From: Swarles_Barkley | #012
They'd have to be almost twice as productive to get the same amount of work done, though. Productivity is a relative concept - the amount of work you get done per unit of time (or money, usually). It says nothing of the total amount of work you're getting done.
Yup. And it sucks because supervisors aren't only concerned about your productivity; they also want you to be present at the office for X hours per day even if they're not micromanaging you or even interact with you at all over the course of a typical workday.
Otherwise, every programming job should have a work-from-home option, at least for non-critical dates (meetings, performance reviews, etc.) If you can get your job done, why do you have to show up in the office in a suit (or business casual attire) when doing so actually reduces your productivity (being neatly dressed won't help you code better.) Even meetings can be scheduled via teleconferencing. And there's always the threat of being fired if you underperform.
In the past IBM gave nearly all of its software engineers the work-from-home option. It's a shame newer IBM offices and other companies don't offer the same choices/benefits.
As for labour/hourly wage jobs, there's absolutely zero incentive to be productive because you get paid the same anyway. When I used to volunteer at a library for junior high school (LOL), I would sort/shelve 2X as many books as the slowest guy. Not only was I not compensated for it, I got assigned more work for the same # of hours, so by the end of my internship I slowed my pace down to be in line with everyone else's.