I hope work from home continues(ryanmercer.com)
ryanmercer.com
I hope work from home continues
https://www.ryanmercer.com/ryansthoughts/2021/4/6/some-of-the-reasons-i-hope-work-from-home-continues-and-i-never-have-to-return-to-an-office
627 comments
I have a hard time wrapping my head around why companies are mandating 100% return to office.
Cost issues aside, I've always maintained that the absolute best experience is a hybrid/flexible schedule and location policy. I'm currently full time remote (I'm on the East Coast working for a West Coast company). My previous company had its main office in my current city, but allowed a super flexible choose-where-you-work-from policy. It was the best.
Didn't feel like dealing with the commute or had a ton of heads down work to do? Stay at home. Wanted to go in to be present for meetings? Easy. Start the day at the office and go home to finish off the day and avoid the commute? Sure.
Of course they made it possible by actively managing it. No meetings before 11am ET (to accomodate those in different TZs). Every scheduled meeting required a Zoom/conference link. Dedicated offices were set up as "conference rooms" so remote people could call in. And of course, people all the way up the ladder worked from home at least some of the time.
Being full remote doesn't work for everyone. Providing a space for those who want it is such a huge quality of life bonus imo. But the biggest factor is creating a culture of inclusion, despite your employees working preferences. This is the hardest thing to do, especially at scale.
Cost issues aside, I've always maintained that the absolute best experience is a hybrid/flexible schedule and location policy. I'm currently full time remote (I'm on the East Coast working for a West Coast company). My previous company had its main office in my current city, but allowed a super flexible choose-where-you-work-from policy. It was the best.
Didn't feel like dealing with the commute or had a ton of heads down work to do? Stay at home. Wanted to go in to be present for meetings? Easy. Start the day at the office and go home to finish off the day and avoid the commute? Sure.
Of course they made it possible by actively managing it. No meetings before 11am ET (to accomodate those in different TZs). Every scheduled meeting required a Zoom/conference link. Dedicated offices were set up as "conference rooms" so remote people could call in. And of course, people all the way up the ladder worked from home at least some of the time.
Being full remote doesn't work for everyone. Providing a space for those who want it is such a huge quality of life bonus imo. But the biggest factor is creating a culture of inclusion, despite your employees working preferences. This is the hardest thing to do, especially at scale.
> I have a hard time wrapping my head around why companies are mandating 100% return to office.
Hot take: There's a whole way of communicating and handling team organization that grew up around 20th century business management culture, and it just doesn't work well with remote teams. Methods that do work well with remote teams, though, don't work well with traditional deeply hierarchical management structures. At best, they tend to make all those management layers somewhat superfluous.
This means getting people back into the office may be a matter of self-preservation for career managers, whether they realize it consciously or not.
Hot take: There's a whole way of communicating and handling team organization that grew up around 20th century business management culture, and it just doesn't work well with remote teams. Methods that do work well with remote teams, though, don't work well with traditional deeply hierarchical management structures. At best, they tend to make all those management layers somewhat superfluous.
This means getting people back into the office may be a matter of self-preservation for career managers, whether they realize it consciously or not.
LOL, this might be one of the biggest truths I've ever read on HN. An expanded, micromanagement style of leadership just isn't necessary in a remote style office. Trust in your employees and a flatter structure, with fewer executives and more people who produce is ideal for a remote office business style. This is a direct contrast to the mantra of the 80's, 90's and 2000's logic of grind it out for as short a time as possible producing and move to middle management. It's been a detriment to our school system and many businesses. Lifetime crafters/creators/producers are looked down upon in our society, more often than not.
This is a depressingly accurate assessment of the last 30 years.
The only hope I hold is that people with shared creative interests will eventually prevail.
The pessimist in me also considers that the allowed monopolies will then buy up those creative successes.
The only hope I hold is that people with shared creative interests will eventually prevail.
The pessimist in me also considers that the allowed monopolies will then buy up those creative successes.
As long as they are paying decent prices for those creative successes (so the creators can have a comfortable retirement with healthcare in the US), this is not the worst outcome.
But my wish is that the really creative, motivated people don't lose their motivation. F*ck You money is a great idea, but after a couple of years of coasting, spend some energy and funds to make something really cool happen.
Unfortunately, some people go through such a traumatic experience which happens to result in FU money that they burn out and stop creating. That's a great shame for us all.
Unfortunately, some people go through such a traumatic experience which happens to result in FU money that they burn out and stop creating. That's a great shame for us all.
I guess?
TBH, getting acquired by a big boring corporation in my early 30s, and having the startup into which I had poured countless late hours' worth of blood, sweat, and tears become a long and joyless coast into mediocrity, was possibly the greatest thing that ever happened to me both professionally and personally.
There was a brief period of anxiety over all the corporate bullshit, and the loss of edge, and all that good stuff. But, after about 6 months of that, a magical thing happened: I started leaving work at work. My demeanor became more placid. My sleep improved. I found hobbies.
I guess maybe, in some poetic sense, it's sad that I'm no longer driven to build exciting things. But, in a more mentally healthy (for me -- I'm certainly not going to begrudge someone else for continuing to be ambitious and driven) sense, that was benefitting a bunch of strangers more than it was benefitting me. I've done my time, and I'm now content to sit back and watch the young'uns take their turn to run themselves ragged chasing dreams around the office all week, and then watch my own young'uns run themselves ragged chasing each other around the yard all weekend.
TBH, getting acquired by a big boring corporation in my early 30s, and having the startup into which I had poured countless late hours' worth of blood, sweat, and tears become a long and joyless coast into mediocrity, was possibly the greatest thing that ever happened to me both professionally and personally.
There was a brief period of anxiety over all the corporate bullshit, and the loss of edge, and all that good stuff. But, after about 6 months of that, a magical thing happened: I started leaving work at work. My demeanor became more placid. My sleep improved. I found hobbies.
I guess maybe, in some poetic sense, it's sad that I'm no longer driven to build exciting things. But, in a more mentally healthy (for me -- I'm certainly not going to begrudge someone else for continuing to be ambitious and driven) sense, that was benefitting a bunch of strangers more than it was benefitting me. I've done my time, and I'm now content to sit back and watch the young'uns take their turn to run themselves ragged chasing dreams around the office all week, and then watch my own young'uns run themselves ragged chasing each other around the yard all weekend.
That's really for you, and I mean no disrespect or judgement. But at some point in the future you'll have a need to "do something" again. Maybe after you've built a family and put them all into motion, you'll find a place where you want to do something again.
And for better or worse, your kids will be shaped by the environment you provide. If you have so much money that they need never worry, then it will actually be harder for them to find their own place and be motivated. Think back honestly... if nothing you did really mattered in terms of your financial success, would you have been motivated to do what you did? I probably would not.
Already my children are a mix of complacent and unconcerned of the financial future and also driven to create. They know they will never be poor or hungry. Will that limit the raw expression and energy they have? It did me. I could not fail if I tried. I knew I was capable of anything, and I demonstrated some degree of that in various ways. But I had nothing to lose.
Eventually everyone begins to ask what the point of anything is. And frankly, we are left with no answers and just some guesses or assumptions. We basically decide what life means. If it means nothing, then why bother with any of it? If it means something, then we should put energy into whatever that something is. Money makes most of it nicer, but it can be a distraction for those who have it and for those who seek it.
And for better or worse, your kids will be shaped by the environment you provide. If you have so much money that they need never worry, then it will actually be harder for them to find their own place and be motivated. Think back honestly... if nothing you did really mattered in terms of your financial success, would you have been motivated to do what you did? I probably would not.
Already my children are a mix of complacent and unconcerned of the financial future and also driven to create. They know they will never be poor or hungry. Will that limit the raw expression and energy they have? It did me. I could not fail if I tried. I knew I was capable of anything, and I demonstrated some degree of that in various ways. But I had nothing to lose.
Eventually everyone begins to ask what the point of anything is. And frankly, we are left with no answers and just some guesses or assumptions. We basically decide what life means. If it means nothing, then why bother with any of it? If it means something, then we should put energy into whatever that something is. Money makes most of it nicer, but it can be a distraction for those who have it and for those who seek it.
If we didn't have managers, all the planning, negotiating, syncing, communication & meetings stuff overflows into the engineers themselves, who might get grumpy at doing something they really typically do not enjoy, which is management work. If you remove the managers, your staff engineers quickly start becoming defacto managers.
PM work, management work and all of that is work, and someone has to do the work and if the managers / PMs don't do that work other people start taking up those jobs. That stuff doesn't go away with the magic wand of remote.
Yes there is an argument that those jobs make a bunch of extra work that may not of been necessary, but that also applies to engineers themselves. Every job role creates extra subjectively unnecessary work.
And I am saying this as someone who has been an engineer my entire career, I haven't been a manager.
PM work, management work and all of that is work, and someone has to do the work and if the managers / PMs don't do that work other people start taking up those jobs. That stuff doesn't go away with the magic wand of remote.
Yes there is an argument that those jobs make a bunch of extra work that may not of been necessary, but that also applies to engineers themselves. Every job role creates extra subjectively unnecessary work.
And I am saying this as someone who has been an engineer my entire career, I haven't been a manager.
If we remove and automate away as much red tape as possible, is the remainder really that bad we still need a dedicated manager over a hybrid? Will somebody of the team not feel the urge or the will to pick it up instead?
Do we still need a manager who has power over the developers and partially decides which jobs exist, giving them not only an incentive to create extra work, but have a trump card on anyone who would call out their BS?
Do we truly need all this manual syncing and negotiating? Or has part of the corporate machine become addicted to all this red tape so much, they believe it is not only a necessity, but an insult to the individuals participating if the red tape is removed in its entirety?
Frankly, as much as I despise management work, I have a hard time buying the argument it really would be as terrible as it is now once you get rid of that red tape. Hybrid roles don't have an incentive to inflate the amount of red tape: they can go back to doing the other side of their role instead, and have an incentive to remove any existing red tape if it becomes suffocating.
Do we still need a manager who has power over the developers and partially decides which jobs exist, giving them not only an incentive to create extra work, but have a trump card on anyone who would call out their BS?
Do we truly need all this manual syncing and negotiating? Or has part of the corporate machine become addicted to all this red tape so much, they believe it is not only a necessity, but an insult to the individuals participating if the red tape is removed in its entirety?
Frankly, as much as I despise management work, I have a hard time buying the argument it really would be as terrible as it is now once you get rid of that red tape. Hybrid roles don't have an incentive to inflate the amount of red tape: they can go back to doing the other side of their role instead, and have an incentive to remove any existing red tape if it becomes suffocating.
Manager as facilitator works awesome. Manager as controller sucks. One path gives the team power, the other gives the boss power.
Managing a highly self-motivated team of engineers is different than managing a team of undermotivated slackers.
For the former, a great manager will regularly ask, "What can I do to help you do your job well?" This person fights the political battles that need to be fought, takes bullets for the team, gets the team the resources they need, removes roadblocks, recruits, etc. The team already wants to work hard, wants to do their job well, and "manager-as-controller" is absolutely the wrong way to lead.
But when you're managing a team of undermotivated people doing more dreary work (which, honestly, might be most people and most jobs), a great manager will occasionally pick up a hammer and do some of the hard work themselves to boost morale. They'll find and remove the major pain-points of the day-to-day, improve training so the team is more productive, cheerlead a bit, try to improve compensation, make sure the team's major wins are visible to upper management so they can get the resources they need, etc.
But critically, this second type of manager ALSO needs to be able to crack the whip once in a while to make it clear that being deadweight won't be tolerated, and complaining won't be rewarded. When the work is somewhat painful, you really want to foster a kind of contagious, optimistic busy-bee state where everyone is eager to do their part and help one another, and you'll have to put on your "manager-as-controller" hat once in a while to get there.
For the former, a great manager will regularly ask, "What can I do to help you do your job well?" This person fights the political battles that need to be fought, takes bullets for the team, gets the team the resources they need, removes roadblocks, recruits, etc. The team already wants to work hard, wants to do their job well, and "manager-as-controller" is absolutely the wrong way to lead.
But when you're managing a team of undermotivated people doing more dreary work (which, honestly, might be most people and most jobs), a great manager will occasionally pick up a hammer and do some of the hard work themselves to boost morale. They'll find and remove the major pain-points of the day-to-day, improve training so the team is more productive, cheerlead a bit, try to improve compensation, make sure the team's major wins are visible to upper management so they can get the resources they need, etc.
But critically, this second type of manager ALSO needs to be able to crack the whip once in a while to make it clear that being deadweight won't be tolerated, and complaining won't be rewarded. When the work is somewhat painful, you really want to foster a kind of contagious, optimistic busy-bee state where everyone is eager to do their part and help one another, and you'll have to put on your "manager-as-controller" hat once in a while to get there.
>you really want to foster a kind of contagious, optimistic busy-bee state
Is that really how american workplaces look? Sounds incredibly dystopian.
Is that really how american workplaces look? Sounds incredibly dystopian.
Yes, it is how american workplaces look. It's a bit dystopian in a sense.
Working in a faster-paced environment probably isn't the hellscape you're imagining: most foreigners I've worked with like it. Some don't. It is different, though - in England the slower pace of everything irritated me.
Working in a faster-paced environment probably isn't the hellscape you're imagining: most foreigners I've worked with like it. Some don't. It is different, though - in England the slower pace of everything irritated me.
> all the planning, negotiating, syncing, communication & meetings stuff overflows into the engineers themselves
That is traditionally done by managers, but it doesn't actually need to be handled someone who is anyone's boss in particular. It's handleable, often with less overall effort, by people who are at the same level as every other team member on the org chart. The whole boss/report dynamic tends to inhibit clear communication, because circumspect people tend to to communicate less-than-candidly with those who hold the power to advance or inhibit their career progress.
That is traditionally done by managers, but it doesn't actually need to be handled someone who is anyone's boss in particular. It's handleable, often with less overall effort, by people who are at the same level as every other team member on the org chart. The whole boss/report dynamic tends to inhibit clear communication, because circumspect people tend to to communicate less-than-candidly with those who hold the power to advance or inhibit their career progress.
My company promotes themselves as a “flat connected organization” yet our CEO has adamantly stated that work from home will not be possible as long as he is CEO. This is despite the company doing better than ever. He leans on a belief that some ephemeral energy and cultural value is being sapped away from working remotely and that we are “running on fumes” through COVID. I don’t believe any of it, and the company has continued making management changes and major acquisitions throughout the pandemic, fundamentally altering any concept of a pre-existing work Nirvana.
Our regional president also is anti WFH. He claims that WFH would eliminate quality mentorship that he experienced and the ad hoc conservations over lunch that lead to friendships and new business opportunities. This is a better angle, but it’s also not something that happens for everyone, everyday, or can be used to justify 5 days in the office.
