[am1m]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Amongst the companies I am associated with the frequency of malafide incidents created by employees working from home increased 2X to 4X during the covid19 period varying with location and time.

Thank you sir, this is hard data, and certainly a very good reason for a company to go back to the in-office model.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

There is only so much you can do to protect a disbursed network.

Not disputing the logic of above return to office business decision at all. But having worked for a small cybersecurity firm, when we were also partnering in a small way with a much, much larger brand-name cybersecurity firm, I saw both firms working remote much before covid-19. They both had systems and products in place that were better than most non-cybersecurity firms I had worked with. And generations ahead of the "we-have-antivirus" attitude of some firms (esp. government) that I know of.

Again, not to dispute the logic of above business decision, it is certainly valid. Not all firms can/will invest in such systems.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Those who wish to pursue only WFH will I guess soon, in a year or two, find themselves as skilled contract workers. Companies will (and are) thinking of why they need the legal & financial load of an employee when they could get by with a contract consultant - less cost less HR related liabilities.

This is a great point! While it will hit the remote workers first, I think overall the industry is going to go the gig economy way anyway. Irrespective of remote or in-office employees.

Personally, I welcome that. But I am at a different stage in my career. Younger employees might certainly want to consider those implications. But on the other hand, I see several younger people already comfortable with the idea of gig work. So we need to see how it all pans out.

Originally Posted by aargee

If you may kindly permit me, would like to share an incident that could perhaps make you smile, but something to think about as well.

I'm sure all of us can pull anecdotal evidence to prove any point. I can pull a few where I've personally wasted the whole day in-office without doing anything productive. Doesn't mean the in-office model doesn't work. Memes and anecdotes certainly spice up the thread though!

[RiderZone]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Warning: Employer's point of view ahead.

Hello, here's the point of view of someone who's been working remotely since 6 years.

Your attitude towards your employees, and your maids, seems very harsh and insulting to me. It looks like what you're saying is that the employee doesn't matter, they should, and will, do whatever the shareholder/customer tells them to do. I think if you keep treating your employees like kids, they will keep behaving like kids, if you keep trying to micromanage them, it shouldn't be a surprise when they waste their time when not being micromanaged. When you never allow your employees to be adults, it's obvious you can't trust them to work productively from home.

This may be part of the Indian work culture and mentality, but my past few years of working with European companies has been a very different experience.

There is a clear recognition in the European work culture that the purpose of a job is to get some money that you can use to enjoy other more important things in life, and so the value given to an employee is far higher than that to a customer. My purpose in life is not just to increase the profits of my employers, and when all the employees of an organization agree with that sentiment, it creates a very different work environment.

We work hard not because the boss is standing over our shoulder, we work hard because we are adults, adults who take pride in the work that we do, adults who enjoy the process of solving problems, adults who take satisfaction in being useful and productive. Are there people around us who misuse this privilege and freedom? Of course there are, but when you foster a work culture based on trust and responsibility, such people quickly get thrown out, not because the boss spots them being lazy, but because their colleagues who work diligently and conscientiously never allow their work standards to go down just because of one bad apple.

To be clear, I'm not saying that Work from Home is correct is every situation for every company. What I am saying is that the advantages that remote work brings in the sense of time spent with family, rent savings, comfort of not having to commute to office, hot meals at home, ability to work from the mountains or the beach etc. have to be carefully weighed against the negatives of security risks etc. My perspective is that if a job can be done from home with reasonable efficiency, the employee at least should have the option to do so.

At the minimum, vague gesturing at the shareholder/customer/economics is not a sufficient reason against work from home. Any company of course has the choice to force return to office, but the risk that entails is losing all the adults, who would rather take remote jobs and continue life on the beach. If you're the shareholder it's your job to explain to the customer why this employee working from home is better for all 3, and it's also your job to realize that the employee is a human being, not a gear in a machine.

[Burgman_tales]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

(a) WFH is their right – oops sorry folks it is an option in some circumstances that will be determined by the forgotten entity the customer and then by the employer; (b) WFH enhances productivity and quality. That is the view of some of the employees – mainly the well off male employee with adequate space in his house to set up a work place and some one to take care of household chores – aka almost all on Team BHP!

Customer cares about the product and service he's receiving, not about the employees coming to office or not. If not, it's the responsibility of the leaders to ensure how customers and employees both well being is taken care of. Saying yes to whatever clients say seems to be Indian IT leaders mentality everywhere

On the 2nd point, which demography do you think is better off with WFO ? Non well off female employees? Because some people can't work at home, that's why everyone has to go to office?

