Liberal Forum

RebelGator » Today, 1:31 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 1:31 pm

If you can work from home, you're a non-essential employee and needs to be ****-canned.

You eat **** out of a can.

RebelGator » Today, 1:31 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 1:31 pm

If you can work from home, you're a non-essential employee and needs to be ****-canned.

**** chat bots co about as well as mom answering when you call tech support.
You can hear little kids playing in the background and your call (her job) is a mere annoying distraction.

Whether it be a home security call, computer support, on-line purchase, etc. They all suck.
Sometimes we poor civilians just want a quick simple answer.
People that work from home aren't pressed to have a decent output or decent attitude.
Some do but many do not.

Vegas » Today, 12:51 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 12:51 pm

I don't think that is the point I made. My point is that the Bommer generation can't adapt to the up-and-coming workforce. The boomers will be gone soon. They don't have the pull they once had. The new ones are coming and are already here. The tech has allowed them more options, so they are now able to tell the boomers to go pound sand with their demands. They no longer have to slave away to make a handful of people billionaires, while they get crumbs. Tech is good. It's a new era for everything and I am excited about it.

Tech isn't always that good.

btw
There will ALWAYS be people at the top and people feeding on the crumbs.
**** tech won't change that part of human nature.

Deezer Shoove » 19 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

19 minutes ago

Tech isn't always that good.

btw
There will ALWAYS be people at the top and people feeding on the crumbs.
**** tech won't change that part of human nature.

Human nature isn't the same thing as naturally human. Behavior cradle to grave is human nature. Being an ancestor alive as naturally human since conceived regardless which reality one is in cradle to grave.

31stArrival » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

7 minutes ago

Human nature isn't the same thing as naturally human. Behavior cradle to grave is human nature. Being an ancestor alive as naturally human since conceived regardless which reality one is in cradle to grave.

Jeez I wish someone or something would shut your babbling **** **** spewing *** up!

murdock » 3 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

3 minutes ago

Jeez I wish someone or something would shut your babbling **** **** spewing *** up!

and I keep explaining why you wish that while I am being civil showing where your reality corrupted your ancestry throughout history so you can correct it forward daily.

31stArrival » 27 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

27 minutes ago

and I keep explaining why you wish that while I am being civil showing where your reality corrupted your ancestry throughout history so you can correct it forward daily.

your civic minded responses show you want no part of honesty going forward staying in character matters most.

Choke on a corrupted horse cock as it impales your *** daily in plain sight while Biden eats pizza off your next closest relatives ****** down in Texas with Mexican hot sauce on the border by the sea.

Vegas » Today, 2:57 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 2:57 pm

Great job on missing the point. The point is that the labor landscape is changing. The whole go -to statement "well, if you don't like it, then go somewhere else" doesn't have the potency it once did. Due to the tech advancements, workers are doing their own ****. The CEOs will need to come up with some other go-to statement.

The LANDSCAPE is only going to change when the ones writing the PAYCHECK let's it change!! PERIOD!!

The WORKERS don't make the rules, the OWNERS OF THE BUSINESS DOES!! For every ASSHAT that thinks they can change the rules by DEMANDING IT, there are 20 in line for a JOB no matter what it requires.

People can wish in one hand and **** in the other and guess which hand fills fastest!! The one where wishing they could "work like they want to" is going to be DAMN EMPTY when an EMPLOYER said, YOU WILL work in the building!!

THATS the only POINT that matters.

31stArrival » 57 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

57 minutes ago

and I keep explaining why you wish that while I am being civil showing where your reality corrupted your ancestry throughout history so you can correct it forward daily.

your civic minded responses show you want no part of honesty going forward staying in character matters most.

**** you, die ****.

Fuelman » Today, 1:37 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 1:37 pm

AbstractWe study employee productivity before and during the working-from-home period of the COVID-19 pandemic, using personnel and analytics data from over 10,000 skilled professionals at an Indian technology company. Hours worked increased, output declined slightly, and productivity fell 8%–19%. We then analyze determinants of productivity changes. An important source is higher communication costs. Time spent on coordination activities and meetings increased, while uninterrupted work hours shrank considerably. Employees networked with fewer individuals and business units inside and outside the firm and had fewer one-to-one meetings with supervisors. The findings suggest key issues for firms in implementing remote work.

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/f ... 086/721803

The share holders demand ya get yer lazy *** up and go to work, 8-19% productivity loss is not an option!

Identifying the problem is half way to solving it. There might be a third way.