Our regional president also is anti WFH. He claims that WFH would eliminate quality mentorship that he experienced and the ad hoc conservations over lunch that lead to friendships and new business opportunities. This is a better angle, but it’s also not something that happens for everyone, everyday, or can be used to justify 5 days in the office.
I’m so tired of this “ad hoc water cooler chat” suddenly being elevated as the most important part of office work. It’s never in the past been valued by these execs, and on the contrary sometimes punished (hey, quit socializing and get back to work!). But, now, all of a sudden when these execs are scrambling to find some reason to return to the office, they trot out “serendipitous hallway conversations” as the great holy reason for the office’s existence. Sorry, but I call bullshit.
When you can't point to something quantifiable, I guess you point to something like "water cooler chat!"
My feeling is the same: while random interactions are important, they aren't exclusive to an office setting. Weird logic. It's been surprising to me how much ink has been spilled about this, and how few solutions have been offered.
My feeling is the same: while random interactions are important, they aren't exclusive to an office setting. Weird logic. It's been surprising to me how much ink has been spilled about this, and how few solutions have been offered.
Exactly this. I've had as many "serendipitous hallway conversations" in the last year as I had in the years before - just this time, they happened on IM, on videocalls, and in code review comments.
A small group of co-workers willing to sometimes go off a tangent in a conversation is all it takes. Doesn't have to be face to face, much less in a hallway or in front of a water cooler.
A small group of co-workers willing to sometimes go off a tangent in a conversation is all it takes. Doesn't have to be face to face, much less in a hallway or in front of a water cooler.
This. You know what happened the first week I was back at the office? Non-work chit chat taking up hours of time.
If it's really valuable information, write it down so even more people can be exposed to it! It's like that saying about meetings: "this could have been an email."
If it's really valuable information, write it down so even more people can be exposed to it! It's like that saying about meetings: "this could have been an email."
> running on fumes
I think management people are likely running on fumes … it's like the inverse of what introverts feel when they have to be in-office 5 days a week I suspect.
I'd add that the second take is also kind of outmoded, in that it assumes that mentorship, friendship, business opportunities must flow through your company. I've actually found more of this during the pandemic, and apart from my company …
True, serendipity (e.g. water cooler conversation) is harder in remote environments, but not unsolvable …
I think management people are likely running on fumes … it's like the inverse of what introverts feel when they have to be in-office 5 days a week I suspect.
I'd add that the second take is also kind of outmoded, in that it assumes that mentorship, friendship, business opportunities must flow through your company. I've actually found more of this during the pandemic, and apart from my company …
True, serendipity (e.g. water cooler conversation) is harder in remote environments, but not unsolvable …
It's not (mainly) about introverts vs extroverts, it's about high status vs low status.
I guess not having your ass kissed daily must feel like "running on fumes".
I guess not having your ass kissed daily must feel like "running on fumes".
The upper management folks also have big, comfy, quiet offices with floor-to-ceiling windows, and an assistant right outside the door to bark orders to.
The people working in cubicle-hell or open-office purgatory generally aren't the ones clamoring to get back inside the building. If offices were redesigned to give more rooms with doors to the people who want them so they can do some quiet focused work, even if it's not an assigned space, I think you'd see much more eagerness to return.
The people working in cubicle-hell or open-office purgatory generally aren't the ones clamoring to get back inside the building. If offices were redesigned to give more rooms with doors to the people who want them so they can do some quiet focused work, even if it's not an assigned space, I think you'd see much more eagerness to return.
> an assistant right outside the door to bark orders to.
And that same assistant will screen time with the boss, something us plebs don't get.
And that same assistant will screen time with the boss, something us plebs don't get.
Fair. My comment did imply that managers / those who feel "drained" by remote working are extroverts, which may be untrue.
On that: I think extroverts can tend to derive value from external factors, which may make them more hungry for praise (especially public).
(Edited because earlier version was murky)
On that: I think extroverts can tend to derive value from external factors, which may make them more hungry for praise (especially public).
(Edited because earlier version was murky)
I'm sure the vast majority of managers are extroverts, and introverted managers would be more ok with remote-work.
This is key. These aren’t bad ideas. Face time is important, non work proximity is important (ie lunch). None of this requires 5 day a week presence.
> This is a better angle, but it’s also not something that happens for everyone, everyday, or can be used to justify 5 days in the office.
It's not, really.
To think of it another way: what would happen if your mentors left for better jobs, got hit by a bus or even just retired? People need to be documenting things so that knowledge isn't lost and can be passed on to many more people. If it's really that valuable, just think of how much more of an impact it will have when it doesn't have to be passed on one-to-one.
It's not, really.
To think of it another way: what would happen if your mentors left for better jobs, got hit by a bus or even just retired? People need to be documenting things so that knowledge isn't lost and can be passed on to many more people. If it's really that valuable, just think of how much more of an impact it will have when it doesn't have to be passed on one-to-one.
Typical management structures seem to be focused on minimizing down-side risks rather than expanding upside returns.
If you have 10 employees, 5 are much happier and productive at home, 4 are the same, and 1 is completely taking advantage of it, old school companies seem to focus on that 1 person, rather than the 5 that are happier and more productive. They'd rather have nobody able to take advantage of the system than to terminate the 1 employee that's taking advantage of things.
If you have 10 employees, 5 are much happier and productive at home, 4 are the same, and 1 is completely taking advantage of it, old school companies seem to focus on that 1 person, rather than the 5 that are happier and more productive. They'd rather have nobody able to take advantage of the system than to terminate the 1 employee that's taking advantage of things.
The communication skills and preferences that are best for remote teams are different than those for in-office teams. Until you can retrain your staff or transition to different staff, a manager might be better off asking people to come back to the office.
> Until you can retrain your staff or transition to different staff, a manager might be better off asking people to come back to the office.
Meanwhile, those who already have remote work skills won't stick around to have their time wasted by being forced to work in an office.
Meanwhile, those who already have remote work skills won't stick around to have their time wasted by being forced to work in an office.
I suppose a manager might be able to handle that by forming different teams with varying policies.
The company I work for actually suggested getting rid of our office and going 100% remote for our group. We actually voted on whether to keep leasing it after Covid or not. We voted to keep it as we generally like our office and it's nice to have a place to meet face to face sometimes. Since we voted to keep it corporate has told us we have to come in at least 3 days a week after Covid. So for us it's less an issue of trust and more an issue of we are paying for this place so you better use it.
That's a good approach.
I think a lot of companies are going to downsize their office space in the future. Having a company place to meet is a good idea. I predict there will be some variants of WeWork which will focus on this concept, basically providing rotating company spaces - possibly complete with branding and decorations which would be swapped out each morning for the "company of the day".
I think a lot of companies are going to downsize their office space in the future. Having a company place to meet is a good idea. I predict there will be some variants of WeWork which will focus on this concept, basically providing rotating company spaces - possibly complete with branding and decorations which would be swapped out each morning for the "company of the day".
Branding can be done with screens. Logos can be done with screens. Fascinating idea, basically a pop-up company..
My company was so ahead of the curve they decided to get rid of the office a full year and a half before the pandemic started!
Of course that was just to save money, since it was an expensive lease, apparently, but it did have the benefit that I didn't have any worries they'd force me to come back into the office once the pandemic started, or I'd have to go back to pack up my desk like my wife eventually had to when she changed jobs.
Other than a really rocky shift of our in-house data center into one of the main corporate data centers, it hasn't resulted in much difference as far as productivity, in fact we've been getting away with about half the staff maintaining the same systems (probably to our detriment if people end up leaving, we don't have much redundancy anymore).
Just makes me a little hesitant to find a new job because after three years I'm really used to WFH and I'm worried most other companies are itching to get people back into physical offices (like my wife will probably need to by the end of the year at her new job), even though there's not really any more room for me to grow at this organization in the next year or two based on what I've heard lately.
Of course that was just to save money, since it was an expensive lease, apparently, but it did have the benefit that I didn't have any worries they'd force me to come back into the office once the pandemic started, or I'd have to go back to pack up my desk like my wife eventually had to when she changed jobs.
Other than a really rocky shift of our in-house data center into one of the main corporate data centers, it hasn't resulted in much difference as far as productivity, in fact we've been getting away with about half the staff maintaining the same systems (probably to our detriment if people end up leaving, we don't have much redundancy anymore).
Just makes me a little hesitant to find a new job because after three years I'm really used to WFH and I'm worried most other companies are itching to get people back into physical offices (like my wife will probably need to by the end of the year at her new job), even though there's not really any more room for me to grow at this organization in the next year or two based on what I've heard lately.
Your physical space may be nice, but if not... would they have allocated a budget to pay for dedicated space at a local coworking facility? I totally get wanting face time with people as needed (or wanted), or just needing a change of place from the house. That option may be less expensive than a 'full office', but still give you all what you need - space for shared meetings and work.
Wouldn't be wiser to get rid of the original office and rent some much smaller space, maybe only meeting rooms?
[deleted]
I have a hard time wrapping my head around why companies are mandating 100% return to office.
I doubt it lasts, at least in software. Talented people are going to have lots of remote options making it harder to find good people willing to show up for daily cubicle warfare.
I was someone who preferred to be in the office every day prior to the pandemic. But after adjusting, I really, really like working from home. Truth is, I can't imagine I'll ever take another job that expects me to show up to an actual office everyday. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I doubt it lasts, at least in software. Talented people are going to have lots of remote options making it harder to find good people willing to show up for daily cubicle warfare.
I was someone who preferred to be in the office every day prior to the pandemic. But after adjusting, I really, really like working from home. Truth is, I can't imagine I'll ever take another job that expects me to show up to an actual office everyday. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
> Talented people are going to have lots of remote options making it harder to find good people willing to show up for daily cubicle warfare.
I worry a lot about how this cuts the bottom rungs off the ladder for junior developers. Senior developers can be very productive without frequent access to in-person help, and are valuable enough that they can get work-from-home if they want. But junior developers have more frequent questions, need to absorb software engineering culture, and need to have more work and task structure created for them. Remote work is really hard for them.
I worry a lot about how this cuts the bottom rungs off the ladder for junior developers. Senior developers can be very productive without frequent access to in-person help, and are valuable enough that they can get work-from-home if they want. But junior developers have more frequent questions, need to absorb software engineering culture, and need to have more work and task structure created for them. Remote work is really hard for them.
Engineering culture should be disseminated via documents rather than oral lore.
If it's disseminated via oral lore it's expensive to change and is often misinterpreted across a large enough org.
A silent killer of engineering orgs is bad practices that stick around because that's the way it's always been done. No one knows why because it wasn't written down. The only way to fix that is for someone high enough to provide blessing, but maybe none of those things are individually disruptive enough to get the CTO involved. So everyone eats the costs in perpetuity.
Much easier to just write everything down.
Increased difficulty for juniors to ramp up when you are remote is a symptom of a culture with lots of overly complicated processes that are not well documented.
If it's disseminated via oral lore it's expensive to change and is often misinterpreted across a large enough org.
A silent killer of engineering orgs is bad practices that stick around because that's the way it's always been done. No one knows why because it wasn't written down. The only way to fix that is for someone high enough to provide blessing, but maybe none of those things are individually disruptive enough to get the CTO involved. So everyone eats the costs in perpetuity.
Much easier to just write everything down.
Increased difficulty for juniors to ramp up when you are remote is a symptom of a culture with lots of overly complicated processes that are not well documented.
> Engineering culture should be disseminated via documents rather than oral lore.
I'm always startled by comments like this because it's so counter to how I understand humanity. We are social mammals. No amount of good grammar and excellent font choice can substitute for sharing the same physical space together, an act that has been core to what it means to be human literally since we first speciated.
Yeah, writing stuff down is important. But engineering culture is a culture in the real sense of the word and trying to transmit that entirely through text sounds to me like raising a baby using a six-axis robotic arm.
I'm always startled by comments like this because it's so counter to how I understand humanity. We are social mammals. No amount of good grammar and excellent font choice can substitute for sharing the same physical space together, an act that has been core to what it means to be human literally since we first speciated.
Yeah, writing stuff down is important. But engineering culture is a culture in the real sense of the word and trying to transmit that entirely through text sounds to me like raising a baby using a six-axis robotic arm.
Personally, I find it hilarious to use "humans are social animals" to justify office oriented mandatory wage labor.
Humans are social animals in the sense that they thrive when being social with whoever and wherever they want to be social. I don't know about you, but I have more time to be social with the people (friends, family, neighbors, volunteer groups, etc) that I actually want to be social with when WFH. Being forced to drive to an office under the pretense of "this is how our evolutionary ancestors preferred it" is low key gross.
You can - and should - be able to disseminate engineering culture through digital means.
Humans are social animals in the sense that they thrive when being social with whoever and wherever they want to be social. I don't know about you, but I have more time to be social with the people (friends, family, neighbors, volunteer groups, etc) that I actually want to be social with when WFH. Being forced to drive to an office under the pretense of "this is how our evolutionary ancestors preferred it" is low key gross.
You can - and should - be able to disseminate engineering culture through digital means.
> they thrive when being social with whoever and wherever they want to be social.
At almost no point in human history has that ever been true. Only in the very recent past has any notion of mobility and sufficient population density existed where one could choose who they socialized with. For all of our evolutionary history, you lived and died within your tribe.
At almost no point in human history has that ever been true. Only in the very recent past has any notion of mobility and sufficient population density existed where one could choose who they socialized with. For all of our evolutionary history, you lived and died within your tribe.
I am equally startled by comments like this implying our nature as social mammals is so limited in ways to be appeased, or expecting the only way to be human is to work with colleagues of the same craft on an almost daily basis.
Socializing can be done with people outside that very limited circle. Meanwhile, I can get my knowledge-sharing itch by looking up new techniques on the internet, going to conferences, etc.
Socializing can be done with people outside that very limited circle. Meanwhile, I can get my knowledge-sharing itch by looking up new techniques on the internet, going to conferences, etc.
I participate in multiple online communities where the "culture" has only ever existed through text.
Just because it doesn't involve beer or seeing each other's faces doesn't mean that it's not a real culture.
That's not to say that any particular group's culture will translate seamlessly from in-person to text/video chat, but the idea that having and sharing a culture in a text format is somehow lesser than having one in person doesn't make sense to me.
Just because it doesn't involve beer or seeing each other's faces doesn't mean that it's not a real culture.
That's not to say that any particular group's culture will translate seamlessly from in-person to text/video chat, but the idea that having and sharing a culture in a text format is somehow lesser than having one in person doesn't make sense to me.
I grew up on BBSes, USENET, email, LKML FFS! I really don't get people who make provably false claims that online culture doesn't work.
