Yahoo Ends Work From Home Program

[MrsK]

http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2...mid=fb-nytimes

Yahoo has told WAH employees that they cannot telecommute any more. Some folks are saying this is a blow for working parents and feel betrayed by Marissa Meyers. Is it fair to expect her to be the be the ambassador for work/life balance because she was pregnant when she came on CEO? In my experience, having a uterus doesn't automatically make you sympathetic to priorities of other parents. If the CEO were a man, would we even blink?

[MsSassyBaskets]

Hm, regardless of whether it was Marissa Meyers or a male CEO, I can see how it would feel like a step backwards for employees. However, can somebody explain to me how this is a perk for working parents? I work from home full time, 8 am - 5 pm. No way could I have a kid around for even part of the day and still get my work done. Just because I'm sitting in my second bedroom, it doesn't mean I'm doing other things around the house (except surfing the internet on my personal laptop, haha). Working from home doesn't mean you don't need childcare. Is it about the flexibility of hours? I don't get it.

[TulipsAndSunscreen]

As someone who works from home as a FT corporate job, there are a lot of pluses and minuses.

Pluses are the fact that my commute is 30 seconds - it means I only pay my nanny while I work, not while I commute. If she's sick, I'm usually home and can dash away to get her to the doctor, etc. I don't have to worry if I get puked on 3 seconds before I walk out the door and I can eat my own food for lunch.

Minuses are that I'm.Never.Not.At.Work. I can always take early morning/late night calls, my phone always rings. I'm always available and I'm never done work. It's really hard on nice days too when she's playing in the yard, etc. and I can't be there. When she went through separation anxiety, I had to deal with that several times a day (her look of horror as I went up the stairs) vs. only once.

As a working parent, I'd say they're getting at least equal work if not more from what I'd be able to contribute if I came into the office (not a possibility for me, it's in a different state). I find it odd that an internet company won't allow telecommuting though. I do agree though that spontaneous collaboration among employees is virtually impossible in a siloed model with everyone at home. And it is VERY easy to hide at home. There have been a couple instances where people got permission to work from home that was quickly rescinded when their managers couldn't reach them. When you sit at your desk all day long, you better answer your damn phone about 95% of the time because where else are you?

I honestly think she's trying to cut the fat and probably energize the top (younger, perhaps non-parent) performers. Companies like Google, FB, etc. don't have that many parents on staff (although they do treat them well at Google at least), parents being somewhat synonymous with not being hip, etc. Yahoo needs new ideas FAST and I think they want to bring the more creative, collaborative vibe that places like Google have...which means open plan offices, lots of meeting spaces, etc. Not everybody working from home.

Yahoo is doing really badly, she has to do something decisive. I don't think it would be getting as much press if she were a male CEO.

[poky]

My take is that their telecommuting policy was pretty loose, and was abused like crazy. I can see the logic in just completely getting rid of it, even though I don't agree that it is the best answer; there's plenty of evidence that SOME of those workers are likely way more productive and happy working at home than they would be if they weren't. The people saying that she's hurting working parents, though...yeah. Not so much. People shouldn't be using telecommuting as a substitute for daycare anyway; if they are, then they're likely abusing the policy. And the points made in the memo about hallway conversations, etc. are valid in a lot of cases (though there are jobs and personalities for which that is not the case, of course).

[MsSassyBaskets]

The people saying that she's hurting working parents, though...yeah. Not so much. People shouldn't be using telecommuting as a substitute for daycare anyway; if they are, then they're likely abusing the policy. And the points made in the memo about hallway conversations, etc. are valid in a lot of cases (though there are jobs and personalities for which that is not the case, of course).

This is exactly what I was thinking... Honestly I can understand suspending the policy. I know I'm less productive working at home than I would be in an office, but an office isn't an option in my current location. The minute I can get into an office, I will. I know that being there with other employees -- even if they're not people I work "with" every day -- will make me more connected to the organization and more "in the loop". I understand flexibility -- employees need flexibility to handle whatever life situations they have, parenthood or otherwise. But a free option to work from home, with people potentially using it as a way of avoiding childcare expenses? No way. Shut that down before it takes your company down.

ETA - this reminds me of the other day when I was at the dentist -- my hygienist asked what I do, where I work, etc. and I told her, and her response was to say how great that will be when I have kids. It was good that I had instruments in my mouth because I might have said something rude. Really!? I might be baby crazy, but I HATE it when people say "WHEN you have kids" like it's an assumption, plus, are you kidding me? Like I could just sit here taking care of a baby with one hand and typing with the other. Give me a break.

[scrub-jay]

I love my telecommuting option. I am WAY more productive and daycare is much much closer to my house than to work. When I telecommute I can pick up my dd in 10 minutes instead of 1 hr+ of sitting in traffic following work. If she's home for some reason (sick/snow day/daycare closure), I take PTO.

[oceanchild]

I wish this weren't happening as an all or nothing. It seems like an option of working at home a couple days a week could still help families while allowing ample time in the office for impromptu collaboration.

I worked at home for 6 months and HATED it, but there are times now where it would be great to have that option. Example: waiting at home all day for a plumber to come. It would be great to work during that time rather than burn a day of leave.

[OrionGrad]

I imagine a lot of the frustration is coming from people who were told they could work exclusively from home when they were hired, and now are having that option taken away. I've heard that some people at Yahoo don't even live in the same cities where they have offices, so they need to move their families or get axed.
And when you add in commuting costs, it could be seen as a pay cut in some cases.

[moonlight]

When you figure in commuting a d working in a office rather than your home Everything Will Cost more. Gas, wear on your car, tolls, clothing, meals out of the home, and all the crazy running around you do just to get to and from work. T&S is right, most at home workers work more hours than in the office workers.

[GrayMatterWife]

I suspect that this change in policy had little to do with the need to have less working from home--it is a way to cut your workforce without (1) having to give WARN Act notice of mass layoffs and (2) pay severance/unemployment. Great for stock price--no bad financial press yet trimming costs. Given the high percentage of Yahoo employees that work from home and depend on that relationship to continue their employment and the impracticality of relocating, management knows that this will trim the workforce.

[Meenah]

GMW, I knew you would come up with a reasonable explanation!!!!!!!!!!!

[Sheherezade]

That's exactly what I've been reading about it, too GMW.

[GrayMatterWife]

I am interested in articles supporting my theory. I haven't seen any yet. I was surprised at how badly the press missed the real story, if there is any truth to my suspicions. In the business world, this is the obvious explanation.

[diggitydot]

Someone on the Today show yesterday said exactly what you posted.

[Sheherezade]

I read it the first day it came out on a few online business sites -- I'll see if I can find them for you. We are Yahoo investors since their IPO (Wahoo! Aren't we smart! *cringe*) so I have news alerts for the latest developments. I think this was the take that most people reporting on the actual business side of it and not the cultural BS have been going with - and they've even quoted people that will be eliminated now because of their inability to move, etc. to support it.

Also there is another business take that this is just another publicity move to get Yahoo in the news instead of relegated to the "irrelevant" shelf. They made the same speculation about Meyer's original hire with her pregnancy - that it could just be a controversial issue that puts Yahoo on the front page and in water cooler conversations and they need that.

Here's the IBD article: http://news.investors.com/technology...ll.htm?ven=rss