[4Runner]

I've often seen opinions like these emerge from companies and managers with a very limited worldview. I think it's undeniable that a lot (not everyone) of people in SE Asia like to stay till late at work because they don't like going back to their "nagging" family or be responsible for young children. Which is why such people compel others in their office to also work in person. Forget working from home, I have seen people prioritize work over being admitted in the hospital because such is the work culture in those companies.

I don't really care if in the old days 6 days working week used to be the norm because in the even older days, people used to ride bullock carts to go farm or hunt animals. We also used to scribble on walls. We don't really do that anymore do we? We have machines and technology to make us more productive and we have other avenues of life to enjoy besides going to work everyday of the week. So I choose to prioritize time with my family over making a bunch of boomers happy.

I've been part of many large enterprise organizations which only consider the impact an employee makes and really do not consider it any of their business where the employee works from. It's not their business to ensure that the employee is able to socialize and bump into somebody in the foyer, because they believe that is the employee's prerogative to manage in their own personal time and that the office workspace is not supposed to be used as a vehicle to improve one's social life.

I work from home, I do my own chores, I have no maids, i love spending time with my family , I like staying with them, I'm still impactful at my work and I've got my share of promotions to show for it. This is the same case with other high performing and responsible employees in my team and organization who don't have to be micromanaged to perform at their best. We have the confidence and the skills needed to survive anywhere if we were to lose our jobs in one place.

Even being on the board of 59 different companies doesn't give anybody the right to tell me how good I can be at doing my job.

Thank you and no offence intended.

[Bhargav7]

Originally Posted by RiderZone

We work hard not because the boss is standing over our shoulder, we work hard because we are adults, adults who take pride in the work that we do, adults who enjoy the process of solving problems, adults who take satisfaction in being useful and productive. Are there people around us who misuse this privilege and freedom? Of course there are, but when you foster a work culture based on trust and responsibility, such people quickly get thrown out, not because the boss spots them being lazy, but because their colleagues who work diligently and conscientiously never allow their work standards to go down just because of one bad apple.

I highly doubt that this maturity level exists in the Indian workforce. This probably applies to the highly motivated successful folks who excel in their careers. For most others, I do not see this level of commitment, motivation, or focus.

And quite often, that bad apples are not thrown out - they sort of pull down the overall motivation of the group and rot the culture. If we have the self-regulating kind of environments in large organizations where responsible employees thrive and bad apples are thrown out, we wouldn't have this thread in the first place. All organizations would be fully working from home (where possible), thereby saving a lot of costs. It is not just the rentals that can be saved. The wage bill would be reduced significantly since hiring an engineer in Hubli would cost less than hiring in Bengaluru.

As someone said before - if you see every vehicle coming in the wrong way, might be that you are the one going wrong. Similarly, if multiple organizations are facing a common problem, it's unlikely that all of them are wrong in the same way at the same time.

[amitoj]

I am enjoying the respectful exchange of differing opinions here. Let's keep it going!

COVID has indeed brought about a massive change in behavior for employees as well as employers. At the beginning, employers were more than willing to make it as easy as possible for employees to continue to work. They even shipped monitors and arranged discounts on home office furniture! Employees loved the flexibility and employers loved the continued operations.

Now, employees have gotten used to the work life balance, the extra time they get to spend with their loved ones and enjoy not having to waste time commuting. Employers on the other hand seem to be getting jittery about empty offices and the lack of networking effect. To me, the biggest disadvantage of working from home is the lack of hallway interactions, the casual conversations that lead to different ideas and collaborations. Perhaps the best solution is a balance of the two extremes.

Full time work from home across the board is not going to be a reality. But WFO needs to bring in flexibility that was not there prior to COVID. What that balance is, that is for each company to explore on its own. There probably is no pre-canned solution here.

All of this is also in the backdrop of how tight the labor market is. At least in the US, there is a huge shift from last year and the pendulum has swung in the favor of employers. So, employees need to accept that reality too.

[VaibhaoT]

Found this interesting piece of news.
Narayana Murthy Suggests 70-Hour Work Week To Youngsters, Sparks Debate

In context of current thread, just wondering if hours of commute time will be included in "70 hours" or not?