I guess medicine is a failure in that regard? Everything is documented to the letter. Perhaps we should let go of it to see what marvelous processes each individual hospital will come up with.
"sounds to me like raising a baby using a six-axis robotic arm"
No it's like raising a baby using advice you read from books that are peer reviewed and revised over time vs. just listening to what your parents say.
No it's like raising a baby using advice you read from books that are peer reviewed and revised over time vs. just listening to what your parents say.
[deleted]
> We are social mammals.
We are sentient beings that have had writing for thousands of years. Perhaps we should start acting like it.
We are sentient beings that have had writing for thousands of years. Perhaps we should start acting like it.
> Engineering culture should be disseminated via documents rather than oral lore.
A million times this! If there's anything that WFH has done, it's exposed the big gaping hole known as "institutional knowledge."
> Increased difficulty for juniors to ramp up when you are remote is a symptom of a culture with lots of overly complicated processes that are not well documented.
Or no process at all. Even on small teams, even on projects I start from scratch by myself, I GD document things. It's not that hard once you start practicing and make it a habit.
I swear, if a programmer had zero comments in their code and said "just come by the water cooler if you have any questions", they'd be fired within a week, yet we put up with this ephemeral bullshit for other things.
A million times this! If there's anything that WFH has done, it's exposed the big gaping hole known as "institutional knowledge."
> Increased difficulty for juniors to ramp up when you are remote is a symptom of a culture with lots of overly complicated processes that are not well documented.
Or no process at all. Even on small teams, even on projects I start from scratch by myself, I GD document things. It's not that hard once you start practicing and make it a habit.
I swear, if a programmer had zero comments in their code and said "just come by the water cooler if you have any questions", they'd be fired within a week, yet we put up with this ephemeral bullshit for other things.
When I was a junior dev, my team was on the east coast of the US, but we worked daily with people from Ireland. This meant every meeting had a Skype link, and everyone was well equipped to screen share and collaborate remotely.
The benefit was this also made them amiable towards WFH situations. Big snowstorm? Everyone can WFH for the week. Want to go visit the west coast for a few months? Sounds great, we'll see you online.
Point being, as a junior dev I never felt left out in the cold. Some of the best pair programming sessions I ever had during that time were with a dude from Ireland while we alternated screen sharing. So as long as the team culture is supportive of remote collaboration, I think junior devs will be fine.
The benefit was this also made them amiable towards WFH situations. Big snowstorm? Everyone can WFH for the week. Want to go visit the west coast for a few months? Sounds great, we'll see you online.
Point being, as a junior dev I never felt left out in the cold. Some of the best pair programming sessions I ever had during that time were with a dude from Ireland while we alternated screen sharing. So as long as the team culture is supportive of remote collaboration, I think junior devs will be fine.
I'm not sure this is true. It's a reasonable concern, but in practice I don't think it turns out this way.
Two points, entirely anecdotal:
1) A few years back, I sort of "restarted" as a Salesforce developer. I had well over a decade of web dev experience, but I was new to SF. Everything about it was unique to this environment. I worked in an office, but my boss worked from home (ironically enough). So I was effectively remote working with him from the get go, and I found it worked really well.
2) My kids learn a remarkable amount of stuff on their own: Minecraft, Roblox, Scratch. All these programming environments that they've become really proficient at, and entirely on their own. This is effectively remote work. There was no one holding their hand.
I think the bigger issue is going to be getting employers to trust that the junior is working well. In truth, most junior employees probably don't have the maturity and discipline to be productive remotely. I certainly wouldn't have back when I was 18-22. I would have taken every chance I could to goof off, and not even considered whether that was a problem.
That kind work ethic (i.e. a bad one) tends to get beaten out of you pretty quick in the early days of a professional career. But a lot (most?) people fresh out of college still have that student mentality of viewing "adults" (bosses, teachers, parents) as authority figures to be rebelled against to some extent. I wouldn't trust someone with that mentality to be productive unsupervised.
The natural counter point is that if you can't be trusted, you shouldn't be hired. But I think that's a mistake. There's an awful lot of talented and smart young people who need a break or two in order to develop the appropriate work ethic and achieve their potential.
All of which is to say, I share your concern about opportunities for junior developers (and junior workers in general), but for different reasons.
Two points, entirely anecdotal:
1) A few years back, I sort of "restarted" as a Salesforce developer. I had well over a decade of web dev experience, but I was new to SF. Everything about it was unique to this environment. I worked in an office, but my boss worked from home (ironically enough). So I was effectively remote working with him from the get go, and I found it worked really well.
2) My kids learn a remarkable amount of stuff on their own: Minecraft, Roblox, Scratch. All these programming environments that they've become really proficient at, and entirely on their own. This is effectively remote work. There was no one holding their hand.
I think the bigger issue is going to be getting employers to trust that the junior is working well. In truth, most junior employees probably don't have the maturity and discipline to be productive remotely. I certainly wouldn't have back when I was 18-22. I would have taken every chance I could to goof off, and not even considered whether that was a problem.
That kind work ethic (i.e. a bad one) tends to get beaten out of you pretty quick in the early days of a professional career. But a lot (most?) people fresh out of college still have that student mentality of viewing "adults" (bosses, teachers, parents) as authority figures to be rebelled against to some extent. I wouldn't trust someone with that mentality to be productive unsupervised.
The natural counter point is that if you can't be trusted, you shouldn't be hired. But I think that's a mistake. There's an awful lot of talented and smart young people who need a break or two in order to develop the appropriate work ethic and achieve their potential.
All of which is to say, I share your concern about opportunities for junior developers (and junior workers in general), but for different reasons.
As much as people don't like it, our current culture of having a video conference open all day with everyone in (breaking out into smaller calls when necessary) brings down the level of "hey, can I ask you a question?" bc we can see if someone is at their desk.
I think this is something that would work for more junior people as well, and I'd be happy to break out / share a screen as needed.
I think this is something that would work for more junior people as well, and I'd be happy to break out / share a screen as needed.
Wow, all day? That's a lot!
My team and others have been having "office hours" meetings where everyone is just working, but often the cameras are off, mics are muted most of the time, and we only do it for a few hours a week.
I definitely agree that there is a lot of value in being able to jump in and ask questions in the moment. That's a big benefit of having these calls for us.
Maybe we should try having them more often. :)
My team and others have been having "office hours" meetings where everyone is just working, but often the cameras are off, mics are muted most of the time, and we only do it for a few hours a week.
I definitely agree that there is a lot of value in being able to jump in and ask questions in the moment. That's a big benefit of having these calls for us.
Maybe we should try having them more often. :)
It's really not been that bad - we had a few people who were remote initially and they had the cameras on in their home office so we could shout over and ask questions and it would feel like they were in the office.
Now we're all remote so we keep the same meeting open. I guess people have differing levels of comfort.
Now we're all remote so we keep the same meeting open. I guess people have differing levels of comfort.
> having a video conference open all day with everyone in
This sounds absolutely horrible.
This sounds absolutely horrible.
Honestly, it's fine. Most of us are on mute for most of the day. In a trading environment, you need a hoot, and this is pretty much our equivalent.
It works well and (at least with how our team works) it's not invasive.
It works well and (at least with how our team works) it's not invasive.
Being watched by all colleagues all day is extremely invasive. I would definitely not want to work in this environment.
You just described every open plan office ever. At least this way nobody can look over your shoulder at your screen. And you can turn your camera off if you want a break.
Yes, open plan offices are horrible. No need to reproduce something just as horrible and intrusive when working from home.
I would just turn both microphone and camera off; if somebody wants something they can message me, like a sane person.
I would just turn both microphone and camera off; if somebody wants something they can message me, like a sane person.
> This sounds absolutely horrible.
And now you know how it feels to work in an open floor plan or cubicle where someone can come along and break your flow causing you to have to waste over 20 minutes getting back into it.
The key with the all day video conference is you can mute it and set your status as away when you need to do deep work. Can't do that in an office environment.
And now you know how it feels to work in an open floor plan or cubicle where someone can come along and break your flow causing you to have to waste over 20 minutes getting back into it.
The key with the all day video conference is you can mute it and set your status as away when you need to do deep work. Can't do that in an office environment.
Or, you know, since I'm already working from home I can just not be in a "digital office". An open floor office is already bad, so there's not need to reproduce it.
It's simply intrusive and unnecessary.
It's simply intrusive and unnecessary.
> our current culture of having a video conference open all day with everyone in
this is incredibly bad for the environment. i just hope it's at least not as bad as commuting
this is incredibly bad for the environment. i just hope it's at least not as bad as commuting
When I was a junior engineer I preferred remote work. It was easier to screen share with a senior and talk about the problem over a computer screen where I could actually see the code, than it was to squint from over their shoulder. It also gave me the chance to drive and for the senior to correct my mistakes / give me feedback.
No you're certainly not the only one. I've found a good way to filter recruiters is to tell them up front, "I will only do full remote with occasional, non-regular office visits."
Once you've tasted freedom...
Once you've tasted freedom...
I've been doing this for 20 years now...
Surprisingly, the recruiters are starting to answer "sure - no problem..." :-)
Surprisingly, the recruiters are starting to answer "sure - no problem..." :-)
> I doubt it lasts, at least in software.
History suggests that talent is not a cause to warp office culture. Office culture will out weather a loss of talent until the business implodes. If the need for talent becomes clearly paramount then it will be outsourced.
History suggests that talent is not a cause to warp office culture. Office culture will out weather a loss of talent until the business implodes. If the need for talent becomes clearly paramount then it will be outsourced.
> I have a hard time wrapping my head around why companies are mandating 100% return to office.
Beliefs and dogma. Amazon's justification was "Amazon is an in-office culture." That ultimately boils down to circular reasoning; the key decision maker (whoever they are) has demonstrated an immense lack of critical reasoning. Continuing this practice is in the same realm as continuing other hostile workplace traditions, although it is one of the less serious ones.
In my opinion, it is wasting a lot of money in the form of productivity. Every employee who commutes to the office has an overwhelmingly high likelihood of having some of their mental resources drained. You're wasting a good hour or two of superior employee performance in the morning, and possibly some near the end of the day when employees start dreading the journey home.
> biggest factor is creating a culture of inclusion
This is a very important point. One of the major ongoing reasons that women are passed over for promotions is that they are the traditional/dogmatic caregivers. Home-first equalizes this, much like paternal leave does. If a home is unable to afford child-care, then men have just as much responsibility and distraction during work hours.
Some people may struggle to afford commute, for example, people escaping homelessness. Being able to work from home would reduce the burden on these people.
In addition, those who cannot causally/physically complete their job offsite (doctors, construction workers, tellers, baristas) won't have roads and public transport congested with people who have no business traveling to work.
> Dedicated offices were set up as "conference rooms"
We need conference rooms as an API. I should be able to add (and be billed for) a physical room to a meeting request as easily as adding a Zoom/GMeet - for when in-person collaboration is really needed. WeWork was in the ideal position to do this, it's a pity they doubled down on big corporate clients instead of "gig economy rooms."
Beliefs and dogma. Amazon's justification was "Amazon is an in-office culture." That ultimately boils down to circular reasoning; the key decision maker (whoever they are) has demonstrated an immense lack of critical reasoning. Continuing this practice is in the same realm as continuing other hostile workplace traditions, although it is one of the less serious ones.
In my opinion, it is wasting a lot of money in the form of productivity. Every employee who commutes to the office has an overwhelmingly high likelihood of having some of their mental resources drained. You're wasting a good hour or two of superior employee performance in the morning, and possibly some near the end of the day when employees start dreading the journey home.
> biggest factor is creating a culture of inclusion
This is a very important point. One of the major ongoing reasons that women are passed over for promotions is that they are the traditional/dogmatic caregivers. Home-first equalizes this, much like paternal leave does. If a home is unable to afford child-care, then men have just as much responsibility and distraction during work hours.
Some people may struggle to afford commute, for example, people escaping homelessness. Being able to work from home would reduce the burden on these people.
In addition, those who cannot causally/physically complete their job offsite (doctors, construction workers, tellers, baristas) won't have roads and public transport congested with people who have no business traveling to work.
> Dedicated offices were set up as "conference rooms"
We need conference rooms as an API. I should be able to add (and be billed for) a physical room to a meeting request as easily as adding a Zoom/GMeet - for when in-person collaboration is really needed. WeWork was in the ideal position to do this, it's a pity they doubled down on big corporate clients instead of "gig economy rooms."
> We need conference rooms as an API.
Is this not pretty much how things work on Google Calendar or Outlook?
Is this not pretty much how things work on Google Calendar or Outlook?
Only if you own those rooms.
> I have a hard time wrapping my head around why companies are mandating 100% return to office
Informal communication, informal collaboration, a culture of apprenticeship. To the extent that the organization values these they are all served much better in person than remote.
All companies and all people are different. There isn't a one size fits all. But it's not like there are no benefits to in person.
Informal communication, informal collaboration, a culture of apprenticeship. To the extent that the organization values these they are all served much better in person than remote.
All companies and all people are different. There isn't a one size fits all. But it's not like there are no benefits to in person.
Informal communication, informal collaboration, a culture of apprenticeship. To the extent that the organization values these they are all served much better in person than remote.
This raises two obvious questions;
- Were those things definitely happening in a way that actually benefits the company, or were people simply assuming they're happening?
- Why can't those things continue to happen in an environment where people work remotely?
Without satisfactory answers to those questions it's impossible to assert comms and collaboration are actually reasons to return to the office. For example, my experience of remote working (many years before lockdown, and during lockdown) has taught me that informal comms actually causes more ambiguity and moving to remote often means people are prone to "over communication" where they leave very little out. That has led to pain for some because there's a lot more email and messaging to deal with, but it also means everyone has a greater understanding of the project. Overall I'd argue that the 'formalization' of comms on a project that comes from everyone being remote and asynchronous is more of a benefit than a cost.
This raises two obvious questions;
- Were those things definitely happening in a way that actually benefits the company, or were people simply assuming they're happening?
- Why can't those things continue to happen in an environment where people work remotely?
Without satisfactory answers to those questions it's impossible to assert comms and collaboration are actually reasons to return to the office. For example, my experience of remote working (many years before lockdown, and during lockdown) has taught me that informal comms actually causes more ambiguity and moving to remote often means people are prone to "over communication" where they leave very little out. That has led to pain for some because there's a lot more email and messaging to deal with, but it also means everyone has a greater understanding of the project. Overall I'd argue that the 'formalization' of comms on a project that comes from everyone being remote and asynchronous is more of a benefit than a cost.
Ad hoc, accidental communication simply doesn't happen in remote work environments.
