Already a member?
Welcome to Brazen Careerist!
Holly Hoffman is using Brazen Careerist to share ideas. Join now to become a member and start networking with Holly Hoffman and other professionals just like you. Learn more.
Holly Hoffman is using Brazen Careerist to share ideas. Join now to become a member and start networking with Holly Hoffman and other professionals just like you. Learn more.
Sean,
I respect your opinion as well. And trust me, I'm far from an idealist. I understand where employee distrust comes from and why it continues to be an issue.
I'm not trying to hate either. Just pointing out what frustrates younger workers. Would you enjoy your job if you were distrusted?
Also, I feel like I need to explain myself more. I made an assumption in my previous comment. I assumed that there was no reason for the distrust. That it was just, as you put it, unearned yet.
If there is a legitimate, concrete reason for lack of trust, that's another story. I agree with you there.
@ Ryan: I understand your point, and believe me, I wish I could agree with you. I wish I could assume professionalism and trustworthiness everytime I make a hire. But as a supervisor with a telework-friendly company (two people on my team telework full-time and three telework four days per week; I telework myself three days per week) I believe strongly that my real-world experience trumps your idealism.
I hate to be a pessimist, but I've come to learn that trust must be earned. In fact, your own post exemplifies my point: you want to be trusted blindly and to have your professionalism be assumed, but look again at what happens when GenY feels distrusted: "they’re likely to hate their job a whole lot more and only try as hard as it takes to not have to put up with crap from their superiors." No mention of introspection regarding the reasons for the distrust; no discussion of collaboration or communication to unearth any problems and rectify them. Just hatred and avoidance.
That doesn't strike me as a very professional or trustworthy attitude, to be honest.
Trust is what shakes a breaks limbs of corporations. This cat and mouse game of "we can't trust them" - "they do not trust us" leads to stolen staplers, copy paper, broken windows, even lieing on time cards. Time cards have value although look were we use them the most. WIth manufacturing jobs - fast food places the jobs of people who are generally not VP or upper management. Yes upper management has earned to not punch a clock although theya are the face of trust and responsibility in the organization. If they show up late and leave early - this sets the trend.
Sean,
No. I think when someone is employed, it is understood that you're hiring a professional -- somebody that you can count on to get the job done.
If it's proven that the employee can't meet their expectations then sure, trust needs to be earned or they need to get the boot.
That's the problem I see with some managers. It's not all about the employee earning their keep. It's about the manager respecting and trusting the employee from the get-go.
If companies want to recruit and retain young people, they'll learn this.
@Ian
If the work is getting done, and you have extra time on your hands, as a supervisor, I would be looking to find you more work to do to fill your eight hours with.
In most cases it is much easier to do this if you are physically in the office.
Exceeding set performance goals - i.e. doing eight hours worth of work in four hours - should accrue to the benefit of your employer during work hours so they can assign you more to fill the other four hours with. It should not be perceived as permission to do whatever you want.
One of the biggest problems I see in the working world is the issue of trust. If an employee doesn't feel trusted, they're likely to hate their job a whole lot more and only try as hard as it takes to not have to put up with crap from their superiors.
On the other hand, if they're shown that they can be trusted, they're more likely to go above and beyond the call of duty.
Sure they're always be a few bad eggs who take advantage, but isn't that the case in any system?
@ Ryan: in both your scenarios, the onus is on the employer to demonstrate trust. Don't you agree that it's the employee's responsibility to demonstrate trustworthiness first?
I used to have to clock in, and I found it rather intrusive, too. However, the advantage is that if you get in early and there's no one there to see you're there early, then having time sheets or a time clock proves it.
Companies have clock in clock out systems to ensure that their employees are accountable for their time.
It is not unreasonable for companies to put systems in place which ensure that the eight hours they pay you for every day you are working. It also ensures that you are not pursuing any other ventures during the time they are paying you to work for them.
I think many in corporate America are wary of remote work because it can be and is abused by some workers.
Some businesses also need people to be physically available. Other businesses, depending upon they type of work, can account for people's time remotely - i.e. call center work.
As you mentioned, if you have a job where you physically have to be somewhere (meetings, clients, whatever), yes, I understand a punch clock.
However, a punch clock doesn't always ensure productivity. For instance, I used to have an employee that had an 8AM shift. He would waltz in at 8 sharp, swipe his punch card and head over to the cafeteria to have breakfast for about 10-15mins. This was a call center, so I had to explain that if his shift starts at 8, he needs to be on the phone at 8 because clients are calling.
Unless you're in that type of job/environment, I see no reason to track someone's time/hours as long as the work is getting done. I've said it before: We have to be very careful of marrying time and value.
@ Jerry: my company actually fully embraces the "new work reality," assuming you're talking about supporting telework arrangements and things like that. But where we stop short--where I agree we should stop short--is blindly trusting every worker to telework simply because they think they can.
I'm not talking about asking our new hires to slave away on meaningless work for years before throwing them a wireless laptop and a VPN connection. What I'm talking about is getting to know you--your capabilities; your response to different leadership styles; your response to different team environments and collaborative environments--and agreeing together that telework will work for you.
Telework is a viable strategy that really works for my company, but only because we take it seriously and treat it responsibly.
I agree with Ryan and add that the "Command & Control" style of management is dead and gone. And, if it still exists where you work, find a new place to work - quickly!
If employees are really in charge then it's time to vote with your feet. if your company won't adjust to the new work reality then move on. Corporate culture takes years to change. And, unless it's your name on the door, you're not going to make them change. Dont' waste your time with an antiquated work environment. either move on or, better yet, create your own work environment.
Trust is a huge thing. if your company doesn't have it in you chances are remote work is out of the question. If it's not in their culture or their nature one or 2 individuals aren't going to make a difference. You only have one career, one today, one chance to find something meaningful and a way to contribute. If your work environment isn't progressive enough to support you and the way you can contribute, move on. Sometimes absence says more than presence.