Based on your copy-paste, it seems to me that they have identified what is NOT working about work-from-home. What IS working about work from home still IS working. Things like higher employee moral and satisfaction, lower turnover costs - which SHOULD be taken into consideration as an OFFSET against those lower productivity numbers, by the way. So, if employers are in possession of the data around what does and doesn't work regarding remote employees, it is possible that employers can take steps to mitigate against the problems while still maintaining the benefits they derive from remote employees.

I mean, Idunno - I can't drop the fries in the fat-vat from home. So Skippy (my manager) says I can't be a remote employee. I don't have a dog in the fight. I'm DAMN sure not gonna finally make Fry Captain by getting under Skip's skin. I'm just saying, it seems to me that the conclusion that should be drawn from the information you shared is not NECESSARILY that work-from-home doesn't work. It could be there need to be two office days - not five. Or it could be they can stay on full remote, but with operative practices and cultural changes that address what isn't working - what is dropping productivity. 
 
 

31stArrival » Today, 6:14 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 6:14 pm

Human nature isn't the same thing as naturally human. Behavior cradle to grave is human nature. Being an ancestor alive as naturally human since conceived regardless which reality one is in cradle to grave.

There's only one reality.
Perception is what's different with each person.

Vegas » Yesterday, 1:46 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 1:46 pm

Is not an option for who? It seems like it's not an option for the CEOs and billionaires. Oh well. That's their problem. The point I am making is that whole "go somewhere else if you don't like it" go-to response doesn't apply much anymore. The reason is because since the tech is becoming more advanced, the younger workers are beginning to understand how to use it in their favor in that they can build their own businesses. It's not widespread now, but it has begun. In about ten years, the CEOs and billionaires will need to come up with another go-to statement.

A) not everyone is owner material...AAMOF, very few are...
B) when companies are busy, employees have the upper hand...
C) when companies aren't busy, companies have the upper hand...
D) boomers are an integral part of a business, they bring experience, wisdom and work ethic and as the workforce goes younger, those 3 points diminish to the outliers ...
E) neither employer nor employees are loyal to the other anymore compared to 40 or 50 yrs ago...
 

DeezerShoove » Yesterday, 5:06 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 5:06 pm

**** chat bots work about as well as mom answering when you call tech support.
You can hear little kids playing in the background and your call (her job) is a mere annoying distraction.

Whether it be a home security call, computer support, on-line purchase, etc. They all suck.
Sometimes we poor civilians just want a quick simple answer.
People that work from home aren't pressed to have a decent output or decent attitude.
Some do but many do not.

I tell people I would make a lousy at home worker..."LOOK! SQUIRREL!!!" and the next thing I know I'd find myself out in the garage working on something non-work related...

Deezer Shoove » Yesterday, 10:34 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 10:34 pm

There's only one reality.
Perception is what's different with each person.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha Only one reality. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Ok, there is but one actual time surviving happens in series parallel time individuals exist at the same time. NOW.
Personally surviving at the same time the survival of the species is only happeing here, in this atmosphere through genetic compounding chromosomes adapting in plain sight of observing everything else outside their own position of ancestry so far.

You cannot excape it, alive since conceived leaving any reproduciton at the mercy of everytingelse inhabiting space so far.

mercy is civility, not civic minded mantras "We are better than you, yours, them, they, those, theirs combined.".

Vegas » Yesterday, 12:51 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 12:51 pm

I don't think that is the point I made. My point is that the Bommer generation can't adapt to the up-and-coming workforce. The boomers will be gone soon. They don't have the pull they once had. The new ones are coming and are already here. The tech has allowed them more options, so they are now able to tell the boomers to go pound sand with their demands. They no longer have to slave away to make a handful of people billionaires, while they get crumbs. Tech is good. It's a new era for everything and I am excited about it.

I think Jamie Dimon is looking at it from a completely different perspective... Currently, with a HUGE percent of the workforce working from home, millions of office buildings are sitting empty, with leases and notes coming due soon (office building don't usually have a firm/fixed interest rate, & change over time)... So, millions of those buildings are sitting empty, are not paying for themselves, and will start to be going delinquent soon (some already have)... Owners will walk away from them, leave the banks holding the property, & the resulting economic shock is what I think Dimon is worried about... LOTS of banks stand a high chance of going under, because of the losses... and that financial calamity could WELL cause a nation wide financial crisis !

Just MY opinion....