Coffee breaks are a shockingly productive element that simply work better in person, at least in my experience (and this seems to be a common sentiment at my software company).
In-person conversations don't have technical difficulties, there's much better engagement which allows people to better read the audience and adapt presentations/design conversations appropriately.
Surveys among colleagues seem to agree -- hybrid seems good, remote only simply is not as productive nor enjoyable.
Coffee breaks are a shockingly productive element that simply work better in person, at least in my experience (and this seems to be a common sentiment at my software company).
In-person conversations don't have technical difficulties, there's much better engagement which allows people to better read the audience and adapt presentations/design conversations appropriately.
Surveys among colleagues seem to agree -- hybrid seems good, remote only simply is not as productive nor enjoyable.
> Informal communication, informal collaboration
This has been happening with greater regularity when we have been working from home. All the time we will have informal communication on slack or jump on an informal unscheduled zoom call to mob on an issue. I worked on campus for 18 years prior to starting to work from home last March. I cannot remember a single time informal communication or informal collaboration happened. For some reason people are much more open to it over slack and zoom than they ever were in person.
This has been happening with greater regularity when we have been working from home. All the time we will have informal communication on slack or jump on an informal unscheduled zoom call to mob on an issue. I worked on campus for 18 years prior to starting to work from home last March. I cannot remember a single time informal communication or informal collaboration happened. For some reason people are much more open to it over slack and zoom than they ever were in person.
No one has ever overheard someone else’s Zoom conversation.
Now that does happen in open slack channels but it seems to me far less frequently.
Now that does happen in open slack channels but it seems to me far less frequently.
I don’t think informal means overhearing. I think it means unscheduled.
> Informal communication, informal collaboration, a culture of apprenticeship
You're right of course, those qualities don't naturally occur remotely.
However, and I know I'm slightly taking your use of "culture" out of context, but "Culture" is often code for any number of implicit biases in a workplace. Known or unknown. If you don't fit in, for whatever reason, can you still not be a productive asset in the corporation?
You're right of course, those qualities don't naturally occur remotely.
However, and I know I'm slightly taking your use of "culture" out of context, but "Culture" is often code for any number of implicit biases in a workplace. Known or unknown. If you don't fit in, for whatever reason, can you still not be a productive asset in the corporation?
> but "Culture" is often code for any number of implicit biases in a workplace
I'm old. Tell me about it. I am not a "cultural fit" in companies, these days.
So I am doing my own thing. I'm extremely fortunate, in being able to do this.
I'm also never going into an office, or relocating, again.
I'm old. Tell me about it. I am not a "cultural fit" in companies, these days.
So I am doing my own thing. I'm extremely fortunate, in being able to do this.
I'm also never going into an office, or relocating, again.
"You're right of course, those qualities don't naturally occur remotely."
In my experience, they do... It's how a project like Krita has grown naturally for over twenty years, bringing in new people, teaching them, having them become productive.
Of course, meeting in person, once or twice a year is important. But there's no need for offices for us.
In my experience, they do... It's how a project like Krita has grown naturally for over twenty years, bringing in new people, teaching them, having them become productive.
Of course, meeting in person, once or twice a year is important. But there's no need for offices for us.
“A culture of apprenticeship” shares the word “culture” but isn’t at all the thing that you’re concerned about.
>I have a hard time wrapping my head around why companies are mandating 100% return to office.
Because most managers have a reactionary style of management. They are like IRQ handlers. Their state doesn't change until they receive an email from their boss or a phone call from a customer. At that point they react to it by running down the hall to find someone. Now, because they do not understand cooperative multitasking they preemptively interrupt YOU and now your day is f*cked.
Because most managers have a reactionary style of management. They are like IRQ handlers. Their state doesn't change until they receive an email from their boss or a phone call from a customer. At that point they react to it by running down the hall to find someone. Now, because they do not understand cooperative multitasking they preemptively interrupt YOU and now your day is f*cked.
2 ways I can answer this:
1. Personally, working from home has been a mixed bag. When I'm allowed to focus on one single task, I can do pretty well. The comforts of having my own office room, high quality monitors, keyboard and speakers listening to music are very nice. The additional latency accessing my remote workstation not so great (and that is required, because of company rules not allowing source access outside of corp network). Also, anything that required a lot of human interaction has been pretty bad, video conferencing is a poor substitute, I've found (as someone who doesn't really enjoy socializing) and depending on where you are in the project (is the team already established, do they know each other IRL, the tasks are clear or are you just starting a new team for a new project, scoping up tasks and everything) it requires more or less interaction. At the beginning of a project there is a ton of little details that get missed in the initial plans which can be resolved very fast in person and which always seem to resolve slower remotely, no matter how good use we attempt to make of all the tools available (team chat, video conference, etc). As such, whenever my company asked in WFH surveys how I would rate my productivity, I always rated it lower than 100%, around 60%-70%. In terms of commute, it's a wash-off: yes, I don't spend time commuting now but the extra time I have I just spend it in longer videogame sessions at night (so not exactly the best/most healthy way to use that extra time) and when I was commuting to the office I'd often commute by bike (at about 100 miles biked per week) while now I barely bike a third of that because I force myself to get out on the bike every weekend to at least have some physical activity.
2. Company wide, based on the the surveys done, it seems most people have rated their productivity lower than when in office. As such, it is no surprise to me that the company is looking at an accelerated schedule to get people back in office.
1. Personally, working from home has been a mixed bag. When I'm allowed to focus on one single task, I can do pretty well. The comforts of having my own office room, high quality monitors, keyboard and speakers listening to music are very nice. The additional latency accessing my remote workstation not so great (and that is required, because of company rules not allowing source access outside of corp network). Also, anything that required a lot of human interaction has been pretty bad, video conferencing is a poor substitute, I've found (as someone who doesn't really enjoy socializing) and depending on where you are in the project (is the team already established, do they know each other IRL, the tasks are clear or are you just starting a new team for a new project, scoping up tasks and everything) it requires more or less interaction. At the beginning of a project there is a ton of little details that get missed in the initial plans which can be resolved very fast in person and which always seem to resolve slower remotely, no matter how good use we attempt to make of all the tools available (team chat, video conference, etc). As such, whenever my company asked in WFH surveys how I would rate my productivity, I always rated it lower than 100%, around 60%-70%. In terms of commute, it's a wash-off: yes, I don't spend time commuting now but the extra time I have I just spend it in longer videogame sessions at night (so not exactly the best/most healthy way to use that extra time) and when I was commuting to the office I'd often commute by bike (at about 100 miles biked per week) while now I barely bike a third of that because I force myself to get out on the bike every weekend to at least have some physical activity.
2. Company wide, based on the the surveys done, it seems most people have rated their productivity lower than when in office. As such, it is no surprise to me that the company is looking at an accelerated schedule to get people back in office.
The companies mandating 100% office time are doing so because their particular executive teams are nuts about it. See Netflix.
Netflix is now hiring full time remote for engineering, reporting to the office post COVID is optional.
Source: I’m a full time engineer happily working out of the PHX suburbs.
Personally, I have no intention of returning to the Bay Area.
Source: I’m a full time engineer happily working out of the PHX suburbs.
Personally, I have no intention of returning to the Bay Area.
To me it is a cost issue. Living within 5-day-a-week commuting distance to an office is expensive for the weighted majority of technology jobs. You are trading space/rent for facetime.
That is fine, but the salaries for 5-day-a-week-from-office jobs need to compensate for this -- not just for execs, but also for normal workers.
Living in a 1br was charming as a 25yo, and not so much for someone with a family. Driving for 1hr+ is also not so charming.
As a former co-founder, i'd happily take this trade --
1. Not compete on city salaries
2. Employees 100% WFH, work from wherever you want. NO salary grading based on metro area (that is so unfair)
3. Quarterly on-site, paid for by company
4. Invest in processes to enable good WFH productivity
That is fine, but the salaries for 5-day-a-week-from-office jobs need to compensate for this -- not just for execs, but also for normal workers.
Living in a 1br was charming as a 25yo, and not so much for someone with a family. Driving for 1hr+ is also not so charming.
As a former co-founder, i'd happily take this trade --
1. Not compete on city salaries
2. Employees 100% WFH, work from wherever you want. NO salary grading based on metro area (that is so unfair)
3. Quarterly on-site, paid for by company
4. Invest in processes to enable good WFH productivity
No salary grading, at least within a country, is easier when you don't try to compete at the high end. And it's effectively what a lot of companies do anyway even if they don't say so publicly. If someone can get a job with one of the big tech employers in the Bay Area and they want to work there, a lot of companies won't even try to salary match.
Your trade assumes that none of your employees will want to live in a high cost of living area if given the opportunity to WFH. If their age / hobbies / etc. make city living attractive you will need to compensate them appropriately or be unable to attract them.
I love living in the city. If work wants to keep me remote, I need an extra bedroom or dedicated office space.
I love living in the city. If work wants to keep me remote, I need an extra bedroom or dedicated office space.
>> Your trade assumes that none of your employees will want to live in a high cost of living area if given the opportunity to WFH. If their age / hobbies / etc. make city living attractive you will need to compensate them appropriately or be unable to attract them.
This is a fair point. Not sure if you're from the US, but I'll note that the weighted majority of all US technology job opportunities are in cities and major metro areas. If someone wants to live in a high-cost-of-living area, thats a great problem to have, because probably half the tech jobs are already there in the Bay Area especially. There is also no shortage of compensation in such high-cost-of-living areas.
This is a fair point. Not sure if you're from the US, but I'll note that the weighted majority of all US technology job opportunities are in cities and major metro areas. If someone wants to live in a high-cost-of-living area, thats a great problem to have, because probably half the tech jobs are already there in the Bay Area especially. There is also no shortage of compensation in such high-cost-of-living areas.
Trust issues. While 80% of employees could be more productive remote, 18% could have serious issues with productivity and 2% might actually turn nefarious while remote (steal company IPR or something like that). Or I would imagine thats what the fear is.
People underestimate how unproductive (or nefarious) one can be in office.
I feel like it's much easier to not do anything when it looks like you're doing something at your desk all day. Mix in a few meetings and random chats, it's very easy to go incognito, productivity wise.
I think we've all had days where we've gotten to the office and had a problem we're working on that doesn't get solved that day. It is actually really taxing and feels really bad to not accomplish anything, as if you've wasted the day.
I've found that the ability to more strictly control distractions at home--not needing to deal with the pressure to chat with co-workers and eat lunch together, for example--has led to far, far fewer days of no-solution. At the same time, it becomes even hard to "give up" on that day's productivity and clock out, since there's no real leaving the office.
I think we've all had days where we've gotten to the office and had a problem we're working on that doesn't get solved that day. It is actually really taxing and feels really bad to not accomplish anything, as if you've wasted the day.
I've found that the ability to more strictly control distractions at home--not needing to deal with the pressure to chat with co-workers and eat lunch together, for example--has led to far, far fewer days of no-solution. At the same time, it becomes even hard to "give up" on that day's productivity and clock out, since there's no real leaving the office.
It's pretty easy to get two full time programming jobs and do both remotely.
Being in the office at least ensures you're not in another office.
Being in the office at least ensures you're not in another office.
Being in the office at least ensures you're not in another office.
How? If I'm willing to work another job while I'm at my first job, no one would know if the code I'm working on my screen belongs to job #1 or job #2.
The employer could use screen monitoring, but then they could do that while I'm at home and see that either I'm working on a second project, or that my computer is idle for long periods of time when I'm supposedly "working".
Though I'm not sure it matters - if I can work 2 jobs and still provide adequate productivity to each employer, then why do they care?
I have so many meetings every day that I'm sure that I couldn't get away with working 2 jobs at once, even when fully remote.
How? If I'm willing to work another job while I'm at my first job, no one would know if the code I'm working on my screen belongs to job #1 or job #2.
The employer could use screen monitoring, but then they could do that while I'm at home and see that either I'm working on a second project, or that my computer is idle for long periods of time when I'm supposedly "working".
Though I'm not sure it matters - if I can work 2 jobs and still provide adequate productivity to each employer, then why do they care?
I have so many meetings every day that I'm sure that I couldn't get away with working 2 jobs at once, even when fully remote.
> Though I'm not sure it matters - if I can work 2 jobs and still provide adequate productivity to each employer, then why do they care?
Measuring programming productivity per person is very hard.
Measuring 40 hour attendance is easy.
So while everyone agrees that A would be better, in reality the approximation of B will have to do.
Measuring programming productivity per person is very hard.
Measuring 40 hour attendance is easy.
So while everyone agrees that A would be better, in reality the approximation of B will have to do.
Companies often make employees sign agreements stating they won't do work for a second company while on the first company's property or while using the first company's equipment. So if you were going into the office and using one company's computer for two jobs, something like that would probably apply.
Man, I would fail those screen time monitors so badly.
I still work out some things on paper—I think well that way. Other times I have to get up and walk around to work something out in my head. I'd look like a constant slacker.
I still work out some things on paper—I think well that way. Other times I have to get up and walk around to work something out in my head. I'd look like a constant slacker.
Sure, you can't have two physical jobs at the same time, but I've worked in multiple offices with people with more than one job. It's almost a given that everyone has some sort of side hustle nowadays.
Plenty of people have productivity issues in the office and "steal" time there (slacking off), so it probably more than balances out.
> 80% of employees could be more productive remote, 18% could have serious issues with productivity
My experience has been almost the inverse of this. I wouldn't quite say 80% of people are less productive at home but I'd think at least above half? For various reasons mentioned elsewhere here (disruptive home environment, can't communicate effectively with co-workers remotely, etc). Many people just become very unproductive if they're not physically in the presence of other people being visibly productive.
I'd like to see some formal studies into this to get the true split.
My experience has been almost the inverse of this. I wouldn't quite say 80% of people are less productive at home but I'd think at least above half? For various reasons mentioned elsewhere here (disruptive home environment, can't communicate effectively with co-workers remotely, etc). Many people just become very unproductive if they're not physically in the presence of other people being visibly productive.
I'd like to see some formal studies into this to get the true split.
Your made up numbers could be said for people working in an office. I had one exec ask me years ago when I was pushing to transition to remote friendly, "how would we know if someone was working when they are at home?" My response, "how do you we know they are working now?"
The numbers are probably close to the same in office too, only the 2% (or whatever percentage it is), ends up with more access to physical capital to steal in office.
Personally, I hope the future for work becomes as remote as possible as near to a 4 day week as possible.
Personally, I hope the future for work becomes as remote as possible as near to a 4 day week as possible.
Isn't this a process failure? At least for that hypothetical 18%. If you have a product roadmap with well-defined milestones and good weekly accountability, it should be clear very quickly if someone is underperforming. There may be people who don't want to work remotely, but that's again why having a flexible+hybrid WFH approach seems like the best of all worlds.
