Policy Makers Jobs Worth???!!!

[visualAd]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/h...re/8231234.stm

A council is to ban Facebook on its computers after it was revealed staff spent on average 400 hours on the site every month.

....

each of its 4,500 staff .... spending about six minutes a month on the site.

I don't like or use Facebook. But what exactly do these people expect to gain from blocking Facebook? An extra 20 seconds of work off each employee every day?

I guess that they have not considered that staff are now going to be leaving work earlier or returning from lunch break later as they take their work laptops to the nearest Wifi zone or go for lunch in their nearest Internet Cafe.

[mendhak]

as they take their work laptops

In London? Impossible.

to the nearest Wifi zone

In London? Impossible.

or go for lunch in their nearest Internet Cafe.

In London? Impossible.

[wossname]

People should go to Church in their lunchtimes like I do.

I pray for all your souls.

[Davadvice]

i don't even know why this is news ?

I can't access any of these sites and i think that i should be stopped from accessing them as there is no requirement for me to access them to do my job!

in fact as it's a council they should ban all internet activity and only give access to people who can fully justify it. we do pay their wages!!

if it was my council i would be asking for a refund for the "400 hours a month" iirc

David

[wossname]

I'm a greengrocer by trade so I've got a reason for being on sites like "The Onion" all day.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I pray for all your souls.

Your wish had jolly well better not be granted. I can get a much better deal for my soul than anything YOU offer!!

[chris128]

I think blocking sites like this does mean you get more work out of people... yes they might leave a couple of minutes earlier or whatever but what does that matter if they would have just been sat there on facebook anyway? All you are doing is taking away a distraction for them - some people will spend all day browsing the web just because they can, if you stopped them from doing so then they would do work instead because they have nothing else to do. At one site we support they dont block any websites and when I walk around the offices I see football websites or facebook up on a lot of the PCs every time I walk past.

[BillGeek]

The majority of websites are blocked at my office as well. Social Networking, Gaming and Gaming related sites, even some of the online shopping areas. Gambling sites, webmail sites... I can't even access my hosting admin panel from the office.

Fortunately, there are billions of sites on the internet. Missing a couple is no biggie.

[FunkyDexter]

Am I the only person who sees the irony in people defending the decision to block sites that aren't required for their jobs by posting in the the chit chat forum?

[chris128]

haha thats a very good point

[visualAd]

Am I the only person who sees the irony in people defending the decision to block sites that aren't required for their jobs by posting in the the chit chat forum?

I often put in 40+ hours per week, so do most of my colleagues.

The only "personal" web browsing I do is on my often 15mins of lunch break; I have little or no time to do the work I am required to do, let alone bunking off. I do have a web browser open as I work, normally with a couple of news websites that I scan throughout the day (I sometimes might steal 5 mins to read an article). It does not distract me from my work but it does prove a welcome break fro the "intense thinking" mindset.

If an organisation is concerned about the amount of time being spent doing non-work related tasks, banning it would cause animosity that would likely translate to the employees finding other methods of conducting their non work related tasks. Things like this point to a systemic problem in the culture of the organisation when such behaviour is rife among staff and bringing policies that restrict their activities further does not address the problem and may even exacerbate it.

By allowing employees to maintain a work-life balance; they often feel more trusted and autonomous in their role (prompting some of them to use their common sense) and are usually happy to give extra when things get busy. Employees who feel they are being watched and are not trusted tend to do their job to the letter of their contract are more averse to making a judgement call and arrive and leave dead on their contracted times.

[chris128]

I often put in 40+ hours per week

So do I, we work a 42.5 hour week

Anyway, I still dont agree - I think some people would probably try and find a way around it yes but the majority of people would just think oh well I cant do whatever I want now so I may as well get my work done.

[Davadvice]

i'm with chris on this.

Please remember that this is the council that we are talking about. 50% of the ppl that work for the council actualy only do nothing each day. it's part of their contract you see.
you would be lucky if they do 10hrs a week

my bin man won't drive in my street if there is a car parked on the road!!!

[Blakk_Majik]

With the advancement in cell phones and mobile browsers, there really isn't any need to use a computer for sites like Facebook.

And does it really warrant blocking a site if each employee spends a lousy six minutes a MONTH on it?

[chris128]

With the advancement in cell phones and mobile browsers, there really isn't any need to use a computer for sites like Facebook.

I dont think there are many places where you could get away with just sitting looking at your mobile phone all the time... its much easier for people to get away with using the internet for personal things on their PC. Plus, mobile phone web browsing still sucks if you ask me.

And does it really warrant blocking a site if each employee spends a lousy six minutes a MONTH on it?

I'm pretty sure thats an average, not the actual time each person spent on it per month...
Also, if you actually read the article you will notice this part as well:

Hampshire County Council issued a threat to block the site after it found 46 employees were regularly spending more than an hour on the site each day

[Davadvice]

yeah, 6 min was an average. that means that for the 1 who goes on for 2 min during their lunch is being hit with the other 4 min. When in fact that there is a minority that are sitting on it all day and doing Nothing in their job.

[visualAd]

yeah, 6 min was an average. that means that for the 1 who goes on for 2 min during their lunch is being hit with the other 4 min. When in fact that there is a minority that are sitting on it all day and doing Nothing in their job.

Then they should be dealt with.

[chris128]

But why bother having to 'deal with' people when you can just block the website and avoid all of it

[visualAd]

But why bother having to 'deal with' people when you can just block the website and avoid all of it

Because invariably those responsible will find other ways to waste time.

[Davadvice]

i'm sorry but i can not see a business case for the councils to have access to such sites. unless they are using it to snoop. how do you feel about that ? so you work for the council ???