ROG62 » Today, 1:23 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 1:23 am

I tell people I would make a lousy at home worker..."LOOK! SQUIRREL!!!" and the next thing I know I'd find myself out in the garage working on something non-work related...

Exactly. While freedom to do the stuff around the house, maybe running errands, no drive to work everyday, etc. all seems great, I have been in both situations. Like a lot of people, I've seem the workplace degrade, productivity become a lesser priority, reliability go to ****, etc.

Then, to cap it off, try getting a "supervisor" (or someone that actually knows what they're doing) involved in the problem. Good **** luck.

btw
I love being put on hold because baby's diaper is full.

Cannonpointer » Yesterday, 10:18 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 10:18 pm

Identifying the problem is half way to solving it. There might be a third way.

Based on your copy-paste, it seems to me that they have identified what is NOT working about work-from-home. What IS working about work from home still IS working. Things like higher employee moral and satisfaction, lower turnover costs - which SHOULD be taken into consideration as an OFFSET against those lower productivity numbers, by the way. So, if employers are in possession of the data around what does and doesn't work regarding remote employees, it is possible that employers can take steps to mitigate against the problems while still maintaining the benefits they derive from remote employees.

I mean, Idunno - I can't drop the fries in the fat-vat from home. So Skippy (my manager) says I can't be a remote employee. I don't have a dog in the fight. I'm DAMN sure not gonna finally make Fry Captain by getting under Skip's skin. I'm just saying, it seems to me that the conclusion that should be drawn from the information you shared is not NECESSARILY that work-from-home doesn't work. It could be there need to be two office days - not five. Or it could be they can stay on full remote, but with operative practices and cultural changes that address what isn't working - what is dropping productivity.

There surely are CEO's that might work with employees to come to an arrangement on WFH. It appears Jamie Dimon has had about enough of that **** and other financial services companies are following suit. With 300,000 employees world wide, Dimon isn't taking any crap from malcontents. 

I can't imagine having a cubicle job, I would have ate lead long ago or gone postal!

 

ConservativeWave » Today, 8:15 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 8:15 am

I think Jamie Dimon is looking at it from a completely different perspective... Currently, with a HUGE percent of the workforce working from home, millions of office buildings are sitting empty, with leases and notes coming due soon (office buildings don't usually have a firm/fixed interest rate, & they change over time)... So, millions of those buildings are sitting empty, are not paying for themselves, and will start to be going delinquent soon (some already have)... Owners will walk away from them, leave the banks holding the property, & the resulting economic shock is what I think Dimon is worried about... LOTS of banks stand a high chance of going under, because of the losses... and that financial calamity could WELL cause a nation wide financial crisis !  However, it may already be too late... BUT, I think Dimon see's this incentive to get workers BACK into office buildings as a "last chance" to avert the economic crisis he sees coming...

Just MY opinion....

  **** the banks and owners of those properties.
They didn't read the writing on the wall.
Now they're crying.

 And if there's a bank crisis you know who gets the blame. Not Biden.
 
 Bank crisis,rising inflation,rising gasoline and grocery costs. Rising construction costs.
Some cuts in Social Security Medicaid and Medicare.
 
Maybe a war or 2 tossed in.
Get some Americans killed for nothing.

Spend a bunch needlessly on Gaza.

This TCA term is shaping up to be the worst ever of any president's. 
Going to be fun to watch.
He may not even last a full term.


By the time it's over the republican party will be a thing of the past.

 I really am liking how things are going.
 

Vegas » Yesterday, 12:25 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 12:25 pm

The working landscape is changing. The ones calling for in person workers are usually the boomers. The up-and-coming workers, Gen Z and Millennials, couldn't are less about making other people billionaires while slaving away for them. Gen x? Well...I don't know. We didn't have a choice. However, the younger gens have more options and possibilities now. Tech has advanced enough to the point where they can start their own business enterprises and do whatever they want. The Boomers can't adapt. They demand and demand and demand...Well tough ****. **** slaving away to make a handful of people billions. That's their problem. 

JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon demands workers return to office in foul-mouthed phone call

So, are you for workers returning to the work place?  Or not?  Or, why do you even care.Most boomers are retired anyway. 
 

Fuelman » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

11 minutes ago

There surely are CEO's that might work with employees to come to an arrangement on WFH. It appears Jamie Dimon has had about enough of that **** and other financial services companies are following suit. With 300,000 employees world wide, Dimon isn't taking any crap from malcontents. 

I can't imagine having a cubicle job, I would have ate lead long ago or gone postal!

I always wanted to work for Dunder Mifflin.