State-Sponsored Solitaire?

jefu writes "According to this story the state of North Carolina may be considering banning solitaire on state owned machines. It seems that state workers are now perceived as having replaced leaning on brooms with playing solitaire or minesweeper. The story provides coverage of both sides of the issue, noting that playing solitaire (or other games) may provide workers with a way to burn off some stress, but that this kind of activity is likely to be perceived as time wasting. My favorite bit (especially as April 15th draws ever closer) is where the author notes that fifty percent of the time an IRS employee is on the computer they are playing games, shopping online or gambling."

Comments

Misses the real problem

[bigtallmofo]

It sounds to me like the real problem is that government workers aren't able to hit Alt-Tab fast enough. Once we address that, then the problem will be neatly swept under the rug.

Linux, here we come!

[zecg]

... and with this regulation fell the last obstacle to Linux acceptance in North Carolina.

Scientific approach

[zecg]

where the author notes that fifty percent of the time an IRS employee is on the computer they are playing games, shopping online or gambling

Would that mean the IRS employs 50% too many workers?

Re:Scientific approach

[weighn]

OH&S SITE INSPECTOR: So, how many people work here?
IRS SECTION MANAGER: Oh, about half of them.

Brilliant!

[Anonymous Coward]

I can see it now: employees sneaking in 52-card decks into the office and playing solitaire on their desk. Boss walks buy, they quickly throw their keyboard on top of it and get back to work. Gotta "burn off stress" somehow.

I just hope Minesweeper addicts don't resort to planting landmines in the office to get their fix.

Re:PANIC!!!

[SimplePaul]

then they would be on the right track to stopping time-wasting ;)

This is STILL stupid.

[KingSkippus]

I have worked at a lot of companies, and one common theme among them is almost always, "Let's get rid of the games." As a sysadmin, I've actually been the one tasked with implementing it. However...

I think these policies are, in a word, stupid. If someone is going to waste time, they're going to waste time. If it's not on a game of Solitaire, it will be on some other non-work activity. The fact is that you cannot command a person to work for eight (if they're lucky) solid hours. Or as Scott Kirwin put it in the article, "Managers [have] lost sight that workers are real people, not robots."

Every time I've been asked to delete the games off of machines, I've expressed extreme disapproval. I've tried to explain until I'm blue in the face that it will not increase productivity. I've tried to explain that if you treat employees like they're four years old by taking away their toys, it will only cause resentment and a resulting LOSS of productivity. I've tried to point out that small Solitaire breaks (or any other mindless activity) actually help a lot of people get back into a more productive mindset going forward. I've also tried to point out that games such as Solitaire help people new to computers learn their way around. For example, it taught my mother, who had only used DOS-based accounting software, how to use a mouse. Sure, it sounds simple to you, but keep in mind that she had no idea what left-clicking, dragging-and-dropping, minimizing and maximizing, etc. were, but she was up to speed within a few minutes thanks to Solitaire.

But in general, all that stuff makes no difference to management. Since companies have layed off and outsourced to the point where they can't function any more, all that matters is that we have to be productive 24x7. Barring that, all that matters is that we have to LOOK productive 24x7.

So stupid...

Re:Slackers Are a Management Problem

[mccalli]

That is, if an employee is not meeting expectations because he is spending too much time trolling the net, that's his fault, not the Internet's. The same problem would exist if he spent too much time doing crossword puzzles are talking to his girlfriend on the phone. The core problem is the employee not meeting expectations, not what he's doing to divert his attention.

Agreed, but I'd like to introduce a slight cautionary note. For some jobs I simply disbelieve that it is possible to be productive 100% of the day for 100% of all working days. I always love these productivity studies which say "600,000 man days of work are lost to <daft activity x> every year, employers say <daft activity x> must be banned from the workplace to ensure productivity rises."

Which, of course, it doesn't because 600,000 man days of work are now being 'lost' by the employees switching to <daft activity y> instead. That 600,000 days was an illusion - the productivity was never there to be had, in some jobs it's impossible for people to work as if they were machines. I including programming in this by the way.

I don't play games at work, but I certainly browse the web and spend some time talking to my wife over SMS messages. In days when desktop internet access wasn't common, I'd do crosswords at lunchtime or go for coffee breaks. Granted some of the figures mentioned sound extreme, but still - 100% of everybody's time isn't always a realistic target.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Karl Marx? Identity?

[5ynic]

Marxian theories have, on the contrary, largely proven correct since his death. Marx did not argue "for" violent overthrow, but rather that violent attempts to overthrow capitalism were at his time of writing inevitable - and therefore not worth arguing "for" or "against".

Re:Slackers Are a Management Problem

[KingSkippus]

I've been saying this to no avail for years now. I wish someone would start listening.

I get so frustrated at management trying to pass off their responsibilites to the IT folks at companies. Simple example: Internet content filtering. I work at a large (Fortune 100) company, and I handle second-level support calls. One common theme that generates hundreds of calls a month (it is multinational) is, "I need access to such-and-such a site for legitimate business purposes, but it says that it's blocked due to (whatever reason the content filtering company had classified it)." So we have to get on a directly-connected machine, check out the site, verify that the person actually needs access, get approval from the person's manager, put in a request with the guy who manages the content filter, wait a few days until he can get around to it, then call the person back and let them know that the site has been allowed.

That's an awful lot of work to keep the very few people who may browse porn at work from browsing porn at work, and it's a major pain in the ass to the honest people trying to do their jobs. I haven't done a formal study, but it must cost the company thousands of dollars every month (maybe more) in the cost of the service plus the man hours spent going through this exercise. How much would the company lose if they just stopped content filtering? Significantly less.

But that doesn't matter. Management looks at this as an IT issue, not a management issue. If they push this responsibility onto us, that's one less thing they have to do, and one more level of blame that separates them from potential violators of corporate policy.

Going back to topic, games are the same way. If someone goofs off all day playing Solitaire, management looks at it as a problem with the computer or a problem with the IT department. Funny, they never seem to see it for what it really is: a problem with the employee or a problem with the employee's manager.

I vote for even more games!

[mrcrowbar]

Let the IRS play all the games they want. The more games they play the less time they have to audit me.