Ask HN: How to implement a stricter “stay at home while sick” office policy? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: How to implement a stricter “stay at home while sick” office policy?

#11

Post by charwalker » Mon, Jan 27, 2020, 11:22 PM UTC

Does your team have set WFH days each week to better that practice and be prepared for sick days that are WFH days?

Is there a policy for sick days and their usage and minimal if any retaliation for regular use? If sick days are part of vaca days or general PTO but make up a small number then I'd say that doesn't count.

Re: Ask HN: How to implement a stricter “stay at home while sick” office policy?

#12

Post by duxup » Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 2:53 AM UTC

I had a boss that would simply send people home.

For some folks that was what they needed. It was the Midwest and some folks just want to work and would come in by default if they were able to walk.

After a while people started to understand that he really meant "stay home if you are sick", not just if they're borderline on their deathbed.

Lots of places are less tolerant of people staying home so they sometimes need to see what level of "too sick" is "sick" before they stay home on their own.

This, like a lot of things, requires a good relationship to avoid hurt feelings.

Re: Ask HN: How to implement a stricter “stay at home while sick” office policy?

#13

Post by diehunde » Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 4:09 PM UTC

A person I know was given thousands of dollars to pay for their home office setup. They got a modern desk, chair, giant monitor and pretty good computer. This kind of setup would make working from home much more attractive IMO.

Re: Ask HN: How to implement a stricter “stay at home while sick” office policy?

#14

Post by auslegung » Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 8:35 PM UTC

machello13 wrote: post #8

auslegung wrote: post #2

People will stay home if there’s no detriment to doing so, and you say people don’t want to suffer the productivity setbacks. What are those setbacks? If they can be addressed people will almost certainly stay home when sick.

> People will stay home if there’s no detriment to doing so This is not true. I, personally, hate working from home and will come into the office any chance I get. There are people who would prefer to work from home and people who wouldn't, and I'm not sure which group is bigger. I imagine it depends a lot on your personality and your living situation (people with families and a big house might prefer to work from ho…

Our definitions (or maybe scope) of "detriment" are different because you're saying exactly what I mean. If being at home is bad in any way, that's a detriment to staying home. People's opinions differ on whether the employer should help make the employee's home a better work environment.

Re: Ask HN: How to implement a stricter “stay at home while sick” office policy?

#15

Post by tdeck » Tue, Jan 28, 2020, 9:40 PM UTC

To be honest, I don't think people are coming into work to avoid a setback in productivity, I think they're coming in to avoid being perceived as lazy and not dedicated to the work. A typical cold is contagious with symptoms for 7-10 days, I can't imagine how I would be perceived for staying home that long due to a cold, which is considered trivial.

Re: Ask HN: How to implement a stricter “stay at home while sick” office policy?

#16

Post by pzxc » Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 1:56 AM UTC

An answer I haven't seen yet in this thread: give people actual sick days instead of PTO.

At most companies I've worked at, including my current employer, sick days and vacation days are combined into PTO - Paid Time Off. Who wants to burn a vacation day if you're sick but capable of working?

Re: Ask HN: How to implement a stricter “stay at home while sick” office policy?

#17

Post by afarrell » Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 1:58 AM UTC

When you say "making this process more rigorous" and "through enforcement", this sounds very much like you're saying that you want to know how to hold people accountable for coming in while sick.

Is that right?

If so, I'm going to have to agree with Jocko Willink on this one: accountability is kinda a crutch. People should be led so that they themselves drive toward this. And in order to lead people, you need to create clarity on:

- Why? -- What is the impact of this thing you want?

- Why not? -- What are the barriers? How shall we tackle them

- What is the coherent overall leadership intent?

If you have some parts of your intent which are in tension, you need to really identify those because the way those you lead try to resolve that tension is probably at the core of the problem.