On a serious note, even if you give historical context of WW2, expecting employees to give so much of time is absurd IMHO. That too when the salaries of freshers (as Mr Murthy is quoting specifically "Youngster") for companies like Infy/TCS has hardly increased in last decade. So basically employees should give much more of their time without any expectation of enhanced compensation and that too from Office.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Ultimately the customer and economics drive everything.

This thread keeps veering off to the IMHO narrow view that lousy managers and Vice Presidents are pushing the WFO agenda for their daily power dose. In the end, it is the customer who influences what he wants and how.

And just to put things in perspective we are talking here of 5.4 million in the IT sector out of ~147 million workers in the service sector alone in India.

I hope I did not offend you, that was not my intention. I was just sharing my point of view, experience and opinion. And of course, as I always say, never believe what you read on the internet!

Yes, in the end, it is about customers and economics (company financials), there is no doubt about it. I have found that having highly motivated, loyal and competent employees makes it a lot easier to meet my customer demands and my financial targets. So I spend a lot of my time and energy understanding what my employees like, need and want and how I can support and grow them.

I can tell you, that every person that I ever met, wherever in the world, likes to have more control over their work, when they do it, how they do and so. They prefer an emphatic manager who helps them grow, rather than one who checks up on them.

Do employees need to learn those traits as you suggested? I am sure many do, but to me, that is a huge part of being a manager. You are not responsible for the employees that are in the department you take over. But you are responsible for how you develop every one of them.

How many companies have systems and policies in place that hold managers accountable for growing their employees in these different aspects, other than their field of expertise? (which is the easy one).

I do believe, to your point, there is not a one-size-fits-all WFH or WFO model as such. In practice, you will very often see some kind of hybrid model if you like. So people will work at the office and home in many cases.

I have seen many companies making the same mistake during the COVID years. They were forced to go WFH, and made a few changes, but did not fundamentally change their ways of working. That is a recipe for disaster. And it shows. A lot of the negative comments concerning WFH simply show a lack of adaption and finding new ways of working to overcome those. Again, that is just poor management. People need to stop moaning about not meeting at the coffee machine. Find a different way to meet and bump into people.

Although some of my experience is in Telecom and IT, my comments are more related to WFH in general and certainly not restricted to the IT industry or India as such. All my kids, my son-in-law and my daughter-in-law work in very different industries than IT and Telecom. None of them work full time, none of them WFO full time.

I just came across this article on enterpeneur.com:

https://www.entrepreneur.com/growing...tations/463696

A couple of interesting quotes:

Let's be brutally honest: Would you stick with your company if it failed to prioritize your wellbeing? You're not alone if the answer is a resounding "no." Workers are sending a clear message to the corporate world — wellbeing is non-negotiable. Forget the antiquated notion that a hefty paycheck is the ultimate carrot on the stick. The data is in, and it's irrefutable: workers really care about their wellbeing and flexibility, and corporations better listen if they want to win the talent wars.

This shift is most pronounced among men, particularly those with college degrees and those in their main working years. It signals that the individuals who traditionally occupied power seats in the corporate world are stepping back, reassessing their options, and consciously opting for a reality that allows them to live fuller lives outside their cubicles. And here's where it gets interesting: It's those men who were already logging in more hours and earning more who have chosen to pull back the most. What does that tell us? These are not decisions of necessity but are based on the realization of an unspoken need for balance, wellness and, dare we say it, happiness.

What was merely a hunch or a buzzword in corporate seminars is now backed by empirical evidence: Workers are not just saying they desire more from life than work — they are manifesting these desires through tangible actions. This act of self-determination is altering the landscape of labor availability, making this a two-edged sword. On one hand, we are moving toward a more balanced and humane concept of work; on the other, it brings about challenges of labor shortages that cannot be ignored.

In the corporate arena, this leads to a potentially seismic shift. If you are a business leader failing to account for this fundamental transformation in worker attitudes, prepare for a rude awakening. Worker wellbeing is no longer a "nice-to-have," it's a "must-have" if you hope to attract and retain the top-tier talent needed to fuel innovation and growth in an increasingly competitive market.

Gympass' annual State of Work-Life Wellness Report this October has gifted us some startling figures from a survey of over 5,000 global employees that reinforce the Fed's findings. A whopping 87% said they would consider jumping ship from a company that disregards employee wellbeing, a notable increase from 77% just a year ago. Moreover, 93% equate wellbeing with salary in terms of importance, up 10 points from last year's 83%. The clincher? An overwhelming 96% will consider only those companies that give prime importance to employee wellbeing for their next job hunt.

