Double Dipping

[carolknox84xp]

It seems to me that people are looking for a second job when the first one lacks a strong system of motivation and the employee sees that they have nowhere to grow. This is a problem of the HR department and the work of managers who aren't able to be true leaders andprovide constant growth of employees.
In short, the problem is not only on the side of the employee, but also the employer!

[bjl584]

It seems to me that people are looking for a second job when the first one lacks a strong system of motivation and the employee sees that they have nowhere to grow. This is a problem of the HR department and the work of managers who aren't able to be true leaders andprovide constant growth of employees.
In short, the problem is not only on the side of the employee, but also the employer!

True, but often a manager and even HR will have their hands tied when it comes to compensation.
Wages and raises are preset and are dictated by upper management and Accounting.
If there is no flexibility to reward a good employee, then the employee will be forced to find other or additional work.

[Petunia 100]

I read an article a while back stating that a rising trend during Covid were people who found themselves working remotely were going out and picking up second full time jobs and working both simultaneously.
Sure enough, there is a website and forum dedicated to doing it full with tips on how to pull it off.

The reason I bring it up is because recently two employees where I work were caught doing this.
They were given a choice as to which job they wanted (as opposed to just being let go), and they chose the other job.

I'm wondering if anyone has heard of this or experienced it.
It seems easy enough to get away with, depending on what your job is.
If you are good at managing your time, and keeping everything straight, then all you need is a second computer.

I wouldn't be surprised if they plan to keep double dipping, with the other job and a new one.

[Petunia 100]

Some of that I agree with, but there are two sides to every coin.

Depending on the industry, for every employee who is now remote, there might be another who still has to report to work.
The person who still goes into the workplace is now burdened with the extra task of supporting the remote worker.
Something as simple as "can you go out to the warehouse and see if we have item X in stock?"
Multiply those little requests by 20 remote workers to each employee in the building, repeat it everyday, and now you have a situation where folks who go into work are unhappy, productivity is lost, stress is up, and ultimately they might quit.

Yes, I have experienced that. In my department, I was one of the few people left in the office. (I could not get an approved telework agreement as it requires reliable internet). Little requests like "hey, can you please go into my cube, and in such-and-such location, there is a green file, please scan me the contents" became very common and began to really eat into my workday.

Also, regular office tasks which were once divided among many now became divided among few (answering the main phone line, ordering supplies, making deposits, etc.).

[ua_guy]

Yes, I have experienced that. In my department, I was one of the few people left in the office. (I could not get an approved telework agreement as it requires reliable internet). Little requests like "hey, can you please go into my cube, and in such-and-such location, there is a green file, please scan me the contents" became very common and began to really eat into my workday.

Also, regular office tasks which were once divided among many now became divided among few (answering the main phone line, ordering supplies, making deposits, etc.).

It's interesting to see how different companies adopt different remote working polices (or not).

In my opinion, "hybrid" approaches are the most problematic, followed by a one-size-fits-all, mandatory "everybody must come to the office" approach. The former seems to lead to a lot of disconnect. In-office employees get the benefit of face-time and other spontaneous conversations, "being in the room". The former leads to a lot of unhappy employees and animosity against the employer.

I have the benefit of being on a 100% remote team right now, all the way from hourly employees to executives. We're spread out across the country and we deal with different time zones, and we make it work. It's perfectly acceptable to get up during a meeting to let the dog inside. To hear a kid in the background is normal. So is the occasional bout of insomnia that leads to sitting in front of the computer at 3am and happening to catch one of our Eastern-time employees starting their work day. It's both weird, and amazing. The fact that we're all remote makes the playing field level. Nobody gets exclusive time in the office and our roles aren't such that some employees are confined to an office and others get to be remote.

In my interview for this role, I happened to be vacationing in the Palm Desert in the dead of winter. My background was the kitchen in our motorhome and I made it very clear that while I do have a home base, I would be occasionally working from the road and was equipped to make work happen, wherever I was. My manager-to-be thought this was fantastic. I could see other peoples eyes light up and they've since asked me a ton about it. I also discovered my manager has a vacation home and since working remotely for the last two years, instead of spending just a couple weeks or holidays there every year, she now prefers to work from there for months at a time!

It's not for everyone nor does it work for every position. Even if most of us don't take on other jobs secretly, us truly remote workers have found a way to double-dip the work/life balance!!

[LivingAlmostLarge]

Maybe but it depends on the type of work you do and field you are in. Again non-competes and proprietary stuff will be a touchy subject to Double dip jobs

[kork13]

It's interesting to see how different companies adopt different remote working polices (or not).

In my opinion, "hybrid" approaches are the most problematic, followed by a one-size-fits-all, mandatory "everybody must come to the office" approach. The former seems to lead to a lot of disconnect. In-office employees get the benefit of face-time and other spontaneous conversations, "being in the room". The former leads to a lot of unhappy employees and animosity against the employer.

I can see how some of those approaches could be problematic. One hybrid model that I've seen to work decently involves a 2-3 days a week teleworking (across the entire organization), and 3-2 days a week in the office (ex: M/Th/F telework, Tu/W in-office). The consistency supports scheduling of events that require in-person, hands-on involvement, while allowing folks to telework to do purely individual admin/paperwork or meetings where virtual forums work fine.