> I have a hard time wrapping my head around why companies are mandating 100% return to office.
Only reasons I can think of is as follows. - Someone in the CEO's direct reports is tasked with making a decision. - They start a survey on how satisfied the managers are on the work performance. - The survey does not go to individual employees. - Rightfully, the survey results wildly support return-to-office. - Decision is made.
Some other company may decide to be data driven, and use metrics which may or may not fully reflect the tradeoffs between work-from-home vs. office.
Or, the top leader makes the decision for the rest of the company. No questions allowed.
> Cost issues aside, I've always maintained that the absolute best experience is a hybrid/flexible schedule and location policy.
Agree. This should be the way.
Only reasons I can think of is as follows. - Someone in the CEO's direct reports is tasked with making a decision. - They start a survey on how satisfied the managers are on the work performance. - The survey does not go to individual employees. - Rightfully, the survey results wildly support return-to-office. - Decision is made.
Some other company may decide to be data driven, and use metrics which may or may not fully reflect the tradeoffs between work-from-home vs. office.
Or, the top leader makes the decision for the rest of the company. No questions allowed.
> Cost issues aside, I've always maintained that the absolute best experience is a hybrid/flexible schedule and location policy.
Agree. This should be the way.
The top level policy is often butts-in-seats but supervisors typically just let people do what they want to do. The VPN is there, we all have laptops...no one is running around complaining about Bob or Jill working from home when they feel like it. This is my observation of many knowledge workers' departments in various companies.
> I have a hard time wrapping my head around why companies are mandating 100% return to office.
Will they though? If some companies don't, that will be a major reason to change jobs for the better employers (who value your flexibility).
Will they though? If some companies don't, that will be a major reason to change jobs for the better employers (who value your flexibility).
a lot of the big tech use their footprints as political power. who wants to bet California goes less after big tech if they keep their hq in San Francisco fully staffed?
A few really need it; most don't. Their managers and executives put their own desires ahead of the best interests of the organization, and what they desire is to have their ego stroked.
> And for the social aspect, weekend or week-long dev retreats are ideal.
As much as I appreciate (most of) my coworkers, on nights and weekends I want to close my computer and spend quality time with my family, not see and talk to the same people I am already forced to talk to 35-40h a week. They might be ideal to you, but you're assuming quite a lot about everyone's situations if you think they work for everyone.
As much as I appreciate (most of) my coworkers, on nights and weekends I want to close my computer and spend quality time with my family, not see and talk to the same people I am already forced to talk to 35-40h a week. They might be ideal to you, but you're assuming quite a lot about everyone's situations if you think they work for everyone.
GP post was referring to retreats for 100% remote workers, which would be work with a f2f element rather than merely socializing during your free time.
These could happen during the week or (depending on the retreat) the weekend, with weekends probably being given comp time in lieu.
If you think that a modicum of face time throughout the year for a remote team has no value to a group or team, I’ve got news for you.
If you think GP was referring to additional face time in addition to face time at a workplace, then I think you may be projecting and selective quoting a bit. Note that employees at this small company can work when and where they want.
These could happen during the week or (depending on the retreat) the weekend, with weekends probably being given comp time in lieu.
If you think that a modicum of face time throughout the year for a remote team has no value to a group or team, I’ve got news for you.
If you think GP was referring to additional face time in addition to face time at a workplace, then I think you may be projecting and selective quoting a bit. Note that employees at this small company can work when and where they want.
I am 100% remote. Some face to face is desirable, sure. Do it in core work hours, and don't assume I want to work outside those.
I think that was the idea.
Most 100% remote places I know of that do retreats typically have them during the week. A weekend retreat would be reserved for an activity that would only happen on a weekend and has buy-in from the team.
There seems to be a lot of resistance from remote workers about remote worker retreats happening outside of work hours. Is this actually a thing? I have never heard of it other than the weekend caveat (weekend only event with team buy in) that I mentioned above.
Most 100% remote places I know of that do retreats typically have them during the week. A weekend retreat would be reserved for an activity that would only happen on a weekend and has buy-in from the team.
There seems to be a lot of resistance from remote workers about remote worker retreats happening outside of work hours. Is this actually a thing? I have never heard of it other than the weekend caveat (weekend only event with team buy in) that I mentioned above.
> There seems to be a lot of resistance from remote workers about remote worker retreats happening outside of work hours. Is this actually a thing? I have never heard of it other than the weekend caveat (weekend only event with team buy in) that I mentioned above.
The occasional event w/ buy-in definitely can work, but that wasn't how OP seemed to frame it. Maybe I misinterpreted, maybe he badly explained his idea, I don't know. But I'd have given anybody sh*t for trying to make me work outside of work hours, remote or not.
The occasional event w/ buy-in definitely can work, but that wasn't how OP seemed to frame it. Maybe I misinterpreted, maybe he badly explained his idea, I don't know. But I'd have given anybody sh*t for trying to make me work outside of work hours, remote or not.
People on my broader distributed team accept that periodic multi-day weekday off-sites are part of the deal. Can't really avoid some weeknights traveling. But, then, all of us normally do a lot of business travel anyway. Periodic F2F is important and there's no way to do it just on company time if everyone isn't in the same location. If someone really can't, they can dial in but that's inevitably not a great experience when everyone else is in the same room.
> Can't really avoid some weeknights traveling.
Just curious... does your leadership go out of their way to offer comp time for travel outside of business hours?
For example, they say or strongly suggest that folks who have to travel at night take the next morning off.
I imagine that this may not be common, but it seems like it would generate a lot of goodwill for folks who have to travel.
Just curious... does your leadership go out of their way to offer comp time for travel outside of business hours?
For example, they say or strongly suggest that folks who have to travel at night take the next morning off.
I imagine that this may not be common, but it seems like it would generate a lot of goodwill for folks who have to travel.
It's probably on a manager by manager basis. If I work a weekend day on business--whether because of travel or because there's a software community event on the weekend--I can take a comp day. For nights not really. But if I get home late at night, no one's going to bat an eye if I take it easy in the morning so long as there's nothing I have to do. My time is usually pretty flexible.
Context is more senior leadership, but 3-4x/year we hold multi-day offsites where we rent a huge house and the entire leadership team lives in it, shopping for groceries upon arrival, cooking all meals together, working on and off, with meals, nearby hikes or other attractions sprinkled throughout.
Those are incredibly productive (it's probably 12 hours per day of "work" topics) and help forge strong bonds in the team. They're one of the things we're literally counting down the days until we can schedule one for 15 days after the last vaccine dose is in the last arm.
Those are incredibly productive (it's probably 12 hours per day of "work" topics) and help forge strong bonds in the team. They're one of the things we're literally counting down the days until we can schedule one for 15 days after the last vaccine dose is in the last arm.
I think it depends on how you view your colleagues, and also on your working conditions and location. My entire company is remote (albeit with a small office in a co-working space a few local people sometimes use), and we have two week-long on-sites every year (recent times notwithstanding). There is no pressure to attend, but the entire company is always there (unless they have scheduling conflicts etc) - that says a lot to me.
It helps that the most important aspect of our hiring process is about culture-fit - so much so that the final stage of the (pretty relaxed) hiring process is a presentation to everyone in the company who wishes to attend (regardless of role). Those presentations typically see 40% or more of the company attend. Crucially, every person in that presentation gets the opportunity to vote on whether the candidate is hired.
I've made friends for life at this company.
It helps that the most important aspect of our hiring process is about culture-fit - so much so that the final stage of the (pretty relaxed) hiring process is a presentation to everyone in the company who wishes to attend (regardless of role). Those presentations typically see 40% or more of the company attend. Crucially, every person in that presentation gets the opportunity to vote on whether the candidate is hired.
I've made friends for life at this company.
My company has offices in the neighboring countries and we travelled often to the branches abroad. The teams are very close because we frequently work together.
Having guests in the company was always an excuse to do fun stuff. Like driving one weekend to a beach/volcano in one country, planning to go to the movies in another one, and lots of tasty food. We could expense the food so we only paid for a bit of extra gas or extra bus tickets with our pocket.
As a perk we have full kitchens in our offices, and a couple of times a week we cooked lunch together with the foodie/cook ones. It was usually tastier than buying food nearby. And it was fun to learn about each country's home cooking style.
I miss that and hanging out and sight seeing with coworkers on weekends or after work... The daily commute to the local office not so much.
Having guests in the company was always an excuse to do fun stuff. Like driving one weekend to a beach/volcano in one country, planning to go to the movies in another one, and lots of tasty food. We could expense the food so we only paid for a bit of extra gas or extra bus tickets with our pocket.
As a perk we have full kitchens in our offices, and a couple of times a week we cooked lunch together with the foodie/cook ones. It was usually tastier than buying food nearby. And it was fun to learn about each country's home cooking style.
I miss that and hanging out and sight seeing with coworkers on weekends or after work... The daily commute to the local office not so much.
> I've made friends for life at this company.
I've just said this earlier in another comment, but I've never had what I'd consider true friendships come out from work acquaintances. I just don't consider "I have fun with you sometimes" to be friendship, and there's exactly 0 people from all the places I've worked at I would feel comfortable say, calling at 3am if I ever felt depressed. That's friendship in my eyes, and a company retreat would never bring that kind of intimacy that's for me a requirement to actual friendship.
Now there are definitely people I would work with again without hesitation, and I'd grab a drink any time with most of my old colleagues.
I've just said this earlier in another comment, but I've never had what I'd consider true friendships come out from work acquaintances. I just don't consider "I have fun with you sometimes" to be friendship, and there's exactly 0 people from all the places I've worked at I would feel comfortable say, calling at 3am if I ever felt depressed. That's friendship in my eyes, and a company retreat would never bring that kind of intimacy that's for me a requirement to actual friendship.
Now there are definitely people I would work with again without hesitation, and I'd grab a drink any time with most of my old colleagues.
I’ll give my counter-anecdote. I have made three close friends at work who I frequently talk to about relationship issues, etc, and would happily help them move a couch if they asked. One of them is currently my roommate. I’m 41, so these things can happen as an adult too. It might be different if I had my own family though.
I cannot imagine telling my very busy, more stressed than me, top level exec wife that she was on her own for a week so I could bang out some code. She wants me to be successful but that's a little too much to ask.
If you think we're meeting to 'bang out some code' then you're very much mistaken. Vastly less code gets written than during a normal working week; the on-sites are about spending time with your colleagues in meatspace. We have a loose schedule with meeting slots for teams/SIGs etc, but the emphasis is strongly on socialising.
My thoughts as well. That said, I think an occasional company retreat during the work week is a nice compromise.
Yeah that can work. I've had a barbecue and games with my current full remote team before lockdowns, it was fun, and seeing them face to face was nice. But it was during work hours. And I still took my car and drove back home at the end of the day - maybe a bit later than usual, but I still could kiss my son goodbye. I've had two days/one night retreats at another role, too, they were fun. But they were planned in advance, exceptional events.
In my remote experience, I definitely don't talk to my colleagues that much.
But when you're trying to build a small company, one approach is to make it feel like a family. And families always have people we like and people we like not so much. But there's something special about one unit working toward a single goal.
My design is for a startup with young people. This would not work nearly as well for older people and people with their own families!
But when you're trying to build a small company, one approach is to make it feel like a family. And families always have people we like and people we like not so much. But there's something special about one unit working toward a single goal.
My design is for a startup with young people. This would not work nearly as well for older people and people with their own families!
I managed distributed teams long before COVID. Having people meet in person a few times a year does wonders for team cohesion.
Some people handle remote communications just fine. Others were raised on a steady diet of internet flame wars and approach the screen names in their company chat the same way: As enemies to argue with every day.
Putting people in front of each other associates a real person with that screen name. Everyone starts treating each other better and working more cooperatively. The transformation is almost instant.
One important tip: Face to face meetings need to happen on regular company time as much as possible. Avoid anything on weekends or after hours as much as possible. You don’t want the team building to be an extra ask on top of their normal workload. It is their workload. Obviously flights and hotel stays must be an exception, but keep it in bounds of normal working hours as much as possible.
Some people handle remote communications just fine. Others were raised on a steady diet of internet flame wars and approach the screen names in their company chat the same way: As enemies to argue with every day.
Putting people in front of each other associates a real person with that screen name. Everyone starts treating each other better and working more cooperatively. The transformation is almost instant.
One important tip: Face to face meetings need to happen on regular company time as much as possible. Avoid anything on weekends or after hours as much as possible. You don’t want the team building to be an extra ask on top of their normal workload. It is their workload. Obviously flights and hotel stays must be an exception, but keep it in bounds of normal working hours as much as possible.
Yeah. Remote is fine but you need to budget time and money for plane tickets and hotels. That's been the tough thing for me the past year. I'm normally remote although I could go into an office--and am technically assigned to one but I normally travel to a lot of events as well as off-sites.
>Face to face meetings need to happen on regular company time as much as possible.
Yep. I sometimes hear people talking about how we should have team building events on the weekend. That's a big nope. In fact, while it's sometimes unavoidable, I sort of resent it when I need to travel on a Sunday to get to some event/meeting.
>Face to face meetings need to happen on regular company time as much as possible.
Yep. I sometimes hear people talking about how we should have team building events on the weekend. That's a big nope. In fact, while it's sometimes unavoidable, I sort of resent it when I need to travel on a Sunday to get to some event/meeting.
> I sort of resent it when I need to travel on a Sunday to get to some event/meeting
As you should. It was something that should have been your time, and became company time.
As you should. It was something that should have been your time, and became company time.
> In my remote experience, I definitely don't talk to my colleagues that much.
Maybe you should, then. I speak to my colleagues at the very least 30 minutes to 1h a day, and work full remote.
> But when you're trying to build a small company, one approach is to make it feel like a family.
An approach I immensely dislike. IMHO it's a huge waste of time to pretend like most employees aren't just there to make a living. I'm not looking for a second family or to make friends, I'm here to provide my skills in exchange for money.
> But there's something special about one unit working toward a single goal.
I don't need to like you or my coworkers to do it, they all just have to be remotely competent and do a decent job at it, and I'll do the same. Let's have fun at work when at work, then let's close our computers and have our own lives, please. If friendships evolve from there, cool, but I'm not actively looking to make friends at my workplace.
> My design is for a startup with young people. This would not work nearly as well for older people and people with their own families!
I'm 30, I'm still quite young, AFAIK.
Maybe you should, then. I speak to my colleagues at the very least 30 minutes to 1h a day, and work full remote.
> But when you're trying to build a small company, one approach is to make it feel like a family.
An approach I immensely dislike. IMHO it's a huge waste of time to pretend like most employees aren't just there to make a living. I'm not looking for a second family or to make friends, I'm here to provide my skills in exchange for money.