When it comes to wellbeing and the workplace, there's a myth that has long been shattered: One size fits all. In reality, our surroundings wield considerable influence on our emotional and psychological states.

Employees operating in work environments that don't resonate with their preferences for flexibility — such as remote-capable workers forced to do in-office work due to a top-down mandate against their will — are not just mildly inconvenienced: many are categorically struggling. According to Gympass, workers who find themselves in such discordant settings are twice as likely to describe their condition as "struggling" or "really struggling" than those fortunate enough to be in their ideal work environments. Let's pause to consider the weight of that statement. It means that a vast swath of employees are grappling with a work setup that not only affects their daily satisfaction but potentially curtails their longer-term mental wellbeing.

But the report doesn't stop there; it draws a stark picture of how drastically our sense of wellbeing can be impacted. While 77% of employees working in their preferred flexible environments feel equipped to take care of their wellbeing, this percentage nosedives to a startling 65% for those who don't have the luxury of such alignment. That 12% differential isn't merely statistical noise; it's the loud cry of an unsatisfied and disengaged workforce. And more than a third of employees wish they worked in a different work environment that aligns with their preference.

Let's call it what it is: this is a seismic shift in employee expectations. Flexible work arrangements are no longer just attractive benefits to be dangled in front of potential hires. They have transitioned into non-negotiable components of an employment package. Why is this so vital? Because of the nexus between flexibility and wellbeing underpinning workplace satisfaction, engagement, and productivity.

First, it's time to let go of your traditional "nine-to-five, in-the-office" mindset, a relic that is increasingly at odds with today's dynamic workforce. For those still clinging to a rigid structure, this might feel like a leap into the abyss. However, the alternative is a debilitating anchoring bias — relying too heavily on the first piece of information encountered (in this case, traditional work models) when making decisions. Shake off this outdated mooring and embrace hybrid and even fully remote work options. Use this as an opportunity to gather data on productivity, engagement and wellbeing, adjusting your course as needed.

Second, pivot to a team-led model for flexibility, where collective decision-making takes precedence over a one-size-fits-all approach. Allow teams to collaboratively determine their work environment — be it remote, in-office or hybrid. This not only fosters a sense of ownership and engagement but also optimizes the unique strengths and requirements of each team. Teams can decide when face-to-face interactions are most beneficial for creative brainstorming or complex problem-solving and when remote work can maximize individual focus and productivity. This approach transcends mere optimization of individual roles; it creates an ecosystem where the team, as a cohesive unit, is empowered to make decisions that maximize its collective effectiveness.

Third, invest substantively in employee wellbeing through targeted financial support. In an era where 93% of employees view their wellbeing as equally important to salary, your investment in wellness programming is more than just an employee perk — it's a strategic imperative. Consider offering stipends for mental health support, from licensed therapy to mindfulness apps. Subsidize fitness memberships or offer in-house wellness programs ranging from nutrition seminars to stress management workshops. Financially support ongoing education, not just in terms of professional development but also in areas that contribute to general wellbeing, such as financial literacy courses or parenting classes. By dedicating actual dollars to these initiatives, you're not only enhancing the quality of life for your employees but also setting a cultural tone that prioritizes wellbeing as much as quarterly earnings. After all, when employees feel their wellbeing is taken seriously, they're more engaged, productive and less likely to seek opportunities elsewhere.

Finally, for those concerned about the economic implications of reduced hours, as highlighted by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, it's important to recognize that wellbeing and productivity often exist in a symbiotic relationship. My advice? Focus on outcomes rather than hours. Assess performance through deliverables and milestones instead of the antiquated metric of "time spent at the desk."

I believe the whole WFH is not a stand-alone phenomenon. It is part of a far bigger shift in how organisations are likely to become and stay successful. It is a massive change and it is worrying to see that quite a number of organisations worldwide struggle with it.

To add to the symbiotic relationship between wellbeing and productivity; the same has been proven true for due care for the environment (ESG) and productivity.

Jeroen

Jeroen

[Mustang Sammy]

Originally Posted by Bhargav7

I highly doubt that this maturity level exists in the Indian workforce. This probably applies to the highly motivated successful folks who excel in their careers. For most others, I do not see this level of commitment, motivation, or focus.

And quite often, that bad apples are not thrown out - they sort of pull down the overall motivation of the group and rot the culture.

