83,742
edits
Talk:The future of office work: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Talk:The future of office work (view source)
Revision as of 19:32, 3 November 2023
, 3 November 2023→Working in your jim-jams
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
===Working in your jim-jams=== | ===Working in your jim-jams=== | ||
I have, throughout this piece mischievously referred to home workers in their jim-jams, eating ice-cream from the tub in a onesie on the sofa whilst dialed into | I have, throughout this piece, mischievously referred to home workers on the kitchen table, in their jim-jams, eating ice-cream from the tub in a onesie on the sofa whilst dialed into the all hands stakeholders conference call and generally insinuating that remote workers might be, well, ''phoning it in''. | ||
This provokes outrage among some,l. I freely admit it is intended to. | This provokes outrage among some,l. I freely admit it is intended to. | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
“It is just wrong for you to imply that people who work from home necessarily take it easy. Some people have family commitments and personal circumstances being their control which mean they have to work from home. And look, dammit, this is not the nineteen fifties. We are not living in a some episode of ''Mad Men''. Smell the coffee, JC. Some people, frankly, just choose to work from home. They work better that way. We have the tools and capabilities, so why the hell ''shouldn’t'' they? They can be just as effective as the most grinding tube-jockey. It is grossly unfair of you to generalise.” | “It is just wrong for you to imply that people who work from home necessarily take it easy. Some people have family commitments and personal circumstances being their control which mean they have to work from home. And look, dammit, this is not the nineteen fifties. We are not living in a some episode of ''Mad Men''. Smell the coffee, JC. Some people, frankly, just choose to work from home. They work better that way. We have the tools and capabilities, so why the hell ''shouldn’t'' they? They can be just as effective as the most grinding tube-jockey. It is grossly unfair of you to generalise.” | ||
Now every word of this is true. But not one grasps the point, which is that this can all be true while a significant portion of home workers do take the Mickey , but more to the point, many office jockeys, deep in their blackest heart, will harbour this conviction. Punters actually do think this. It might not be fair, but they do. People are human: they justify themselves, like any pattern-matching generaliser, they make generalisations. Such as all other things being equal the more committed people '' | Now every word of this is true. But not one grasps the point, which is that this can all be true while a significant portion of home workers do take the Mickey , but more to the point, many office jockeys, deep in their blackest heart, will harbour this conviction. Punters actually do think this. It might not be fair, but they do. People are human: they justify themselves, like any pattern-matching generaliser, they make generalisations. Such as all other things being equal the more committed people ''show up''. | ||
These metaphors tell us something deep about our cultural values. | These metaphors tell us something deep about our common cultural values. We have a bunch of metaphors that equate presence with effort and energy, and distance with half-heartedness. That is, literally, the origin of the expression, “phoning it in”. It is what it means to say, “I don't know what happened there. The Aresenal just didn’t ''turn up'”. Or “JP ''put a shift in'' on this”. “She really came good.” “Stay close ” “ Keep in touch ” ,"be on it ”. ”“They represented.” “She went missing in action.” “he was awol”. “she seemed distant and uninvolved.” “She had real ''presence''.” “This is all a bit remote”. “sorry I was miles away". | ||