> But there's something special about one unit working toward a single goal.
I don't need to like you or my coworkers to do it, they all just have to be remotely competent and do a decent job at it, and I'll do the same. Let's have fun at work when at work, then let's close our computers and have our own lives, please. If friendships evolve from there, cool, but I'm not actively looking to make friends at my workplace.
> My design is for a startup with young people. This would not work nearly as well for older people and people with their own families!
I'm 30, I'm still quite young, AFAIK.
"not much" is a matter of perspective. In a workday, I have a lot of interactions. And then I thankfully have periods of 2-4 hours at a time when I don't talk to anyone.
As a developer, at least with my limited attention span, I need periods of no interruption to get anything done. That's why sometimes I stop "working" in the afternoon and resume at 00:00 for a couple of hours to really get things done.
On the family topic, I guess it's a matter of our experiences. Even at my current company, I feel like at least 2-3 of my close colleagues are sort of family. We can discuss some life issues, and we clearly care about each other. We also are totally committed to a shared goal, and we give our all in a sort of intimate way to get the result we agree on. This is the kind of sentiment I want to foster.
As a developer, at least with my limited attention span, I need periods of no interruption to get anything done. That's why sometimes I stop "working" in the afternoon and resume at 00:00 for a couple of hours to really get things done.
On the family topic, I guess it's a matter of our experiences. Even at my current company, I feel like at least 2-3 of my close colleagues are sort of family. We can discuss some life issues, and we clearly care about each other. We also are totally committed to a shared goal, and we give our all in a sort of intimate way to get the result we agree on. This is the kind of sentiment I want to foster.
I always find this position to be really interesting because as an adult I've had a really hard time making new friends.
So working in an environment that values and supports employees creating friendships that extend outside of the office has been a huge benefit for me.
So working in an environment that values and supports employees creating friendships that extend outside of the office has been a huge benefit for me.
Maybe our definition of what counts as a friend differ? I don't really consider work acquaintances (some of those I loved working with and would do again in a heartbeat if the occasion presented itself) "friends".
A friend is someone I feel I can confide in and would not hesitate to call if I ever needed help with something personal. I can count those on a single hand, and in my case, none of those came from work, and that kind of deeply rooted relationship definitely wouldn't come from a company or team-wide organized retreat.
A friend is someone I feel I can confide in and would not hesitate to call if I ever needed help with something personal. I can count those on a single hand, and in my case, none of those came from work, and that kind of deeply rooted relationship definitely wouldn't come from a company or team-wide organized retreat.
I don't think our definitions differ at all.
I have a close group of friends that I made at my current company. Some of them have moved on, others are still here but pre-covid we made time to hang out on the weekends or after work and during covid we've done zoom hangouts and stuff like that. A number of them were at my wedding, we were all there for support when someone's mom died during the pandemic and she couldn't travel home for the funeral, and we all supported each other when one of our friend group took his own life last year.
Obviously you won't find that applicable to every job or company, but I see a lot of similarities to making friends at work and when you're in school. You spend a lot of time with the same people everyday and you probably have a shared interest or two. Sometimes that means you find people you can be friends with outside of the time you're "forced" to spend together with.
I have a close group of friends that I made at my current company. Some of them have moved on, others are still here but pre-covid we made time to hang out on the weekends or after work and during covid we've done zoom hangouts and stuff like that. A number of them were at my wedding, we were all there for support when someone's mom died during the pandemic and she couldn't travel home for the funeral, and we all supported each other when one of our friend group took his own life last year.
Obviously you won't find that applicable to every job or company, but I see a lot of similarities to making friends at work and when you're in school. You spend a lot of time with the same people everyday and you probably have a shared interest or two. Sometimes that means you find people you can be friends with outside of the time you're "forced" to spend together with.
Ah yes, the founder’s dream: gaining familial power over young people’s entire lives to further your start-up, before they realize they should develop a life of their own outside of work to avoid complete burnout.
Hey, they can spend 1-2 years with me, learn to be a good developer, and then happily go do whatever they want. I'm not binding them to be with me and my company forever.
This is not the US startup scene. There are decent alternatives which don't use people up. No VCs, so no short term fixations beyond having enough runway to last 6 months.
This is not the US startup scene. There are decent alternatives which don't use people up. No VCs, so no short term fixations beyond having enough runway to last 6 months.
I can almost hear his "Our Incredible Journey" post already.
I'm a worker in the trenches myself. If you read a different story, that's based on your perception or experience rather than my motives. You can look through my previous posts. I want everyone to be happy and fulfilled, and money is not my driving force.
All that said, I do believe that doing things well and providing a great collaborative atmosphere (even family-like perhaps) can lead to high performance.
What I do not want is people merely trading their time, their lives, for a bit of money. That is not living.
All that said, I do believe that doing things well and providing a great collaborative atmosphere (even family-like perhaps) can lead to high performance.
What I do not want is people merely trading their time, their lives, for a bit of money. That is not living.
IIUC, you're saying that the GP's approach is a recipe for failure. Can you elaborate?
In a nutshell, the problem with the "family approach" is how it puts a very powerful tool into the hands of one's employer they can hold against you: your committal, loyalty or even reliance on others in the same situation. Should you ever want to switch places, you will likely have to rebuild your circle of friends, as they often do not take kindly to people "leaving the family" or simply lose contact due to no longer sharing anything big in common.
Similar things tend to happen when one has a circle of "friends" related to a physical activity: when they stop or change clubs, they often lose most of those "friends", as often the only thread holding things together is a shared activity and location.
At least by recognizing this, people can opt to not put all their eggs in one basket, which lessens any potential loss. Also, it allows them to look at different ways to establish friendships, in a way they can withstand more changes. Finally, there is no third party (the employer) that can use a potential insecurity against them (e.g. less financial growth because Bob is so afraid of rebuilding his circle of friends, he'll accept a stellar performance netting him 1% wage growth).
And as others point out: forced participation into social activities is not something everyone is favorable towards.
Similar things tend to happen when one has a circle of "friends" related to a physical activity: when they stop or change clubs, they often lose most of those "friends", as often the only thread holding things together is a shared activity and location.
At least by recognizing this, people can opt to not put all their eggs in one basket, which lessens any potential loss. Also, it allows them to look at different ways to establish friendships, in a way they can withstand more changes. Finally, there is no third party (the employer) that can use a potential insecurity against them (e.g. less financial growth because Bob is so afraid of rebuilding his circle of friends, he'll accept a stellar performance netting him 1% wage growth).
And as others point out: forced participation into social activities is not something everyone is favorable towards.
The issue here is that in an honestly positive scenario, the family concept is good. But in a manipulative scenario, it is bad.
When I was 22 and taking on my first development job, I would have loved to have a family-centric groups of smart, motivated people to be a part of. Instead, I did a contract with an IBM subsidiary. We worked sort of like a family, but our idiot manager ignored our scheduling advice and promised delivery in half the time we recommended. So we worked our asses off, as a small ad-hoc family, and still lost the next contract.
What if instead this "family" could be led by a manager who understands reality and doesn't overpromise and underdeliver?
If you ever work with any person or person in a high stress situation, they will become your family or your enemy. Family is much better. And if the greater circumstance is also comprised of family, then you can take on the world. If you don't get this, then you haven't experience it yet. This is not some Cali startup bullshit. This is real people pouring themselves into something they believe in - foolishly or otherwise.
When I was 22 and taking on my first development job, I would have loved to have a family-centric groups of smart, motivated people to be a part of. Instead, I did a contract with an IBM subsidiary. We worked sort of like a family, but our idiot manager ignored our scheduling advice and promised delivery in half the time we recommended. So we worked our asses off, as a small ad-hoc family, and still lost the next contract.
What if instead this "family" could be led by a manager who understands reality and doesn't overpromise and underdeliver?
If you ever work with any person or person in a high stress situation, they will become your family or your enemy. Family is much better. And if the greater circumstance is also comprised of family, then you can take on the world. If you don't get this, then you haven't experience it yet. This is not some Cali startup bullshit. This is real people pouring themselves into something they believe in - foolishly or otherwise.
So, to be clear, your plan is no different than all the other crappy companies people complain about: replace real process and professional management with calling yourself a family, “perks” the employees already pay for through reduced salary like food, and taking advantage of young, cheap labor that doesn’t know any better than to be exploited?
Is that what you read? No, I am creating the kind of company I would have loved to work for.
Salary is fine, but I know firsthand that if there is good free food, I will stay and work through lunch (or at least talk with my colleagues about work challenges while eating the nice food).
Look, if someone is not happy with their work, free food or free trips is only going to hold them in place for a short while. They absolutely will leave at some point, and chances are they'll either do some damage on the way out or take some IP if possible. If you don't treat people well, you get what you deserve.
Salary is fine, but I know firsthand that if there is good free food, I will stay and work through lunch (or at least talk with my colleagues about work challenges while eating the nice food).
Look, if someone is not happy with their work, free food or free trips is only going to hold them in place for a short while. They absolutely will leave at some point, and chances are they'll either do some damage on the way out or take some IP if possible. If you don't treat people well, you get what you deserve.
When fun and camaraderie happens naturally on a project, it's really amazing to be a part of. When an org tries to force "fun", it's awful.
I think you are dreaming of the first kind, and everyone against you in this thread is having nightmares about the second.
But I've also learned something about dealing with "corporate BS" -- if it's at least reasonably well intentioned, one can still decide to make the most of it instead of fighting everything and killing everyone else's motivation.
I think you are dreaming of the first kind, and everyone against you in this thread is having nightmares about the second.
But I've also learned something about dealing with "corporate BS" -- if it's at least reasonably well intentioned, one can still decide to make the most of it instead of fighting everything and killing everyone else's motivation.
Very true. Marketed "fun" is usually not. And frankly, I don't have energy or patience to play the marketing game.
But I do know what fun is. I worked in the gaming industry at one point, and later in life I worked in places with Friday parties and foosball and food and spirits. Party play time can be a whole lot of fun - the kind you talk about Monday and even Tuesday and then look forward to next Friday.
Foster an environment where people work hard and you all gain, and you get to play nicely on a regular basis, and you have a place where you don't have to compete for talent. People seek you out.
But I do know what fun is. I worked in the gaming industry at one point, and later in life I worked in places with Friday parties and foosball and food and spirits. Party play time can be a whole lot of fun - the kind you talk about Monday and even Tuesday and then look forward to next Friday.
Foster an environment where people work hard and you all gain, and you get to play nicely on a regular basis, and you have a place where you don't have to compete for talent. People seek you out.
How about just, you know, letting people have a lunch break that doesn’t involve work. By all means subsidise it if you want, but don't try drag people back to their desks with free food.
agreed. I have just found by my own experience that when nice free lunch is supplied (finance company, not SV startup), we typically talked about work and tech stuff anyway.
those who went out for lunch did because they needed some air and distance, and that was not frowned upon at all. but trust me, good free food is a powerful motivator to stick around!
those who went out for lunch did because they needed some air and distance, and that was not frowned upon at all. but trust me, good free food is a powerful motivator to stick around!
> “perks” the employees already pay for through reduced salary like food,
Isn't it a big net tax advantage to provide this rather than they pay in after tax (and after employer's portion of payroll tax) dollars?
Isn't it a big net tax advantage to provide this rather than they pay in after tax (and after employer's portion of payroll tax) dollars?
> In my remote experience, I definitely don't talk to my colleagues that much.
I'm fully remote and this is weird to me. I might go a day or two and not talk to anyone because I'm busy on a problem, but there's always sprint planning every couple of weeks. We also have a general rule that if a slack convo gets too complicated we just start an impromptu video call in the channel and talk it out. This normally leads to a bit a banter after figuring out what we needed.
I'm fully remote and this is weird to me. I might go a day or two and not talk to anyone because I'm busy on a problem, but there's always sprint planning every couple of weeks. We also have a general rule that if a slack convo gets too complicated we just start an impromptu video call in the channel and talk it out. This normally leads to a bit a banter after figuring out what we needed.
what's the upper age limit to join this hypothetical company? /s
I'm thrown by people working on a laptop. Do you have a battery powered second screen? Is there some workflow tips I should adopt to make it work better?
I'm quite jealous of people who can work on laptops.
I wonder the degree to which people enjoy WFH is the same as the degree to which they enjoy working on a laptop. Even the people I know with a dedicated room for work set up want to go back to the office if they prefer multiple monitors.
I'm quite jealous of people who can work on laptops.
I wonder the degree to which people enjoy WFH is the same as the degree to which they enjoy working on a laptop. Even the people I know with a dedicated room for work set up want to go back to the office if they prefer multiple monitors.
I much prefer a 4k monitor as my primary, and my laptop below it (open, as a small second screen).
Going outside, working just off the laptop, is a definite shift. It usually means less coding, but sometimes it pushes me to be productive in areas I normally neglect (documenting, planning, organizing).
To do real development, I am very dependent upon a big monitor. If I travel, I take one or rent one.
Honestly though, sometimes I just go for a walk. And often during that walk, with no screens, my brain magically sorts through some problems and gives me new insights.
If you work from home though, most people agree on dedicating some space and properly equipping it. Working always only on a laptop in a floater kind of way is something that I suspect most people cannot do with any real level of productivity.
Going outside, working just off the laptop, is a definite shift. It usually means less coding, but sometimes it pushes me to be productive in areas I normally neglect (documenting, planning, organizing).
To do real development, I am very dependent upon a big monitor. If I travel, I take one or rent one.
Honestly though, sometimes I just go for a walk. And often during that walk, with no screens, my brain magically sorts through some problems and gives me new insights.
If you work from home though, most people agree on dedicating some space and properly equipping it. Working always only on a laptop in a floater kind of way is something that I suspect most people cannot do with any real level of productivity.
> And often during that walk, with no screens, my brain magically sorts through some problems and gives me new insights.
So many of my breakthroughs happen on walks. Being forced to reconstruct the situation in my head makes me think about the nitty-gritty details in a much more systematic manner.
So many of my breakthroughs happen on walks. Being forced to reconstruct the situation in my head makes me think about the nitty-gritty details in a much more systematic manner.
How do you carry your monitor? this has been a problem for me during covid. also there is the work chair problem..
Le Sigh, during COVID I don't go anywhere. Carrying a monitor is not a problem. But when I traveled, many co-working spaces offer halfway decent monitors for rent. And if you're staying for a while, you can buy one locally and honestly just leave it there when you go. We're talking about $200. It's just part of the cost of being a digital nomad (which you totally make up in many other ways).
