Breeders being worshipped at the office

Not a new song and dance but the one I'm dealing with right now. This little young thing has been out on FMLA for the full
3 months after having her baby and today was her first day back. A little background on my office - there have been noises about us being able to work from home. This is nothing out of the ordinary in our industry, but the powers that be have been hemming and hawing over it, acting as if we might or might not do it, might be a breach of contract or security, yada yada yada.

I overheard our boss telling the ever-so-ingenue-ish new mom that she will soon be given the equipment and set up to go work from home.

This burns me up so bad I have no words. I figured something like this might happen but was hoping the gooey-eyed little thing might be so in love with her new loaf that she would decide not to come back. Alas, she did.

We have been on the hot seat the whole time the new mom has been out on leave, especially since there have been major illnesses in some of the rest of the staff as well. It has been crazy. Of course I'm biased in my own favor, but I have had to change my schedule (looks like permanently), learned a new aspect to my job to replace another person who was out, and have a longer drive to the office than most of the others. Being able to work from home would be a great relief on the drive and give me a bit extra sleep in the morning as well. So it would actually be good for my health.

But guess who is being rewarded? Yep, the baby mama. The one who contributed to our being so strapped all this time. She's being treated like a savior and I'm just

I'm actually really into worker's rights and IMO we need more here in the US. But there need to be protections and considerations for all, not just rewards for new parents and to heck with the ones who were steady workers and helped hold down the fort.

First off, please don't mention this to anyone at work. If you need to rant, do it here. If anyone else overheard pretend to be absolutely clueless even if you have already brought it up. I wouldn't throw you under the bus if I worked with you but there are lots of others who may do so.

Your boss may be using the moo to try to illicit a change for everyone she supervises and moo may be the guinea pig. Is your boss cool and are you on good terms with her?

Once moo has worked a full day (or two, perhaps a week) from home successfully and it becomes public knowledge, go to your boss and state that you'd like to start working from home on specific date (7/15, for instance) and ask about the equipment and preparations required.

At that point a precedent is set and unless your company wants to open the door to overt favoritism I'd suggest all the people battling major illnesses and anyone who wants to work from home also jumps on the bandwagon. Make it all or nothing because you have nothing to lose and everything to win!

Quote
freya
Once moo has worked a full day (or two, perhaps a week) from home successfully and it becomes public knowledge, go to your boss and state that you'd like to start working from home on specific date (7/15, for instance) and ask about the equipment and preparations required.

At that point a precedent is set and unless your company wants to open the door to overt favoritism I'd suggest all the people battling major illnesses and anyone who wants to work from home also jumps on the bandwagon. Make it all or nothing because you have nothing to lose and everything to win!

I think you're making a big assumption that the new moo will succeed. Working from home is difficult for many people because it requires discipline and a lack of interruption, and I don't think these are things a new moo is going to have. I fully expect her to completely fuck it up.

Decent management would be aware that one person doesn't represent everyone, but decent management would also be initiating a wider trial to begin with. So I see two likely outcomes: one, it is admitted that moo isn't working and this is used as an excuse to kill the working from home idea, or two, others are allowed to work from home but there's no benefit because anyone conscientious will be working extra hard to make up for all the slackers who know they can get away with it. If the management is really bad, they will simultaneously use the work-at-home failure as an excuse for not allowing others to try it, while at the same time not discipline the moo for slacking.

I'm a bit of a cynic when it comes to any company that pilots a policy in an unfair way.

When I worked from home for 2 years (back in my working days) back in 2001-2003, I went out of my way not to abuse this privilege. When things weren't too busy, I voluntarily took some vacation hours instead of simply being paid to do nothing it was also a part-time working arrangement). They type of work I did was a good fit to work from home because a lot of it was computer programming and I could take my programs used by my division's staff off line at night when everyone else was done working.

I recall a woman coworker asking to get my mostly telecommuting deal near the end of her pregnancy. She had equal seniority to me but her work wasn't a good fit to working from home. Also, she was maybe an average worker, not nearly as vital to my division's good functioning as I was. Her request was rejected, and she quit after she had her kid. My company awarded telecommuting deals based on merit and how it fit with one's job tasks, how it should be done.

Unfortunately, my company ended all open-ended telecommuting in late 2003. This ended up being my ultimate undoing, as I predicted it would. Five years later, to the day, in fact, after my telecommuting ended, I retired.

Quote
yurble

Quote
freya
Once moo has worked a full day (or two, perhaps a week) from home successfully and it becomes public knowledge, go to your boss and state that you'd like to start working from home on specific date (7/15, for instance) and ask about the equipment and preparations required.

