Didn't see this posted and I know how the board loves to debate WFH productivity.

Good Abbott in my opinion.

https://www.kut.org/texas/2025-06-26/abbott-telework-bill-state-law-agencies

"Maggie DiSanza with the Texas State Employees Union said the governor's signature wasn't altogether shocking. TSEU lobbied in favor of HB 5196, pointing to the state's own study that found productivity didn't dip amid an increase in remote work, and it helped reduce turnover at state agencies after years of attrition. Ultimately, that study helped marshal the bipartisan support to get the bill over the finish line, DiSanza said."

Put it in reverse Governor!

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

State Employees aren't exactly known for productivity. Glad they can half-ass jobs that largely shouldn't exist in the first place from the comfort of home again

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

---

German hookers?

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

---

if the industry is homemaking, I agree.

the most cool guy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

---

if the industry is homemaking, I agree.

---

Engineering and design. Seen it at multiple firms. The design staff work far better alone without interruption they are constantly subject to in an office setting.

Depends on the position, type of work and the days task as well. If I am trying to do a long comprehensive report, I can do that much better from home. But it's hard to test stuff/"do science" in the lab if I'm home.

Also if I'm coming down with something, that's an easy one. No need to get people at work sick and cause productivity losses.

There are of course many jobs that simply cannot be done from home.

Anything that keeps less people on the roads is a good thing.

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

Government agencies are unproductive by default. It doesn't matter where the "work" takes place.

It's easier for a manager to set a default rule at one extreme or another rather than making difficult personnel decisions and giving some employees WFH and some having to come in. So they push the easy button and say no WFH for anyone or WFH for everyone.

I think the best managers in the future will make WFH an option for employees whose role and/or demonstrated history of being a high performer, or as a perk for retention, can show themselves to be real leaders in this time of change.

I can be equally unproductive in the office as I am at home. There are fewer distractions in the office. But the office takes longer to commute to and I generally sneak in a longer lunch break. At home my wife thinks it is catch up time and the kids and the dog usually request some of my time. I prefer going to the office significantly more.

The kids thing is a big part of the dynamic on how effective it is. My kids are in school all day and/or old enough to take care of themselves. So work from home is distraction free.

A vast majority of the workplace roles are more productive in the office (for at least 2-3 days a week).
I feel sorry people starting out their careers who are only remote.

I have always been a proponent of work from home for those types of jobs that can be done effectively and productively in that way. As long as there is accountability and requirements and targets are met, it is often a more efficient arrangement. Some workers can't responsibly handle it and that Ned's to be identified and corrected.

My issue is that if and when management or leadership wants you to report into an offfice, there should be compliance as a condition of employment.

You could DOGE our state government and cut it by about 50% and it'd still keep on cruising.

Horn_in_Aggieland said:

---

....the state's own study that found productivity didn't dip amid an increase in remote work.....

---

Do very little at office = do very little at home.

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

A vast majority of the workplace roles are more productive in the office (for at least 2-3 days a week).
I feel sorry people starting out their careers who are only remote.

---

But in a way, after taking more than half of their courses on line, sleeping until noon at college, prepares them for remote work.

ts5641 said:

---

Anything that keeps less people on the roads is a good thing.

---

Fewer.

Underrated post.


For reference….
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2839681862721521&surface_type=vod&referral_source=vod_deeplink_unit

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

---

Government isn't one of them.

I'm on an advisory council for a state agency and up until the back to the office mandate, we had one in-person meeting in 2 years, mostly because the staff wouldn't trouble themselves to come in to the office for a meeting. Absolutely nothing was getting done.

IMO, this is a bad move for Abbott. Forcing government employees to come to work is one of the few ways to hold them accountable for their performance or lack thereof. Otherwise, I guarantee you they are slacking off at home or holding second jobs on the taxpayer dime.

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

The internal "REEEEE!!!!" of the geriatric when they see this is a thing of beauty.

Now this is how you start the weekend.

FTAG 2000 said:

---

You could DOGE our state government and cut it by about 50% and it'd still keep on cruising.

---

Seeing as how it's done in the private sector all the time, you're not wrong. The only difference with this is that this comes a la Wheelie, you know a "Look at him follow Elon and Trump MAGA 'Mercan conservative."