Oh, but chairs for me are not a problem. I have been a very happy standing-worker for 13 years now. It started with hip and lower back pain in my early 30s, which seemed f'd up, and then some articles by a Mayo Clinic doctor who worked standing and sometimes on a treadmill. Turns out, it was good advice. Now I stand all day - sometimes 18 hours, and don't even notice. (To be clear, you always move a bit, shift your weight, etc.; it's not being a statue.)
Oh, but chairs for me are not a problem. I have been a very happy standing-worker for 13 years now. It started with hip and lower back pain in my early 30s, which seemed f'd up, and then some articles by a Mayo Clinic doctor who worked standing and sometimes on a treadmill. Turns out, it was good advice. Now I stand all day - sometimes 18 hours, and don't even notice. (To be clear, you always move a bit, shift your weight, etc.; it's not being a statue.)
Just like to the other commenter mentioned, be careful of standing all day. My mother was a hairdresser for 50+ years. She needed operations on both her knees.
I think it's all a balance of sitting and standing, and not taking one to the extreme. I say this as I just threw my back out a few weeks ago, because I was sitting all day :( So yeah, I'm not a model person to listen to either!
I think it's all a balance of sitting and standing, and not taking one to the extreme. I say this as I just threw my back out a few weeks ago, because I was sitting all day :( So yeah, I'm not a model person to listen to either!
That's quite a lot of standing. At what point would you start worrying about varicose veins?
I have a few small spider veins, but I've had them for 10 years already. And since I work from home, I can play James Brown any time I want. You can imagine I get down; I'm not static.
Slightly more seriously, there is no one answer. But in terms of total human history, sitting isn't something we spent a lot of time doing. Sleeping, lying flat, we obviously spend about 1/4 to 1/3 of our time doing. Standing or walking or running surely must be a big portion of the rest. Sitting would only be reserved for when you have the time to "do nothing". That's kind of a new concept. Thusly, I'm not afraid.
For a 50 year old nerd who hasn't exercised in a year, I'm still well above the health and capabilities of a lot of same age people. And when I'm in a good environment with outdoor play areas (mountain biking) or indoor gyms, I'm fit. Aesthetically, losing hair and gaining less elastic skin is much more a concern to me than some tiny purple lines in my ankles or knees :/
Slightly more seriously, there is no one answer. But in terms of total human history, sitting isn't something we spent a lot of time doing. Sleeping, lying flat, we obviously spend about 1/4 to 1/3 of our time doing. Standing or walking or running surely must be a big portion of the rest. Sitting would only be reserved for when you have the time to "do nothing". That's kind of a new concept. Thusly, I'm not afraid.
For a 50 year old nerd who hasn't exercised in a year, I'm still well above the health and capabilities of a lot of same age people. And when I'm in a good environment with outdoor play areas (mountain biking) or indoor gyms, I'm fit. Aesthetically, losing hair and gaining less elastic skin is much more a concern to me than some tiny purple lines in my ankles or knees :/
While it's not a big 4K monitor, when I used to travel a lot pre-COVID, I got a 15" USB monitor for my laptop. It was small enough to easily haul around in a carryon bag and gave some useful screen real estate.
I bought a 15" 4k UPERFECT portable gaming monitor for this situation. It's about the size of my 15" MBP, only thicker. I was worried about it being sketchy (as far as I can tell, they only sell on Amazon), but aside from difficulties syncing sometimes if I turn on the monitor before the computer and it decides there isn't a signal, it works great.
Even the people I know with a dedicated room for work set up want to go back to the office if they prefer multiple monitors.
Well, allow me to be the first outlier. I typically use two monitors (tried three, didn't really add much to having two, for me); using two external monitors (attached to a laptop) right this second as I type this (and also a proper keyboard and mouse - the laptop to which they are all connected is under the desk, closed).
I am very happy indeed to continue using two monitors at home. A chap on my team uses four monitors on his setup and he's similarly happy to continue doing so from home.
Why do the people you know who like to use multiple monitors want to do so in the office rather than at home in a dedicated work room? Are they, at home, like, actually working ON the laptop? Typing on the little laptop keyboard, using the little laptop mousepad, staring at the little laptop screen?
Well, allow me to be the first outlier. I typically use two monitors (tried three, didn't really add much to having two, for me); using two external monitors (attached to a laptop) right this second as I type this (and also a proper keyboard and mouse - the laptop to which they are all connected is under the desk, closed).
I am very happy indeed to continue using two monitors at home. A chap on my team uses four monitors on his setup and he's similarly happy to continue doing so from home.
Why do the people you know who like to use multiple monitors want to do so in the office rather than at home in a dedicated work room? Are they, at home, like, actually working ON the laptop? Typing on the little laptop keyboard, using the little laptop mousepad, staring at the little laptop screen?
> I wonder the degree to which people enjoy WFH is the same as the degree to which they enjoy working on a laptop.
I hate working on a laptop screen.
OTOH, I like the 34” ultrawide monitor I use at home attached to my dock better the twin 21” widescreens I had in the office, plus I get to use it, rather than a laptop, in the numerous meetings-with-computers, which were held in meeting rooms with in-person work.
I hate working on a laptop screen.
OTOH, I like the 34” ultrawide monitor I use at home attached to my dock better the twin 21” widescreens I had in the office, plus I get to use it, rather than a laptop, in the numerous meetings-with-computers, which were held in meeting rooms with in-person work.
I have an 34" 1440p ultrawide + vertical 24" 1080p at home. That setup > all setups I've ever managed to get at work, including that triple 24" I've had once. I can't stand working off a laptop my hands, neck and back inevitably start to hurt after slouching over and typing off the tiny keyboard and trackpad.
I used to hate laptops, and chafed when they were provisioned for my team. We all worked in the office, and docked them. We rarely needed to use them from home until COVID.
Yet the last year has changed my mind. I have a 15" MBP from 2015 that is fine. My home office has an iMac, so I really don't want a second monitor crowding my desk. I just use the laptop's display and keyboard. Less stuff to worry about finding space for, or keeping the cats from fucking with.
And best of all, when work is done, I log out of the VPN, and close the lid. Of course I have Teams/Outlook on my phone if there's an emergency, but there's also a clear delineation for my family to recognize; if the laptop is open, I'm still working. If it's closed, then they can talk/pester/joke with me without worrying about my work. And it also helps me remember to not overwork.
Yet the last year has changed my mind. I have a 15" MBP from 2015 that is fine. My home office has an iMac, so I really don't want a second monitor crowding my desk. I just use the laptop's display and keyboard. Less stuff to worry about finding space for, or keeping the cats from fucking with.
And best of all, when work is done, I log out of the VPN, and close the lid. Of course I have Teams/Outlook on my phone if there's an emergency, but there's also a clear delineation for my family to recognize; if the laptop is open, I'm still working. If it's closed, then they can talk/pester/joke with me without worrying about my work. And it also helps me remember to not overwork.
I have a minimalist approach to interfaces, and work on 1080p (both desktop and laptop). I don't have second monitors and I don't intend to add any.
I don't doubt that adding screen estate has value, but in the minimalistic spirit, anything added also subtracts something :) And in the same spirit, anything subtracted adds something else - in my case, the ability to work more efficiently.
Try to work on a single screen for a relatively long time (say, a few months). Over the time, you'll develop (because you're forced to) more efficient habits.
I don't doubt that adding screen estate has value, but in the minimalistic spirit, anything added also subtracts something :) And in the same spirit, anything subtracted adds something else - in my case, the ability to work more efficiently.
Try to work on a single screen for a relatively long time (say, a few months). Over the time, you'll develop (because you're forced to) more efficient habits.
I use a window manager that has multiple desktops. It's like having 9 screens, only you can only see one of them at a time. But really, that's how screens are. You can't really look at two screens at once.
Sort of, but doing a stare-and-compare, two screens beats two virtual desktops in productivity. It’s the difference between being able to set two documents side by side on a desk vs stacking them. There’s more friction in the swap than in the glance.
Also, being able to have VC people on one screen while full screening content, or full screening content while playing a game is valuable.
It depends on the use case.
I frequently use two terminals side-by side; for this type of work, 1920p are enough [for me]. They're enough also for diffing source code, as long as the lines are not excessively long (around 100 chars fit on each side; comparing 2 lines long statements is acceptable)..
I think a use case where a single (1080p) screen is significantly inconvenient is for windows with a fixed shape, for example, debugging a videogame.
I frequently use two terminals side-by side; for this type of work, 1920p are enough [for me]. They're enough also for diffing source code, as long as the lines are not excessively long (around 100 chars fit on each side; comparing 2 lines long statements is acceptable)..
I think a use case where a single (1080p) screen is significantly inconvenient is for windows with a fixed shape, for example, debugging a videogame.
Having worked on multiple monitors for so long, I would find just having a tiny laptop screen too restrictive. Being able to glance at multiple windows to collate information without having to Alt+Tab is priceless.
I bought a 43" (4K 3840 x 2160) and put an older (rotated) 24" right next to it - the setup works perfectly contrary to my initial worry of the main display proving to be too big. Advantage of the 43" display over an ultra-wide is that I get plenty of vertical space as well in addition to the horizontal space. That means easily having 4 80-column tall IDE windows side by side for reduced scrolling. Another advantage is that videos play full screen without any black areas on the sides. The smaller monitor is split between Slack and email - both always visible but not too distracting due to being in the peripheral vision.
I bought a 43" (4K 3840 x 2160) and put an older (rotated) 24" right next to it - the setup works perfectly contrary to my initial worry of the main display proving to be too big. Advantage of the 43" display over an ultra-wide is that I get plenty of vertical space as well in addition to the horizontal space. That means easily having 4 80-column tall IDE windows side by side for reduced scrolling. Another advantage is that videos play full screen without any black areas on the sides. The smaller monitor is split between Slack and email - both always visible but not too distracting due to being in the peripheral vision.
Sorry for the tangent, but I'm considering replacing my current home-office monitor.
Mind sharing which 43" monitor you have, and any other thoughts on its suitability for coding?
Mind sharing which 43" monitor you have, and any other thoughts on its suitability for coding?
Keep in mind that at some point (depending on your distance from the screen, which tends to be 18-24 inches for developers), the size of the screen grows beyond what you can see without intentionally looking off at an angle.
I would argue that 32" is enough. Maybe 35-40 if it were curved. Of course, if I could have a 1:1 aspect ratio screen which was spherical, that would be ideal. Even so, you only get so much benefit from larger size.
My primary monitor is an LG 27UD58 "4k". It is fantastic in terms of visual quality and even gaming. But as far as I can tell, there's no good upsize option. I'm hoping for improvements in VR style glasses which would allow me to look all around and see a virtual big screen on demand.
Two monitors are nice, but then you're always looking a bit to the left or right. Two stacked monitors are nice, but then you're looking significantly up or down. There's no good answer :/, other than a neural interface which does not yet exist.
I would argue that 32" is enough. Maybe 35-40 if it were curved. Of course, if I could have a 1:1 aspect ratio screen which was spherical, that would be ideal. Even so, you only get so much benefit from larger size.
My primary monitor is an LG 27UD58 "4k". It is fantastic in terms of visual quality and even gaming. But as far as I can tell, there's no good upsize option. I'm hoping for improvements in VR style glasses which would allow me to look all around and see a virtual big screen on demand.
Two monitors are nice, but then you're always looking a bit to the left or right. Two stacked monitors are nice, but then you're looking significantly up or down. There's no good answer :/, other than a neural interface which does not yet exist.
I'm using the Dell Ultrasharp Monitor U4320Q. There is no other way to put it - when I first bought it, I had doubts about my decision because this thing is _big_. You'll need to move your eye (and/or your neck) a bit more for the content on the edges which you almost never have to do for something like, say, 24" monitor.
However, few months down the line, this is the best decision I made for coding. The real estate makes a real difference. The quality of the panel is great and you soon get used to "bigness" and the ability to have so many split windows makes a huge difference in productivity. It'll probably really shine with a tiling WM/virtual workspaces (I use a non-tiling single workspace setup so that's just speculation though).
You still have to move few inches away if you are playing content full screen (my desk is wide but not very deep). I play Youtube videos expanded but not full screen and that is already big enough for me. For movies in full screen, I push my chair a bit away from the desk and put my legs on a small stool and then the experience is great.
However, few months down the line, this is the best decision I made for coding. The real estate makes a real difference. The quality of the panel is great and you soon get used to "bigness" and the ability to have so many split windows makes a huge difference in productivity. It'll probably really shine with a tiling WM/virtual workspaces (I use a non-tiling single workspace setup so that's just speculation though).
You still have to move few inches away if you are playing content full screen (my desk is wide but not very deep). I play Youtube videos expanded but not full screen and that is already big enough for me. For movies in full screen, I push my chair a bit away from the desk and put my legs on a small stool and then the experience is great.
I've always worked on a single laptop and I will never go back to the office, so that checks.
I like working on a small laptop even when there are multiple large monitors available - probably to do with being a very heavy virtual workspaces + tiling wm user. I also hate sitting at a desk and prefer to flop around whatever couch, recliner, or bit of lawn seems comfortable at the time, and it's harder to do that when you're dragging hardware around. For whatever reasons, I find it way easier to get in the zone working this way.
It depends on the kind of work. Having a nice virtual workspaces setup makes it possible to switch between applications accurately and quickly (not like alt-tab), and that makes it possible to do work where cross-referencing a lot of text isn't required.
I wonder the degree to which people enjoy WFH is the same as the degree to which they enjoy working on a laptop. Even the people I know with a dedicated room for work set up want to go back to the office if they prefer multiple monitors.
I can understand why people who are working from their kitchen table want to go back to the office, but for those that have a dedicated work area, wouldn't they set it up the way they want?
I have a multi-monitor setup at home that's better than what I have at work since I'm not limited to IT approved hardware. Related, I also have a loud clicky keyboard that I can't get away with using at work since everyone in the shared office area can hear it.
I can understand why people who are working from their kitchen table want to go back to the office, but for those that have a dedicated work area, wouldn't they set it up the way they want?
I have a multi-monitor setup at home that's better than what I have at work since I'm not limited to IT approved hardware. Related, I also have a loud clicky keyboard that I can't get away with using at work since everyone in the shared office area can hear it.
Depending on country, you’re not legally allowed to work on your laptop. You’re required to have a monitor, keyboard and mouse, you cannot be hunched over a laptop for 8 hours a day. The applies both to the office and when working from home.
Which country is this?
Denmark. Working on laptop is only allow for short periods of time, and it can’t be planned. So you can deal with emergencies, quick last minute things.
Rules have been more flexible during Covid, but people have been working from home for so long now that height adjustable desks and external monitors something the employeers need to ensure that people have access to again, even at home.
Rules have been more flexible during Covid, but people have been working from home for so long now that height adjustable desks and external monitors something the employeers need to ensure that people have access to again, even at home.
