N.F.L.’s Push Ahead With Season Rankles Workers in the Home Office

[Punching Bag]

Did I miss discussion on this?  And is NY Times only publication which calls it "N.F.L."?

Note: NYT requires you provide account which it will send email to or paid subscription.  I was getting too many emails so I cancelled it and used another account which I rarely use to connect with.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/sports/football/coronavirus-nfl-restart-season.html

 

Quote

Workers who have been ordered back to the league’s headquarters are resisting, arguing that the reopening was rushed and that in some ways they have been put in an “impossible situation.”

 

Quote

League officials have said that allowances will be made for employees with particular health concerns or family challenges. But the parent network took issue with that, too. The N.F.L. is requiring workers who want to continue to work remotely to discuss these requests with human resources representatives. Workers said that requirement “puts our colleagues in an impossible situation” because of their desire to maintain their own and their family members’ privacy on matters of physical and mental health, among other reasons.

 

This is not unusual in my experience otherwise employees would be requiring exceptions to rules even when not warranted. 

In my case I needed to provide extensive information to HR and when my doctor decided I could increase my hours to 32 hours a week and disability company agreed HR refused and told me I needed to go back to work full time or they would change me involuntarily to part time employee and I would lose all benefits including ones I paid for which included long term disability.  I also had to provide documentation twice on bereavement leave of mother-in-law and mother.

 

Quote

The return was announced July 31 in an email from Goodell making the case to get back to the office, particularly as players have been asked to report to training camp.

“As our teams and players gear up for the season, it is critical that we quickly ramp up our physical presence in the workplace too,” Goodell wrote in the email, a copy of which was reviewed by The Times.

 

Quote

Unlike the players, workers in the league’s headquarters, as well as on individual teams, are not unionized, so they have less leverage to negotiate work conditions. In that regard, the league’s efforts to accommodate its workers’ needs, particularly parents, mirror challenges faced by many companies.

 

[whatdrought]

I mean, what do they want? I assume these are employees that have been paid during down time / compensated to work from home (which is traditionally less efficient/valuable to the company) instead of being laid off like many people have. But now they want it taken on faith that when they're not ready to come back to work it's all on the up and up? I mean, this is the real world. I get not wanting to divulge medical information, but there are certain rights you part with for the sake of employment. 

 

[NoSaint]

7 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

I mean, what do they want? I assume these are employees that have been paid during down time / compensated to work from home (which is traditionally less efficient/valuable to the company) instead of being laid off like many people have. But now they want it taken on faith that when they're not ready to come back to work it's all on the up and up? I mean, this is the real world. I get not wanting to divulge medical information, but there are certain rights you part with for the sake of employment. 

 

some of my very least productive days were spent in a cubicle 

 

and frankly, just because many employers treated their employees worse doesn’t mean nfl employees can’t ask for more. 

[atlbillsfan1975]

Another attempt by the Times to try and stir the pot. Misleading title and very vague article. Par for the course from the Times. 

Edited August 11, 2020 by atlbillsfan1975

[njbuff]

It's the New York Slimes.

 

That entity is the biggest POS in this country.

[whatdrought]

19 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

some of my very least productive days were spent in a cubicle 

 

and frankly, just because many employers treated their employees worse doesn’t mean nfl employees can’t ask for more. 

 

That makes sense, but the general rule is that in office is more productive. 

 

Right, but what they're asking for (at least from the context of the snips, as I couldn't see the article) is exemptions from returning to work without any proven reason. 

[NoSaint]

10 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

That makes sense, but the general rule is that in office is more productive. 

 

Right, but what they're asking for (at least from the context of the snips, as I couldn't see the article) is exemptions from returning to work without any proven reason. 

which in many work environments is pretty normal right now. More than a few office places are going the extra mile for safety and not bringing people back in unless they can provide a reason you are needed in person. 
 

It’s ok to press your employer on stuff like this. I know employees rights aren’t a thing to many many Americans... but “the players have to show up” isn’t a great reason for why sally in accounting can’t WFH any longer. If she is truly needed and they’ve taken the reasonable precautions that’s different. 
 

Also your assertion that the general rule is you are more productive in the office is not much of a rule. Many studies have found various roles accomplish more from home. Depends on the job and the person but broad strokes put WFH ahead for quite a few positions. 

Edited August 11, 2020 by NoSaint

[whatdrought]

3 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

which in many work environments is pretty normal right now. More than a few office places are going the extra mile for safety and not bringing people back in unless they can provide a reason you are needed in person. 
 

It’s ok to press your employer on stuff like this. I know employees rights aren’t a thing to many many Americans... but “the players have to show up” isn’t a great reason for why sally in accounting can’t WFH any longer. If she is truly needed and they’ve taken the reasonable precautions that’s different. 
 

Also your assertion that the general rule is you are more productive in the office is not much of a rule. Many studies have found various roles accomplish more from home. Depends on the job and the person but broad strokes put WFH ahead for quite a few positions. 

 

Valid points, and It makes sense. 
 

But if at the end of the day, if Sally is needed in the building and has a medical reason why she can’t be, it makes sense that she needs to validate that claim somehow. 
 

I see what you mean, but the missing issue in that conversation is the company as a whole. The NFL corporate offices have run via a group of people working in close proximity. Maybe they could do it as well, or better at home, but to get to that point (with normal, non-pandemic workload and function) would take a lot of investment, or so I would imagine. 
 

 

So the reality is that the employers needs dictate the work relationship and where that happens. 

[NoSaint]

17 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Valid points, and It makes sense. 
 