I personally have seen work environments (usually Indian arms of US MNCs) where tasks would get stretched to the entire length of time assigned for completion, rather than the employee or team focusing on completing the work early and going back for more. Those places felt like government offices, where people would stroll in at 10:30-11, take a chai break, long lunches and be out by 5pm.
The work attitude was entirely task oriented, not results driven. Any issue would result in the team throwing up their hands and waiting for direction from the US counterparts, rather than trying to fix it themselves.
It was highly frustrating, to say the least.
It took new management wielding a big stick to turn things around.

[RiderZone]

Originally Posted by Bhargav7

I highly doubt that this maturity level exists in the Indian workforce.

I would agree with this somewhat, but I would say it's sort of a chicken and egg situation. When I worked for an Indian IT company back in 2010, I was picked up straight from college. The college treated us all like kids to begin with, no real critical thinking skills were taught, just fall in line and follow the crowd. I was sent to Chennai for training, and that was even worse than college! Far more importance was given to the color of my shoes than building my skills. Then I got a project in Mumbai, and my team leader and project manager were the first people who treated me like someone with half a brain, but I was extremely lucky in that, and that's where my attitude changed. If they had treated me the way my trainers at Chennai did, my formative experience in IT would have been extremely negative, and I can't imagine what my thought process would have been subsequently. Maturity doesn't spawn out of nothing, it flows from and is nurtured by your environment. The Indian work culture is an expert in killing maturity, and then complaining about why the workers behave like kids.

[Kurrant]

I work from home and provide services to clients as a contractor. In my family and friends circle, a number of them have been working from home even before COVID. But most, if not all of them are based out of US. One of my cousins was at a senior position in IBM, and he had no office. He was either travelling or would work from home. I envied him, but whenever we were on this topic, I always felt such a concept can't succeed at a large organised scale in India.

Difficult to put it in words, but to make my point I often draw a corollary from self driving cars. Compared to how it is in countries where this concept originated, we treat self driving cars as trash and abuse them. I feel something similar will happen or happens with WFH. Probably we don't prove to be good custodians of something entrusted to us in good faith.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

I hope I did not offend you, that was not my intention. I was just sharing my point of view, experience and opinion.

Not at all Jeroen. You are very right that at least in some parts of the service sector this WFH-WFO factor will force employers to focus more on employee development and well being which often is in short supply and in the Indian IT industry even more so.

All,

Eventually each employer in the service sector will evolve to some variant of WFH-WFO balance. Those employees who wish to only work from home will eventually find themselves a part of the gig economy - contract consultants paid on output and without assurance of income an employment brings. That will work for many and good for them. The tone on this thread by some that they wish to be employees {assured income, social security cover, paid more for time rather than measurable output} but still be 100% or substantially WFH is less likely to happen at least in India.

If the world economy takes a tumble or if the world witnesses a boom both will have ramifications for the WFH-WFO scenario depending on which sides bargaining clout increases or decreases.

Unfortunately, as I said in post nos # 762 this debate at least on this thread has become like religion with inflamed opinions and even a neutral statement or explanation or sharing of views angers some members a little too much! Further there is a misconception that WFH-WFO is an existential matter - it isn't - certainly for the employer it isn't in India at least. And neither the employer nor the employee can have their cake and eat it too. Customers in USA/Europe tolerated having their systems accessed by IT/BPO employees in India from home due to the global emergency. Far too many of them, as I see it, are reluctant to continue doing that. Hence my oft repeated statement that the customer takes the call finally. Some posts on this thread have a strong I, me, myself flavour with little appreciation that the customer who pays the bills ultimately decides if he is okay with WFH and to what extent. And the primary factor for the customer is cyber security.

I know from personal association at least 5 large IT/BPO/Internet Services companies that have permitted those who insist on 100% WFH to become a contract consultant with an IT security cage within which they can access the company's cyber systems - not all jobs fit in that. If your job cannot be done within an IT cage and you demand 100% WFH then parting of ways is the answer. This at least is what I am observing with a workforce of about 150,000 within these 5 organizations.

I don't wish to be rude to any one who is an employee somewhere. In any situation of bargaining or negotiating it helps to be very conscious of one's balance of negotiating power. Till unemployment in India remains what it is the employer (in any sector) wields the lathi. Ranting on social media won't change that. I am trying to share the employers perspective so that it is of some use to members here given that most of this thread, which I started, has degenerated into an angry echo chamber.