Ag87H2O said:

---

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

---

Government isn't one of them.

I'm on an advisory council for a state agency and up until the back to the office mandate, we had one in-person meeting in 2 years, mostly because the staff wouldn't trouble themselves to come in to the office for a meeting. Absolutely nothing was getting done.

IMO, this is a bad move for Abbott. Forcing government employees to come to work is one of the few ways to hold them accountable for getting something done. Otherwise, I guarantee you they are slacking off at home or holding second jobs on the taxpayer dime.

---

I would agree. See the Federal Government. Trump went the opposite direction and we got to unload a decent amount of dead wood over it.

But I hold private vs federal employment to a different standard.

It's been a while since we've had a "people who work from home suck"/ "no they don't thread". I don't know why people insist that every job is the same and must be done in a sea of cubes after and hour long commute.

Of course lab work must be done in the office. Of course plant jobs must be done in the plant. Of course field jobs must be done in the field.

But many jobs don't have to be done in an office. And people can and do goof off in the office. They disappear, sit on the toilet, discuss sports, take long lunches, go to their friends desk for long periods of time to "discuss a difficult account", etc. Real leaders can measure performance in or out of the office.

Of course we are talking about govt employees here, so…

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

---

if the industry is homemaking, I agree.

---

Engineering and design. Seen it at multiple firms. The design staff work far better alone without interruption they are constantly subject to in an office setting.

---

In work with every large civil/land engineering firm in the Houston area, and have before and after WFH.

I find this completely false in my industry.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

---

German hookers?

---

Civil engineers who connect fire hydrants to sewer mains

redag06 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

---

if the industry is homemaking, I agree.

---

Engineering and design. Seen it at multiple firms. The design staff work far better alone without interruption they are constantly subject to in an office setting.

---

In work with every large civil/land engineering firm in the Houston area, and have before and after WFH.

I find this completely false in my industry.

---

Civil also. I have found the complete opposite. Not Houston, but DFW and Austin. It's also extremely difficult to find good talent or lure talent from others if work from home is not an option.

Mind you I'm talking hybrid and not full WFH.

It allows it but any state agency under the governor can be told by him not to allow it. This doesn't mean his agencies are going to get to work from home.

This discussion is so COVID era. High performers will be able to work where they want. Low and many medium performers will not be working at all --> AI.

Unfortunately, the last place that AI will replace jobs will generally be governmental jobs.

This bill just provided a framework that state agencies have to abide by to allow work from home. State law already allowed for it. This bill added some specific requirements for uniformity. There is nothing in it that says agencies have to allow remote work. if the governor tells agency commissioners no work from home then they just won't allow it.

If a manager can only determine employee productivity when they are physically in the office then they shouldn't be managing. I have a large team of safety consultants that work in the field full time. I talk with my people and assess their performance all the time. None of them are in the office. I still know when they are being productive or not.

As someone mentioned above, work from home doesn't apply for every job type but it is a valuable tool, especially if you are trying to recruit talent in areas with terrible traffic, or in the case of a state government job are at a disadvantage in terms of compensation.

It should never be a right of the job though, but rather a privilege that can be instantly removed if abused.

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the industry. In some people are far more productive at home.

---

if the industry is homemaking, I agree.

---

Engineering and design. Seen it at multiple firms. The design staff work far better alone without interruption they are constantly subject to in an office setting.

---

This is a million times false. You need constant communication. You need to hear conversations over the wall. People working in a vacuum are absolutely detrimental to the design process.

the most cool guy said:

---

BrazosDog02 said:

---

Yikes. The olds and the "ya gotta be at work to be productive" crowd are not going to be happy about this.

---

It makes no difference to me. But the idea that, on average, people are equally productive at home as they are in the office is so obviously false it is absolutely ****ing laughable.

---

It depends on the work ethic of the person. In my work environment (before I retired) my co-workers and I took ownership of our responsibilities and put in however much time was required to get the work done. This often included staying late at the office or taking a briefcase full of work home at night or the weekends. I can visualize a dedicated person taking this approach whether working at the office or at home. The question is what percentage of today's workers have that kind of work ethic.