But if at the end of the day, if Sally is needed in the building and has a medical reason why she can’t be, it makes sense that she needs to validate that claim somehow. 
 

I see what you mean, but the missing issue in that conversation is the company as a whole. The NFL corporate offices have run via a group of people working in close proximity. Maybe they could do it as well, or better at home, but to get to that point (with normal, non-pandemic workload and function) would take a lot of investment, or so I would imagine. 
 

 

So the reality is that the employers needs dictate the work relationship and where that happens. 

While they do generally need to set up the work flow for sake of structuring a business...just because they declared their plan it doesn’t mean it’s a good one. Plenty of mid to senior managers have very little concrete data on best practices and simply revert to how it has been done as the safe “don’t rock the boat” way to do it.
 

In this case that boat may just be not wanting to look bad in front of people in the 32 other buildings- which wouldn’t be a good reason. 
 

I don’t know their individual tasks though so really I’m just railing against the assumption that it’s by default right because the employer said so and they should be grateful to work. Odds are general nfl office jobs could be overwhelmingly accomplished at home though, with quite limited time and titles in office.

Edited August 11, 2020 by NoSaint

[KD in CA]

41 minutes ago, atlbillsfan1975 said:

Another attempt by the Times to try an stir the pot. Misleading title and very vague article. Par for the course from the Times. 

 

Yup.  You'll never seen them write that article about an entity they like.

[Mike in Horseheads]

45 minutes ago, njbuff said:

It's the New York Slimes.

 

That entity is the biggest POS in this country.

Yes it should be something reputable like FOX News with Tucker and Sean

[quinnearlysghost88]

48 minutes ago, atlbillsfan1975 said:

Another attempt by the Times to try an stir the pot. Misleading title and very vague article. Par for the course from the Times. 

They’re not stirring the pot. They’re literally reporting that nfl workers don’t want to report to the headquarters for health/quality of life reasons. It’s actually a thing that’s taking place. And they’re reporting on it. Would it be easier if it were a meme on Facebook for you? 

[Mike in Horseheads]

3 minutes ago, quinnearlysghost88 said:

They’re not stirring the pot. They’re literally reporting that nfl workers don’t want to report to the headquarters for health/quality of life reasons. It’s actually a thing that’s taking place. And they’re reporting on it. Would it be easier if it were a meme on Facebook for you? 

Don't confuse him, on PPP nobody talks back

[MJS]

Yep, most people don't like going to work, so if they have the option to sit around at home they resist the requirement to go back.

[NoSaint]

10 minutes ago, MJS said:

Yep, most people don't like going to work, so if they have the option to sit around at home they resist the requirement to go back.

Ok, boomer 

[Lurker]

37 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Don't confuse him, on PPP nobody talks back

 

More like nobody listens.  That place is an echo chamber...

[whatdrought]

52 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

While they do generally need to set up the work flow for sake of structuring a business...just because they declared their plan it doesn’t mean it’s a good one. Plenty of mid to senior managers have very little concrete data on best practices and simply revert to how it has been done as the safe “don’t rock the boat” way to do it.
 

In this case that boat may just be not wanting to look bad in front of people in the 32 other buildings- which wouldn’t be a good reason. 
 

I don’t know their individual tasks though so really I’m just railing against the assumption that it’s by default right because the employer said so and they should be grateful to work. Odds are general nfl office jobs could be overwhelmingly accomplished at home though, with quite limited time and titles in office.

 

I don’t care if the employer is right or wrong in this context. My main issue is that to be excused from work means a certain surrender of privacy. 

[Punching Bag]

I think unless people are being watched at work people act at home like they did do at work. 

 

?

I work with staff member who is unavailable for over an hour because he is on personal video call with his wife and he has barely been at work for an hour. The person is the night lead and is person who needs to call for support.  And due to his absences I have had to add support people to email chain which got his organization unhappy so I am not supposed to do that any more even when I can see he is absent, sleeping or not bother looking at computer chatting with someone.

 

I actually perform better at home since I do not see this and I am not frustrated and do not step over line and get people mad.

 

?

 

On my team I had part of a system down from Thursday to Saturday last week.  I did not work those days and discovered that it was down and nobody noticed it including the day staff who set it up and our staff who covers evenings, overnights and weekends.  The same two people were working who missed the issue same time.  I contacted day staff reporting it down and it was fixed; I pointed out this should not have been missed by day staff so lead coded a monitor to watch for this and added it to the page added last time something was missed.  I was one who caught issue last time as well.

 

If a problem occurred on server which was watched by that monitor there is a possibility we and more importantly me might be out of a job but we got lucky and he is ignoring problem again.  Quote from chat:

 

me:

Server was not down then but most of monitors were. Old "Health Of Monitoring Machines"  page would have reported health fine which Is why I got day staff to add items to that page.

him:

ok if it was not down then there is no problem...simpe

simple...no need to open a can of worms when nothing is there

[atlbillsfan1975]

11 hours ago, quinnearlysghost88 said:

They’re not stirring the pot. They’re literally reporting that nfl workers don’t want to report to the headquarters for health/quality of life reasons. It’s actually a thing that’s taking place. And they’re reporting on it. Would it be easier if it were a meme on Facebook for you? 

I am not on Facebook. Thank you for proving my point by trying to attack me. The employees of the NFL have a choice if they don’t think it’s safe, quit . Find someplace else to work

Edited August 11, 2020 by atlbillsfan1975

[MJS]

57 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

Ok, boomer 

I'm a millennial.