At that point a precedent is set and unless your company wants to open the door to overt favoritism I'd suggest all the people battling major illnesses and anyone who wants to work from home also jumps on the bandwagon. Make it all or nothing because you have nothing to lose and everything to win!

I think you're making a big assumption that the new moo will succeed. Working from home is difficult for many people because it requires discipline and a lack of interruption, and I don't think these are things a new moo is going to have. I fully expect her to completely fuck it up.

Decent management would be aware that one person doesn't represent everyone, but decent management would also be initiating a wider trial to begin with. So I see two likely outcomes: one, it is admitted that moo isn't working and this is used as an excuse to kill the working from home idea, or two, others are allowed to work from home but there's no benefit because anyone conscientious will be working extra hard to make up for all the slackers who know they can get away with it. If the management is really bad, they will simultaneously use the work-at-home failure as an excuse for not allowing others to try it, while at the same time not discipline the moo for slacking.

I'm a bit of a cynic when it comes to any company that pilots a policy in an unfair way.

You're definitely correct on this. I also doubt moo will have the discipline and lack of interruption to work from home. And it wasn't a good decision for management to start with this one person and not initiate a wider trail.

Will she be allowed to watch her loaf and work? Because that's a recipe for non-production.

My employer fucks a lot of things up, but it's actually in our telework policy that if your child is in daycare while you are on site at work, I.e. not old enough to take care of themselves, that's where they need to be when you are teleworking. There have been a few Moos who got caught and lost their telework privileges.


It's also really stupid to let his Moo work from home all the time when she hasn't demonstrated that she can do it a day or two a week and be productive.

They haven't thought this one through at all.

yes, I worked part time in a women's service program. They were painfully moo-friendly, in line with their credo of "supporting women" (and after all--ALL women are Moos, right?). They had one highly esteemed, and highly paid for the field worker who was a complete airhead in most respects. They allowed her to bring her sixth crotch fruit to work every day ("our religion doesn't approve of BC"). They kept the pac-n-play in one of the officer's office, and NO ONE got any work done for cooing , feeding and changing the little myraccal. After the sprog started crawling,they allowed Mega-Moo to set her own hours, work partly from home and come in on the weekends when hubby would watch the zoo. Believe me, she was standing in my doorway blabbing about her family a good part of the time, even though I ignored her as much as possible. Then , out of the 4-6 hours she was "working", she got and made calls from home literally about half the time! Talk about hell!!

Quote

Then , out of the 4-6 hours she was "working", she got and made calls from home literally about half the time! Talk about hell!!

This reminds me of a job situation I was in a decade ago. Two Moos were allowed to "job share" and they both worked part time. I was resentful because they kept the same hourly wage of their former positions, even though they were doing a much different, easier job. (Essentially preparing briefings and scheduling people's calendars. Yeah, that's a $50/hour job.)

I sat next to the duo and one of them was particularly bad. She worked 6 hours a day Tuesday through Thursday. You would think if you were working only three days a week, you would arrange appointments around your work hours. But no, she was constantly taking off for kid-related events. And the phone calls! She was ALWAYS on the phone with her nanny, coordinating grocery lists, reminding her to "buy the chocolate milk from Cotsco because it's cheaper," Jaysus, why can't you leave a list? One day I sat through an exhaustive conversation as she discussed Tennis for Tots, which required white attire (because nothing says 'pretentious social climber' like being overly-concerned about the attire of a 6 year old kid.) I knew all her stupid kids' activities. Seriously? When you are AT WORK, shouldn't you be focused on work? I give full time workers some slack regarding personal calls. They are sometimes necessary because the person is working during business hours, but this broad was off two days a week. She should have been coordinating all this personal stuff on her own time. (But that would mean conducting oneself as a professional.)


I was SO HAPPY when a CL/CF female manager came along and eliminated this arrangement. One went back full time and the bad one just quit altogether, thank Todd.


I can understand how a company may want a part time arrangement to retain someone with real skills, but too often you see Moos getting these types of arrangements just because they are Moos.

Telecommuting is not a substitute for babysitting. Although my company does not discriminate between parents and nonparents, it is painfully obvious when parents "work from home." There is little working that gets done.

Quote
quiltergirl
Telecommuting is not a substitute for babysitting. Although my company does not discriminate between parents and nonparents, it is painfully obvious when parents "work from home." There is little working that gets done.

My work is largely independent and fortunately my work acknowledges that there's minimal need for coordination and no need to be in the office. However, there is accountability. Not on a day-to-day basis, but over a longer period. If my achievements weren't sufficient, I wouldn't find myself forced to work from the office, I'd find myself out of a job.

I think this is an ideal situation when other people don't depend on you, but when there is mutual dependence the feedback cycle needs to be much shorter, so the company doesn't lose the good people out of frustration.

