck, if you can do 8 hours of work at home in 2 hours, why not get 8 hours of pay! The key is productivity.
--PM
Re:But How Many $$? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:2, Insightful)
People like you that work two shifts are responsible for half of the high unemployment, the other half is the absence of decent working regulations that makes that type of ridiculously long shift illegal.
You can't produce quality code at 80hr a week in a sustainable way. The only type of code that can be produce at that constant rhythm with a reasonable level of quality, would be the kind of code best left to a generator.
Re:So? (Score:0, Insightful)
People like you that work two shifts are responsible for half of the high unemployment, the other half is the absence of decent working regulations that makes that type of ridiculously long shift illegal.
So you expect him to drop down you your dismal level of productivity so that some slacker can get food/shelter? It's called survival of the fittest and it's served us well for millions of years, it is WHY YOU EXIST AT ALL. If you have issue with it, build a company and pay people for the hours you want them to work - otherwise shut the fuck up, your OPINION does not matter slacker.
You can't produce quality code at 80hr a week in a sustainable way. The only type of code that can be produce at that constant rhythm with a reasonable level of quality, would be the kind of code best left to a generator.
YOU can't produce code at that rate, nor can most college-accredited CS dipshits - it doesn't mean everyone is so pathetic as to be gauged by, and to follow for life, a system geared for the lowest common denominator. You are why there aren't jobs for everyone, why scientific progress has virtually ceased in favor of grabbing the low hanging fruit, and why we as a species on this Earth are degenerating at a rapid pace - stop coddling the meek and encouraging them to reproduce in both genetic and metaphysical philosophical contexts, let them die as they deserve you sick, demented, piece of shit.
One hour a day? I wish! (Score:5, Insightful)
Disclaimer: I AM telecommuting today and I AM reading Slashdot right now...
Seriously, though - what's with the "getting dressed for the day was far too strenuous" tripe? I wear sweats or shorts when I work from home - so what? What's wrong with being comfortable?
I suppose they'd also complain that people like me are sitting on the couch rather than on a hard wooden chair. Also, I have a window open and am enjoying the breeze - maybe I should relocate into a closet instead.
This "study" is garbage. At the end of the day I'll give my boss a list of what I worked on today - just like I do every time I work from home. He's happy with my performance, and recognizes I can focus on longer-term tasks much better when I don't have the near-constant interruptions of the office environment. I just wish I knew who commissioned that study - should I ever leave my current job, I don't want to bother applying to that old geezer.
Not exactly shocking (Score:4, Insightful)
As far as I can tell, it's extremely rare for senior management to have any idea what the actual staff do, or especially what value they bring to the company. As far as most senior management know, their employees primarily produce warm chair seats. It follows that the only differences between employees in any job category is:
1) How many hours the seat stays warm, and
2) How much it costs to keep the chair warm.
Thus, the principal employee quality metric is hours/dollar because most employees keep chairs at nearly the same temperature. Longer hours are good, and it's an added bonus to not have to pay for the chairs. An employee who works from home is presumably keeping a chair warm even more than one who comes to the office, so the best possible employee is one who will accept a low wage (typically entry-level in someplace like Nigeria; the chair-warming learning curve isn't terribly steep) and who answers e-mails at all hours of the day, night, and weekend.
Re:So? (Score:4, Insightful)
You can thank the Bush Administration for taking most of the teeth out of the Fair Labor Standards Act. I read the whole thing cover-to-cover about 5 years ago, there were decent protections for those of us in computer-related fields. Once Bush's changes went into full effect, our HR department wasted no time in rolling out changes to attendance/tardy policies, destroying vacation rules and taking away vacation time. I resent the HELL out of being told I have to be on call every third week, answer the phone 24x7x365 if it's my specific area of expertise, then I'm told if I'm 5 minutes late I'll be written up. 10 years and I never had hard-coded office hours. I used to do a job, not warm a seat. They get less out of me now, even though I'm in the office more.
Re:But How Many $$? (Score:4, Insightful)
Uh, smart companies should be doing their best to limit both as much as possible. The office is for work, socializing and relaxing should be done on your own time.
For manufacturing-line work? Sure thing, though even there breaks are mandatory (and have been found to help total day productivity). For creative work? No, sorry. You need space to let your subconscious chew on ideas, and you need to discuss ideas with others.
In short, if you're consists of such repetitive tasks that you'll get more done by never relaxing or socializing, you'll be replaced by automation soon enough.
The wrong way to measure employees. (Score:5, Insightful)
Measuring employees clocking in and out is an archaic way of managing. It was something developed in the Industrial Revolution where employees were near slaves. Measure work done, and its quality, set tasks accordingly, set deadlines accordingly, require set times for meetings etc, but that's all you need to do.
Secondly, fire all HR staff. Yes, ALL of them. They are a worthless cost center that kills productivity and quality. Small businesses do not have HR staff, they tend to hire better quality employees. They tend to manage employees better. With the technology currently available there is absolutely no reason whatsoever that supervisors and managers can't actually do real managing, and take care of anything and everything that HR does -- and do a much better job of it too. The only purpose of HR now, is for weak managers to use them as a CYA excuse. But HR does nothing else but cost money and kill quality, productivity and innovation. HR is probably the single biggest fail, and brake, on the world's economy.
Nobody EVER grows up wanting to work in HR. They have all failed at something else, most of them also have an huge chip on their shoulder. They are failed people. Fire ALL of them everywhere, and watch the economy grow, if not surge.
There's no reason why most people need to work in offices most of the time. Anything desk or phone based could be done at home. Considering the massive cost to the environment of all those cars going to business parks, city centers and the like, and the increasing personal cost to employees of fuel etc, It's also often quieter and easier to work at home, with less distractions. Open plan offices are hellish places in which to concentrate. Telecommuting is an excellent solution to a lot of business problems. Not to mention that your business may well get access to much better quality employees who live too far away to work for you in person.
Other than bad management, and bad economics, there's no reason why telecommuting isn't massively more prevalent in modern businesses and organizations. It's the future... if only HR would allow organizations to hire good enough managers to make it happen.
Re:So? (Score:2, Insightful)
So the people like him (and myself) who are willing to work our asses off to better our lives by working more than one job and/or freelancing a lot, we're the problem? Yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and say "fuck you" on that one, buddy.
If more people were willing to take risks and work hard, we wouldn't have the unemployment we do because people would be out there creating jobs instead of sitting on their asses waiting for a check to be handed to them. And just because you're happy with a mediocre existence, doesn't mean you get to foist that lazy attitude on everyone else.