The important thing to remember is that for most organizations, this scale of virtual work is still very, very new. It takes time to develop best practices that work for the circumstances of any given organization.

[ua_guy]

I can see how some of those approaches could be problematic. One hybrid model that I've seen to work decently involves a 2-3 days a week teleworking (across the entire organization), and 3-2 days a week in the office (ex: M/Th/F telework, Tu/W in-office). The consistency supports scheduling of events that require in-person, hands-on involvement, while allowing folks to telework to do purely individual admin/paperwork or meetings where virtual forums work fine.

The important thing to remember is that for most organizations, this scale of virtual work is still very, very new. It takes time to develop best practices that work for the circumstances of any given organization.

I've been working "hybrid" since about 2006 and it has its good points. It also means on any given day, about half the team is out of the office and the other half is in the office. You learn on which days you need to overlap with people you need to see in-person, which leads to roving in-office cliques. You also learn on which days the people you can't stand take from the office, so you configure your schedule to be opposite!

We had rules. You couldn't work remotely on Monday AND Friday. Management was too worried people would use that to take long weekends. Each team had a day when all its members had to be in the office. For us, that was Tuesday. Terrible Tuesday! Tuesdays were ridiculously long and saturated with meetings which really didn't need to be in person.

I worked for a really insecure manager who would require us to send a list of everything we worked on at home, and accomplishments. But that wasn't required when we were in-office. lol. He's the kind of guy who would randomly IM you to see if you were really there. He assumed if you were at home, you were not working hard. He got written up for following his fantasy football leagues from his work computer, in the office....haha!

It all worked out. In the end, it was 2 fewer days of commuting expense and hassle, and not having to be confined to the cube farm at work.

[LivingAlmostLarge]

I've been working "hybrid" since about 2006 and it has its good points. It also means on any given day, about half the team is out of the office and the other half is in the office. You learn on which days you need to overlap with people you need to see in-person, which leads to roving in-office cliques. You also learn on which days the people you can't stand take from the office, so you configure your schedule to be opposite!

We had rules. You couldn't work remotely on Monday AND Friday. Management was too worried people would use that to take long weekends. Each team had a day when all its members had to be in the office. For us, that was Tuesday. Terrible Tuesday! Tuesdays were ridiculously long and saturated with meetings which really didn't need to be in person.

I worked for a really insecure manager who would require us to send a list of everything we worked on at home, and accomplishments. But that wasn't required when we were in-office. lol. He's the kind of guy who would randomly IM you to see if you were really there. He assumed if you were at home, you were not working hard. He got written up for following his fantasy football leagues from his work computer, in the office....haha!

It all worked out. In the end, it was 2 fewer days of commuting expense and hassle, and not having to be confined to the cube farm at work.

I would think that monday/friday remote would make life wonderful but it could mean a lot of work not done.

[QuarterMillionMan]

Before COVID my dept chief in big government was implementing WFH. When COVID hit WFH got expedited and all 180 staff packed up and permanently WFH. Fast forward to today 2023 the dept chief took another position and we have a new dept chief who will be implementing a hybrid model with 2 days a week in an office.

[ua_guy]

Before COVID my dept chief in big government was implementing WFH. When COVID hit WFH got expedited and all 180 staff packed up and permanently WFH. Fast forward to today 2023 the dept chief took another position and we have a new dept chief who will be implementing a hybrid model with 2 days a week in an office.

How do you feel about it--do you think it's a good change, or not so much?

[QuarterMillionMan]

I tantrummed like a little kid. It's like the new chief wants to control everything and doesn't trust the staff. Some staff reported it to the union and the union presented a "cease and desist" letter. One worker retired, which I thought about too but will suck it up and ago in 2 days a week. I live 16 miles one way from the office so I convinced myself that 2 days is not really that bad. I hope the union can stop it but if they cannot I will have to live with it.

[kork13]

Personally, I feel like a hybrid setup like that (2x office/3x WFH) would be phenomenal. Depending of course on how much interaction you need with co-workers... But you can use the office days for meetings & project coordination, and the WFH days for focusing on getting stuff done. I'd take that in a heartbeat with a smile on my face.

[ua_guy]

Sadly, hybrid models end up being kind of a disjointed mess. The needy extroverts try to plan everything in-office and force more than just 2 days in office because of "critical" meetings, and they use that as a weapon to force participation... The lazy are always gunning to WFH Monday and Friday, which is often a company rule, no stacking the schedule to make a total of 4 days away from the office. The whole thing is just stupid and it's often brought down by managers who are ineffective at managing staff remotely or have trust issues and think work only gets done in an office/prison space. I like fully remote models when it can be done. People who work fully remote and don't perform at their jobs evaporate quickly, or get let go. Hybrid? It's basically 2 sanctioned days for excuses and/or saving on childcare.

Not every job should or can be done fully remotely, but a lot of them can be. So I say let it happen.

The other thing is....you learn quickly who has a miserable life at home and who has a spouse or kids they can't stand to be around, and they insist on being in an office so they can get their daily time out/away from the people they supposedly love. I can be empathetic, but I don't have that problem at my house.