[am1m]

Guys, we need to listen to sensible facts that people on both sides are putting down. Unfortunately they are getting lost in the rhetoric and memes, either of the 'Indian employee and his poor work ethic' or 'inept management' variety. Both are true in specific, anecdotal cases but both are lazy generalizations.

Personally, I've found so much useful information from members like V.Narayan who just has a level of insight that I don't possess, and I've learnt so much from his posts.

Admittedly I've also been triggered by generalizations in other posts that don't agree with my viewpoint and have reacted to them, often just repeating the same things I've already posted earlier. That doesn't contribute anything to the discussion. (But immensely satisfying though and, I guess, doesn't hurt TBhp page views either! ) I hope I can avoid that going forward.

Ultimately what is coming out is that both models can work in the IT industry (including the vague 'hybrid' ). But different options for different companies with different circumstances. Things have changed. Some form of remote work is here to stay. Everyone, or even a significant number of people in the IT industry working remote is not going to happen.

Perhaps this thread could now evolve into one where we share strategies, personal experiences to help people make the transition. Or advice on why it may not be the best solution for a specific individual/business. Without either being interpreted as a refuting of one's worldview.

[d.w.w.]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Ultimately the customer and economics drives everything.

I am doubtful on the customer part though. My customer shutdown and vacated the office space during COVID and offered permanent WFH for their employees and direct contractors. For business operations they opened a new space and that was meant only for business, not IT. They offered the same privileges to be extended to their vendors also. But when this came up, the company's response was that the clients(customer) should not interfere in the company operations and we were warned of HR actions for discussing internal things with customer You might say this is a one off case, but when such people has influence in decision making, WFO becomes a one-size-fits-all

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

The biggest problem of all was the significantly increased vulnerability of the company's computer systems to viruses due to every machine operating via a home line.

The root cause of such issue is the misuse of company asset for personal work. I know many people who don't own a personal laptop and their reason for that is having an office laptop. When you do 'dirty browsing' on office laptop, it increases the risk of virus/malware most people will keep mum even if their system get affected. This will stop once strong disciplinary action is taken against few people and the news is widely shared in the organization. IT companies are very shy to take actions on such instances even if they have hard proof to pinpoint the employee. The only place where I have seen strict action being taken is sexual harassment cases.

Originally Posted by Bhargav7

I highly doubt that this maturity level exists in the Indian workforce.

+1.

Originally Posted by Bhargav7

And quite often, that bad apples are not thrown out

Again +1. I wonder what is preventing companies from throwing out such people. Couple of personal experiences.

My customer has an ongoing project done by a WITCH company. This company build a team and 3 people in the team refused to work for no reason. They were still in the team and billable, but they just wont work. Seeing this other people also started following the same footsteps. A senior guy there told me that this attitude is because they know the company is not going to take action on them, worst case they will be moved out of the project.

Few years back we took a 5yr exp resource in our team. He worked on a similar technology as ours and the idea was to train him and get the work done. But then he seemed to be missing the big picture, so we started on the basics. We asked this guy to write a java program to add 2 numbers and he simply couldn't, even using Google's help . (This guy had a MCA from a reputed university). The PM simply released him and there was no action taken.

[avira_tk]

Originally Posted by d.w.w.

My customer has an ongoing project done by a WITCH company. This company build a team and 3 people in the team refused to work for no reason. They were still in the team and billable, but they just wont work. Seeing this other people also started following the same footsteps. A senior guy there told me that this attitude is because they know the company is not going to take action on them, worst case they will be moved out of the project.

The worst case they can do is not a different project, especially in this current economy. They haven't seen anyone being escorted out, but they'll learn soon enough, there are zero protections in this sector. What is the client doing? paying 120 hours a week for seat warming?

Originally Posted by d.w.w.

Few years back we took a 5yr exp resource in our team. He worked on a similar technology as ours and the idea was to train him and get the work done. But then he seemed to be missing the big picture, so we started on the basics. We asked this guy to write a java program to add 2 numbers and he simply couldn't, even using Google's help . (This guy had a MCA from a reputed university). The PM simply released him and there was no action taken.

MCA doesn't involve much coding, my team mate who was an MCA said it involves more broad concepts etc. He was good at coding because he graduated in mathematics, very good with logic. The PM released him as he was probably assigned by a HR person who thought SAP and ASAP are beginner and advanced level of sap.