Quote
bell_flower
I can understand how a company may want a part time arrangement to retain someone with real skills, but too often you see Moos getting these types of arrangements just because they are Moos.

Companies should realize that retention for the sake of retention is a pointless exercise. It just results in the good people jumping ship at the first opportunity, because they don't feel appreciated. Some attrition is a good thing.

It took me just under two years to convince Big Boss to let me telecommute. I showed I was a dedicated worker and due to my client's locations I was often still in the office well into the evening. Sometime I was still there when people arrived the next morning. I mentioned to my boss that working the hours I work would be easier if could telecommute a few days a week. I also pointed out that many of my clients really seemed to like the personal interactions I was building and it could lead to more contracts. Also it would make co worker's jobs easier since there would be less lag time, the faster things get going the faster the company gets paid.

Boss talked to Big Boss and Big Boss agreed to a month trial period, I increased productivity which lead to increased contracts. At the end of the trial Big Boss agreed to let me telecommute with flexible hours with conditions such as I have to be in the office at least once a month and for some meetings. All children must be in daycare (obviously doesn't apply to me), and Big Boss can rescind the agreement at any time.

My advice is to convince Boss and/or whoever has the authority to let you telecommute that it benefits, boss, coworkers, and the company's bottom line to let you telecommute. Be patient and keep your eyes open for jobs that have telecommuting as a benefit.

Quote
yurble

Quote
bell_flower
I can understand how a company may want a part time arrangement to retain someone with real skills, but too often you see Moos getting these types of arrangements just because they are Moos.

Companies should realize that retention for the sake of retention is a pointless exercise. It just results in the good people jumping ship at the first opportunity, because they don't feel appreciated. Some attrition is a good thing.

IMO this new moo is not any more skilled than the rest of us! I'm just not sure why our boss is bending over backwards to keep her happy instead of at least making a token effort to retain those of us who worked hard to try to hold things together during the last few months.

They have already tested it with the boss' assistant, so New Moo will be "test" #2. They are apparently doing this knowing full well that she will have the baby at home. I don't think she'd care about working at home if she couldn't have the baby with her - there would be no additional benefit. She doesn't want to be at the office primarily because that means she is away from baybee. Maybe she will have a relative at the house to help, I don't know. If she is there by herself with the loaf, I can't imagine how she will get anything done. If she fails, the powers that be may use that as evidence that the rest of us can't be trusted. They really don't seem to think we will be as productive at home. They can look at how much each of us has "produced" at the office and compare it to how much we do at home and either recall us or fire us, but they seem not to want to do it at all except for New Moo and the assistant. The rest of us are no good layabouts apparently.

What pisses me off even more than the favoritism is the fact that they are being so underhanded about it. They definitely don't want to just TELL us what the plans are.

Quote
tiredchicken
I'm just not sure why our boss is bending over backwards to keep her happy instead of at least making a token effort to retain those of us who worked hard to try to hold things together during the last few months.
...
What pisses me off even more than the favoritism is the fact that they are being so underhanded about it. They definitely don't want to just TELL us what the plans are.

My take: your employer is playing the long game. It only looks like favoritism...they want to give her just enough opportunity to "work" from home, completely fuck up, and then fire her. No employer can show their hand and tell anyone else on staff if this is the plan--because you can be sure that there is ONE coworker who would surely tell Moomie she was being set up to fail, and no one wants to deal with the fallout from that shit.

Quote
Tiquer

Quote
tiredchicken
I'm just not sure why our boss is bending over backwards to keep her happy instead of at least making a token effort to retain those of us who worked hard to try to hold things together during the last few months.
...
What pisses me off even more than the favoritism is the fact that they are being so underhanded about it. They definitely don't want to just TELL us what the plans are.

My take: your employer is playing the long game. It only looks like favoritism...they want to give her just enough opportunity to "work" from home, completely fuck up, and then fire her. No employer can show their hand and tell anyone else on staff if this is the plan--because you can be sure that there is ONE coworker who would surely tell Moomie she was being set up to fail, and no one wants to deal with the fallout from that shit.

I'm not sure what their motivation would be unless it's because we're getting ready to go into a slow season. Maybe. Something weird is going on!

Quote
tiredchicken
I'm not sure what their motivation would be unless it's because we're getting ready to go into a slow season. Maybe. Something weird is going on!

Again, another guess, but it might be your employer fears some kind of bullshit lawsuit or the social media damage this slacker might cause claiming how she wasn't "treated fairly" (read: didn't get a paycheck for essentially fucking off at home and producing zero work product) because she has a baybee and is distracted doing TMIJITW.