There are many large and #serious#problems in the world. Many people are victimized by the #system in a thousand different ways. This is not their story; it is not about their problems, but this should not be seen as minimizing them.
I'd like to talk about something a little closer to home: #employee#abuse in the #tech field. I've been in this field for <mumble> years and worked for tiny companies, medium consulting companies, large orgs, and as a one-man independent contractor.
@cazabon Yes! Great thread. Have experienced it similarly in educational, academic, and government environments, too, with attendance NOT optional- at least not without far reaching consequences.
It happens in the huge Big Tech companies with tens or hundreds of thousands of employees. It happens in almost any tech shop with even a handful of people.
It goes by many different names.
It is ... the "brown-bag session".
Sometimes called a "lunch-and-learn" session.
And although widely practiced, it is #abusive, and it is #corrosive to employee #morale. It probably contributes a non-negligible amount to employee #turnover, but it isn't studied.
Before I go further, there's one big exception to what I'm describing; I'll mention that at the end, so hold your rotten tomatoes.
What's wrong with brown-bag lunch-and-learns?
Well, it's the #obvious thing. Most companies ask their employees to attend these on their #lunch hour, or on other #personal time.
That would be fine, except many - perhaps most - of these sessions are actually for giving employees #information to use in the #performance of their #job#duties.
So an employee who can't use the tool to the utmost because he didn't attend the "optional" training won't be held to account or compared to others who took the training? Unlikely.
And just how "optional" is it? Are employees turning up because they'll look bad if everyone else on their team goes and they don't?
A lot of managers are blind to this kind of #silent#pressure on employees. They are completely unaware of the power dynamic between management and employees, and so they misunderstand the #motivations and #behaviours of those employees.
#Tip for managers holding these "optional" sessions: if more than half of your employees are attending the optional #training, or if #attendance is heavily skewed in favour of #younger and/or more #junior employees, then from their point of view, it isn't optional.
Managers who don't see this are also the type who have "open-door" #policies, but who report very few employees coming to them with problems and questions, from which they derive the #conclusion that everything is hunky-dory.
Why do I hate it? After all, it's just stealing a little bit of personal time from the staff.
#Breaks, including lunch, are #essential for the #mental well-being of employees. All employees. They need time to decompress, to take their mind off work, to eat, to go for a walk and some fresh air, to woolgather and relax -- and have deep insights that actually help them in their work later, too.
Saying "take this training on your lunch break, you weren't doing anything anyway" is evil.
Some places have sessions organized by employees organically. Management doesn't really care about these ones. They're about things that aren't directly useful in the job; one's a #language#enthusiast and wants to talk about #Elixir, which the company doesn't (yet) use internally, and others are interested in it for their own #curiosity.
Ideally, it's the senior members of the team that push back; I've done it. We have more experience and therefore know the boss/company's limits better, as well as having more margin before we get to that "Is this person worth the trouble?" point with the boss.
If the juniors need to do it, then it's up to them to determine how gently.
There isn't an easy answer. But if we can raise awareness of this, it can become standard practice and perhaps they'll be less likely to do it.
I ask, because this is a practice I've noticed where I work. It's only impacted me recently, & it's a state-mandated policy shift that's requiring us to learn these skills & make these upgrades, so it's for damn sure "work-required." It makes me wonder what the thinking is with "do this meeting on your lunch hour" instead of, you know, budgeting actual work-day (aside from the fact that we're eternally short-staffed & time-crunched). Hm. I may poke the committee lead about this.... 🤔
Definitely sounds like a work-time thing. As for the thinking behind doing it on lunch... I don't think it's too deep, just "They need to do <X> but I don't want it to impact their work, so I'll ask them to do it on personal time".
By all means, politely point out to the committee that this is work, and should be on work time. Good luck!
Add comment