For_The_U
All ACC
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2018
- Messages
- 5,766
Good lord, man, you're changing everything this discussion is based on...If you're working remotely and are capable of doing a job effectively, who gives a **** if you're watching your kids or not? It's not that hard. I find it unethical that an employer can criticize a how virtual based employee handles caring for their child without attempting to provide a solution to better the circumstance or that employee. Furthermore, you say "they didn't have to offer a remote option" like they're gifting remote work to their employees, when they're simply just adapting to the current landscape of doing business during a difficult circumstance.
I find it comical that you say my premise is based on an impossibility when it's currently impossible for you to have an accurate market or workplace data set based the current situation you're speaking of.
First, they aren't traditional "virtual-based employees" like you keep making it seem over and over. As the article plainly states, the policy "applies to employees whose job duties require them to be on campus full-time during normal business hours". These are employees who pre-COVID had jobs that required them to be on campus M-F from 9-5. Surely your position is not that those same employees should have been able to bring their kids with them to campus everyday to babysit while they were at work back then, right? This is no different in that regard. Those employees were simply given the option to work from home instead of on campus because of COVID. These aren't graphic designers who routinely work from home on their own schedule. Just like they couldn't babysit their kids on campus pre-COVID while they work, they can't babysit their kids at home post-COVID while they work either.
Well, why not, you say! If they're working remotely and "are capable of doing their job effectively" why wouldn't they be allowed to! Well, of course, bud, if we entirely change the fact pattern (to one like the graphic designers above) then your point makes a ton of sense. Are there some people who do a type of work that allows them to (1) work from home, (2) supervise their kids, and (3) simultaneously do their job effectively? Yeah, of course there are. But those people don't have job roles which involve "being on campus full-time during normal business hours". So back to the actual discussion at hand....
Obviously, the powers that be in those departments do not believe those job roles can be done effectively while someone is simultaneously supervising young children. If they didn't feel that way, they wouldn't have implemented this policy. There are a TON of jobs that cannot be done effectively while you're the sole supervisor of young children regardless of how good one is at "multi tasking". Heck, I'd argue the vast vast VAST majority of jobs cannot be done effectively while you're in charge of a one year old you can't take your eyes off for more than 10 seconds (literally), a 3 year old still in diapers who needs attention constantly, and possibly another kid or two running around as well. The fact they needed them there M-F 9-5 implies they are likely needed on a consistent basis throughout that time during work days (like financial aid people, registrar's office, admissions and enrollment, etc). Hence, the policy.
To infer this policy is evidence that the employer doesn't support families and doesn't care about their staff is absolute nonsense. It's virtue signaling nonsense, to be more precise.
Last edited: