[HN Gopher] Amendment introduced to limit remote working in Ohio
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Amendment introduced to limit remote working in Ohio
        
       Author : biscuits1
       Score  : 27 points
       Date   : 2023-06-26 21:15 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.wdtn.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.wdtn.com)
        
       | jrs235 wrote:
       | Question: Are state employee pensions considered income earned in
       | the state the employee worked while earning it? Or can they move
       | out of state and avoid state income taxes? Should they be able
       | to?
        
       | drdec wrote:
       | The headline is misleading, the amendment would limit remote work
       | for the state of Ohio.
        
         | chasingthewind wrote:
         | > If the measure survives, Ohioans who work for the state of
         | Ohio would be limited to only eight hours of remote work each
         | week.
         | 
         | Specifically state government workers.
        
         | karaterobot wrote:
         | That is, it applies only to people who work for the state
         | government of Ohio specifically.
        
       | renewiltord wrote:
       | Remember: regulations are written in blood.
        
         | trickyager wrote:
         | While generally fair, if this were specifically true for
         | regulations about remote work, then working from home would be
         | promoted and not limited.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | jkubicek wrote:
       | > If the measure survives, Ohioans who work for the state of Ohio
       | would be limited to only eight hours of remote work each week.
       | 
       | The amendment limits remote work for Ohioans _working for the
       | state of Ohio_. Probably still silly and short-sighted, but not
       | as bad as I was imagining.
        
         | thehappypm wrote:
         | As a taxpayer I think in-person work reduces waste
        
           | EA-3167 wrote:
           | What's the evidence for your belief? What sort of waste are
           | we talking about? Is that waste enough to offset the
           | fuel/time use for commuting?
        
           | darklion wrote:
           | Citation needed.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | diegoholiveira wrote:
             | It's a personal opinion, citation is not required.
        
               | LadyCailin wrote:
               | No it's not. A personal opinion would be "I wish people
               | would work in person more often." "In person work reduces
               | waste" is a (perhaps true, perhaps not) statement of
               | fact, which is very reasonable to ask for a citation
               | about.
        
               | tomrod wrote:
               | Subjective judgements which are quantifiably proven or
               | disproven should be replaced with evidence.
        
           | vore wrote:
           | Well, as a taxpayer I think in-person work increases waste.
           | Now it's even!
        
           | aeze wrote:
           | I'd be careful of such a generalization. Studies seem to be a
           | wash. I'd imagine it depends on the policies and processes of
           | a given organization.
        
             | candiddevmike wrote:
             | Remote work is the ultimate way to get offices to become
             | paperless.
        
           | chrismcb wrote:
           | I don't know why you need to clarify that you are a taxpayer.
           | But I would argue that in person work creates more waste.
           | Between commuting and real estate. It might be easier for a
           | remote worker to not work, but it should be easy for a
           | manager to notice their employee isn't working.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | vlunkr wrote:
       | This applies only to employees of the state:
       | 
       | > Ohioans who work for the state of Ohio would be limited to only
       | eight hours of remote work each week
       | 
       | Seems like a pretty arbitrary thing to set in stone.
        
       | mistrial9 wrote:
       | during an adjustment phase of residential real estate in the
       | continental US, maybe around 2008-2010.. one of the very few
       | places in the entire US where home prices fell, was in Ohio.
        
       | carabiner wrote:
       | How can I even sleep knowing Ohio exists?
        
         | MissTake wrote:
         | Me too & I live in this godforsaken state.
        
           | toomuchtodo wrote:
           | Lots of better states to choose from friend, all nearby!
        
       | kneebonian wrote:
       | Well this is about the kind of thing I'd expect from Ohio....
        
       | pipeline_peak wrote:
       | I work remotely from Virginia...centered in Ohio.
       | 
       | Not feeling good about this
        
       | MissTake wrote:
       | "Prohibits state employees from working from home for more than
       | eight hours per forty hour workweek for the time period beginning
       | October 1, 2023, and ending June 30, 2025."
       | 
       | As @kesslern stated earlier, coffee shops are totally fine still,
       | as are libraries, other people's homes, even the parks...
       | 
       | This is why we should never allow politicians to get involved in
       | politics.
        
       | kesslern wrote:
       | It's not mentioned in the article but the language is such that
       | state employees are limited to 8 hours of working from home.
       | Coffee shops, a neighbor's house, restaurants, all fine.
        
         | jonny_eh wrote:
         | Maybe they can work at a library, those are government
         | buildings afterall.
        
         | onemoresoop wrote:
         | Nice loophole find.
        
       | Terr_ wrote:
       | OK, so _state employees_ would be hard-limited to 8h /week... But
       | why does that policy need to be codified into _state law_ across
       | all possible state employees and agencies, and not just a policy
       | decided by different agencies or offices or managers?
       | 
       | I can't help but feel there's some hidden agenda by whichever
       | anonymous Ohio legislators introduced the provision into the
       | bill.
       | 
       | ____
       | 
       | Found another article [0], which says:
       | 
       | > Senate President Matt Huffman (R-Lima) said the suggestion to
       | force state workers to return to their offices came from a member
       | of the Ohio House. Huffman didn't identify that member. The
       | provision was not part of the House version of the budget.
       | 
       | > [...] Huffman said 10 years ago, when he was in the House, if
       | he had an issue with someone at the Ohio Department of Education,
       | he could walk over to their office and talk to them about it. He
       | said that's not the case anymore. There are times when issues
       | cannot be resolved with a phone call, Huffman also said.
       | 
       | Sounds almost as if the legislators don't like teleconferencing,
       | and miss their ability to go throw their weight around in person
       | at the capitol.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.statenews.org/government-
       | politics/2023-06-20/sta...
        
         | lvspiff wrote:
         | I'm unfortunately inclined to look at it from the negative side
         | -- Its more like they don't like writing it down and/or having
         | a paper trail of some sort. Its hard to achieve that when you
         | have to schedule a virtual meeting or type up an email. Even a
         | phone call leaves a record of there being interaction. They
         | don't want THAT and I see that happening in corp culture to. If
         | its not on a person's calendar, in a discussion thread, or
         | there wasn't an email then it didn't happen and there is
         | plausible deniability. Its like the madmen method of the board
         | room back deals is being taken away from them and its too
         | difficult to let go.
        
         | unsupp0rted wrote:
         | I suppose if it's a state law it reduces all the time wasted by
         | employees renegotiating this every month or so on a per-office,
         | per-boss level.
         | 
         | Not to mention the jealousy and back-stabbing that would result
         | from one office having unlimited remote work and another one
         | having almost none.
        
         | jonny_eh wrote:
         | That, or commercial real estate is a powerful lobby group.
        
           | giantrobot wrote:
           | Sounds like a case of "and" rather than "or".
        
             | jonny_eh wrote:
             | and/or, as in `||`
        
         | notatoad wrote:
         | So basically the same justification as every push to get
         | employees back in the office: Very Important People want to be
         | able to yell at employees who dont actually work for them, but
         | are beneath them in an org chart.
         | 
         | When employees work from home and meeting requests have to go
         | through proper channels, somebody might have a chance to stop
         | that abuse.
        
           | analog31 wrote:
           | Perhaps more importantly, Very Important People don't want to
           | leave a record of their conversations.
        
         | rodgerd wrote:
         | > and miss their ability to go throw their weight around in
         | person at the capitol.
         | 
         | Remote workers in the financial sector are 14% less likely to
         | commit fraud or other crimes.
         | 
         | In-person workers are ~15% more likely to commit crimes.
         | 
         | The bad apples want you back into the office to bully you into
         | going along with their crimes.
        
       | cebert wrote:
       | Are employees of state universities considered to be employees of
       | the state? If so, it seems like this legislation could be
       | impactful to academia.
        
         | analog31 wrote:
         | Generally yes (former State U employee, and spouse of State U
         | employee). On the other hand, salaried workers aren't required
         | to report their hours.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-06-26 23:01 UTC)