Thanks David. You actually brought up one more area of trust:
Commitment. How do they know I'm not wasting time? When I was a
sysprog in the office, if I wasn't working on something specific there
was a lot of free time. So I would try to work on side projects,
assembler, scripts, etc. One day the boss decided he would be spending
a day with each person to watch what they did, so my plan was to browse
random web sites that day, just to make a point. Luckily he gave up on
that idea and it never happened.
And yes, I agree there's almost no reason to work in an office anymore.
I only mentioned "datacenter" because I was on site last week watching a
z16 install. Turns out the sysprogs for that machine have never been to
the site - they rely on contractors to drop by and connect cables, work
with the SSR, help with HMC setup, etc. I brought my regular tool kit
including USB's, cables, and an 8-port switch for problem diagnosis. I
imagine there are some places that wouldn't let me in the door with that
kit.
On 2/20/2023 3:48 AM, David Spiegel wrote:
Hi Tom,
I've been saying this (i.e. matter of trust) for many years.
I also say that any (potential) employer who demands that a SysProg work
on-site is being illogical. I have seen many job ads which say "remote
until COVID". This means that they are willing to trust my work out of
the office while
there is a pandemic. Afterwards, I'm not trusted?!
(Back in the '80s before VPNs, some places had no (or very limited)
remote access. Later, the on-site mentality was changed by a lot of
companies with governments being the big exception.
They also believed (mistakenly) that if an employee/contractor was "in
the office" the work could be monitored. i believe that if the
milestones are set properly, this is not a problem. Also, if someone
really wants to goof off, it can be done at the office too.)
While we're on the topic of installing one's "took kit" ... I work at a
place where the MVS people (i do middleware at this job, but, I've been
doing MVS for more than 40 years) have been thwarting every effort I've
made to have (ACF2) TSO Command Limiting removed from my account. I even
showed them official emails from Broadcom saying that TSO Command
Limiting is useless for my job (especially because I have update access
to APF Authorized PDS(E)s).
At one meeting, the MVS Team Lead asked why I want this capability. I
mentioned the CBT "Tape". The MVS Team Lead then said: "CBT??? ... Never
heard of it! I Googled it and couldn't find it". I then realized that
this was a no-win situation.
(They also refused to update the TSO Command Limiting Table to include
e.g. PDS86.). Incidentally, these people had some Exit redesign work
assigned to me, because they claimed to not know Assembler.
Systems Programmers not knowing Assembler? ... Make your own conclusion.
Regards,
David
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