Well, I enjoy WFH (mostly) but a laptop alone isn't great. At home I use a corner desk, two monitors, two phones and three laptops (one testing, one does light compiling and vpn duties).
There's no way I'd be allowed this much equipment and space in the office. I had a nice-ish 27' monitor there and a small desk crammed next to another developer.
As much as I miss the social aspects of an office, WFH has a lot of benefits. I realize this is not true for many, and a lot of my own money went into the office of my dreams here. But it's quite comfortable.
There's no way I'd be allowed this much equipment and space in the office. I had a nice-ish 27' monitor there and a small desk crammed next to another developer.
As much as I miss the social aspects of an office, WFH has a lot of benefits. I realize this is not true for many, and a lot of my own money went into the office of my dreams here. But it's quite comfortable.
Why can't they have multiple monitors at home?
It depends on what I'm doing. I do video calls from my desktop as I have all the lighting, microphones, and good webcam set up. And I'll also use the multiple monitors if I need a lot of reference material. But if I'm just writing something or doing email, I'm perfectly happy just working on a laptop and probably do it more than using my desktop.
I use one of these when on the road. https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-MB169B-1920x1080-Portable-Monito...
I was like you until July of last year. Started working exclusively on my laptop (I'm a c++ engineer) and I found that it forced me to be more organized. Vim + tmux lets me make full use of a smaller screen. My productivity has honestly improved as a result
These are helpful, in my experience:
https://www.asus.com/us/Displays-Desktops/Monitors/ZenScreen...
https://www.asus.com/us/Displays-Desktops/Monitors/ZenScreen...
I don't think it's that people in charge of big companies are not creative thinkers. I think their priorities are things other than employee satisfaction, or possibly even employee productivity. Both of those things are great, but maximizing shareholder value comes first. Big companies are applying creative thinking to marketing, sales relationships, mergers and acquisitions, strategic lobbying/lawsuits, cost cutting, etc.
In my younger days, I made the mistake of getting overly invested in the companies I worked for. Always put your long term goals first. If you don't have equity, it's not your company!
> weekend or week-long dev retreats are ideal
When you do retreats do keep in mind that not everyone will want to spend a week or weekend away from their family, and that retreats with a bunch of people who can be social nonstop for 12 hours can also be the worst nightmare for introverts. Keep it optional, make sure it's clear that it's optional, make sure junior employees don't feel pressured :)
When you do retreats do keep in mind that not everyone will want to spend a week or weekend away from their family, and that retreats with a bunch of people who can be social nonstop for 12 hours can also be the worst nightmare for introverts. Keep it optional, make sure it's clear that it's optional, make sure junior employees don't feel pressured :)
I think it works fine as long as you're up-front about it when hiring e.g.
> We get the whole company together once a year for seven days so that Automatticians can create bonds that influence them all year long. So far we’ve done Grand Meetups in San Francisco, California; La Paz, Mexico; Oracle, Arizona; Breckenridge, Colorado; Mont-Sainte-Anne, Québec; Seaside, Florida; Budapest, Hungary; San Diego, California; Santa Cruz, California; Park City, Utah; Whistler, Canada; and Orlando, Florida.
> In addition to our all-company Grand Meetup, teams meet for five to seven days to brainstorm team-level strategy and bond in locales ranging from Boulder to Buenos Aires, Las Vegas to Lisbon, Montréal to Mexico City, and Vienna to Vietnam. If you join our merry band, expect to travel three to four weeks per year.
> As a distributed company we also know how to connect with each other from afar, and consider day-to-day social communication at least as important as breaking bread in person.
https://automattic.com/how-we-work/
> We get the whole company together once a year for seven days so that Automatticians can create bonds that influence them all year long. So far we’ve done Grand Meetups in San Francisco, California; La Paz, Mexico; Oracle, Arizona; Breckenridge, Colorado; Mont-Sainte-Anne, Québec; Seaside, Florida; Budapest, Hungary; San Diego, California; Santa Cruz, California; Park City, Utah; Whistler, Canada; and Orlando, Florida.
> In addition to our all-company Grand Meetup, teams meet for five to seven days to brainstorm team-level strategy and bond in locales ranging from Boulder to Buenos Aires, Las Vegas to Lisbon, Montréal to Mexico City, and Vienna to Vietnam. If you join our merry band, expect to travel three to four weeks per year.
> As a distributed company we also know how to connect with each other from afar, and consider day-to-day social communication at least as important as breaking bread in person.
https://automattic.com/how-we-work/
Although mildly off topic I found this interesting tidbit on their sustainability page [0]:
> Since our company consists of a distributed workforce, the majority of our employees work remotely from home, reducing the need to commute daily to a central workplace, and greenhouse gas emissions as a result. Employees at Automattic are invited to share the distance of their previous commute. On this basis we are able to calculate that we save approximately 18,207 kilometers of travel every work day.
> However, we also believe that it’s crucial to meet together in person several times a year, and those flights can have a very large impact. We don’t have exact data yet, but our rough estimate is that each Automattician is generating about 2,500kg of CO2 per year for work related flights.
Considering that they have 1424 employees listed on the map on their about page [1], let's do some simple math:
1424 employees * 2500000 g/employee CO2 = 3,560,000,000 g CO2/year
is the company's actual current footprint of the air-travel meetups.
Suppose a car emits around 200 g CO2 per km,
200 g/km * 18207 km/day * 365 days/year = 1,329,111,000 g CO2/year
if they forgo the meetups and do on-site instead. (And that's the worst case scenario of everyone driving their own car to work and zero public transportation use.)
Conclusion: Remote + air travel meetups is NOT necessarily more sustainable! In this case the CO2 emissions of remote work is almost TRIPLE.
[0] https://automattic.com/sustainability/
[1] https://automattic.com/about/
> Since our company consists of a distributed workforce, the majority of our employees work remotely from home, reducing the need to commute daily to a central workplace, and greenhouse gas emissions as a result. Employees at Automattic are invited to share the distance of their previous commute. On this basis we are able to calculate that we save approximately 18,207 kilometers of travel every work day.
> However, we also believe that it’s crucial to meet together in person several times a year, and those flights can have a very large impact. We don’t have exact data yet, but our rough estimate is that each Automattician is generating about 2,500kg of CO2 per year for work related flights.
Considering that they have 1424 employees listed on the map on their about page [1], let's do some simple math:
1424 employees * 2500000 g/employee CO2 = 3,560,000,000 g CO2/year
is the company's actual current footprint of the air-travel meetups.
Suppose a car emits around 200 g CO2 per km,
200 g/km * 18207 km/day * 365 days/year = 1,329,111,000 g CO2/year
if they forgo the meetups and do on-site instead. (And that's the worst case scenario of everyone driving their own car to work and zero public transportation use.)
Conclusion: Remote + air travel meetups is NOT necessarily more sustainable! In this case the CO2 emissions of remote work is almost TRIPLE.
[0] https://automattic.com/sustainability/
[1] https://automattic.com/about/
I think something to say about remote-but-local companies. Close enough to travel to a central location every few weeks/month, but far enough to let people live in cheaper, larger housing you wouldn't find within 10 miles of a city office.
Like, look at London. Mega house prices in the city, but they peter out pretty quickly once you cross the M25 and you start hitting semi-rural areas.
Like, look at London. Mega house prices in the city, but they peter out pretty quickly once you cross the M25 and you start hitting semi-rural areas.
Yeah, I like that. I think having an office with flexibility to be there anywhere from occasionally to every day is a good thing.
There are also people who don't work well remotely, especially if the salaries don't increase enough to rent a big enough apartment with decent lighting, or if the employee has children who constantly distract them, among others.
There are also people who don't work well remotely, especially if the salaries don't increase enough to rent a big enough apartment with decent lighting, or if the employee has children who constantly distract them, among others.
There's pretty much no such thing as optional if there's a team off-site unless it's "I can't" for some reason rather than "I don't want to." Multi-day off-sites are sometimes necessary but weekend is a no go.
But does your "off-site" really need to be off-site?
If you're a fully remote company, sure, it makes sense, but for a company with an actual local office, taking the team to Hawaii for 3 days just to have meetings that could have been had at conference rooms at your usual office isn't always appreciated by every member of your team, especially the ones who have {health conditions, children, pets, side gigs, ...}
If you're a fully remote company, sure, it makes sense, but for a company with an actual local office, taking the team to Hawaii for 3 days just to have meetings that could have been had at conference rooms at your usual office isn't always appreciated by every member of your team, especially the ones who have {health conditions, children, pets, side gigs, ...}
For what it’s worth you have a yard, most of the people wanting to go back to the office live in a more cramped conditions. Not having something like a yard to fall back to has also make it way harder for those people in terms of mental well-being, seeing people around them instead of the same four walls would be like going back to normal for them.
This is true, and forgive me - I do forget this often. When I lived in one room of a shared apartment, I probably would have jumped off the balcony by now due to too much time with my roommate.
But! If remote is the new way, then we don't have to live in the city center. Especially in nice countries with good train systems, we can live in more distant places where rents are cheaper and we can have an entire place with yard to spare. I'm in NL, and I have about 150 square meters of indoor space plus a big yard for less than 800 eur. Previously I spent 700 for 35sq meters and no yard. The difference now is that I'm in a village 2.5 hours from Amsterdam. As long as there are trains, I can go to the office on occasion.
But! If remote is the new way, then we don't have to live in the city center. Especially in nice countries with good train systems, we can live in more distant places where rents are cheaper and we can have an entire place with yard to spare. I'm in NL, and I have about 150 square meters of indoor space plus a big yard for less than 800 eur. Previously I spent 700 for 35sq meters and no yard. The difference now is that I'm in a village 2.5 hours from Amsterdam. As long as there are trains, I can go to the office on occasion.
Unless that company is government owned, the owner is, in the US vernacular an "ass". Better facilities equals better hires equals better productivity equals more profit equals more money to invest in better facilities. It's a virtuous circle.
I work in London, and the lack of commuting by train, stuffed with a hundred other people, has been the equivalent of very hefty pay rise, and an improvement in my health, such that I haven't been ill, at all, since Xmas 2019.
I want to go back, but only for a couple of days a week if possible. I know I've signed a contract with my employer stating my place of employment and so on, so I'm resigned to the fact that it will likely be 3 or 4 days.
But I agree with only a few of the original author's sentiments. Not having to share an open plan office with a hundred other people has massively improved my productivity and health.
I work in London, and the lack of commuting by train, stuffed with a hundred other people, has been the equivalent of very hefty pay rise, and an improvement in my health, such that I haven't been ill, at all, since Xmas 2019.
I want to go back, but only for a couple of days a week if possible. I know I've signed a contract with my employer stating my place of employment and so on, so I'm resigned to the fact that it will likely be 3 or 4 days.
But I agree with only a few of the original author's sentiments. Not having to share an open plan office with a hundred other people has massively improved my productivity and health.
Big companies lack the freedom because they have to answer to institutional + activist investors, and institutional + activist investors want to see a sweat shop. They get nervous if they think people are having a chilled time at home.
This is a caste culture issue. It's orthogonal to productivity and real returns.
If you set up your chilled culture, you'd better stay bootstrapped. If you take VC money, most are going to push for a less liberal line.
This is a caste culture issue. It's orthogonal to productivity and real returns.
If you set up your chilled culture, you'd better stay bootstrapped. If you take VC money, most are going to push for a less liberal line.
This is a great (and refreshing) perspective on how to inspire employees by crafting a truly flexible work environment. We (especially the creative class) aren’t cogs to clock in 40 hours a week and leave. We want more from our employers.
The details of an ideal employee policy can be debated, but you’re right there with the 4 hours hard work, 2 hours social interaction, and the rest up to the employee. Especially a free trip with the staff every now and then to bond. Something you can’t really find at big companies anymore.
The details of an ideal employee policy can be debated, but you’re right there with the 4 hours hard work, 2 hours social interaction, and the rest up to the employee. Especially a free trip with the staff every now and then to bond. Something you can’t really find at big companies anymore.
As I begin to form my own company, one of my priorities is to allow my employees to have at least some of their time completely at their own discretion
The only way to really give employees freedom to work from anywhere completely at their own discretion is to let them work full-time remote.
If you require any face time at the office at all, then they have to live within commuting distance, or at least within flying distance.
An employee may prefer to work from Bali, but if he has to go into the office twice a month, he can't (reasonably) do that.
The only way to really give employees freedom to work from anywhere completely at their own discretion is to let them work full-time remote.
If you require any face time at the office at all, then they have to live within commuting distance, or at least within flying distance.
An employee may prefer to work from Bali, but if he has to go into the office twice a month, he can't (reasonably) do that.
I wonder if there's a strong correlation between big city/rural dwellers and the work from home joy. I live at the edge of the suburbs with a nice yard that looks out onto the woods. I have a large home with plenty of space. I love working from home. If I lived in a tiny efficiency apartment in a big city I would hate being there all day, even though I might enjoy the benefits afforded to me by living close to lots of live entertainment, etc.
If I had an open-office setting, that alone would get me to sign on to what the author is saying. With my private office, being closer to the hardware and coworkers can outweigh the benefits of working from home.
this is like the norm outside of fang
What kind of office was this person working in? Having to breathe jet exhaust fumes while suffering through 85 degree indoor temperatures and drinking algae-filled water is nowhere near normal.
The company he’s describing is severely broken if everything he’s describing is true. Most of what he describes are not normal office problems. Some of them are even health and safety violations. Working from home will only distance him from those problems, but it can’t fix an inherently broken company that doesn’t care about employees. He should be searching for another remote job ASAP
The company he’s describing is severely broken if everything he’s describing is true. Most of what he describes are not normal office problems. Some of them are even health and safety violations. Working from home will only distance him from those problems, but it can’t fix an inherently broken company that doesn’t care about employees. He should be searching for another remote job ASAP
> Having to breathe jet exhaust fumes while suffering through 85 degree indoor temperatures and drinking algae-filled water is nowhere near normal.
I was told to suck it up and do at least 50+ hours (35h paid) when working at temps over 42c (110f). Both are illegal here, they don't care, they will always find a poor sucker in a dire situation needing the job.
I was told to suck it up and do at least 50+ hours (35h paid) when working at temps over 42c (110f). Both are illegal here, they don't care, they will always find a poor sucker in a dire situation needing the job.
Could you clearify “don’t care”? Because here you simply report the company anonymously. You even have a person among the staff, who is extremely difficult to fire, that can do the reporting for you.
Companies will be fined for this kind of environment and the office will be closed if things aren’t improved. You can’t choose to not care.
Companies will be fined for this kind of environment and the office will be closed if things aren’t improved. You can’t choose to not care.
> You can’t choose to not care.
It's all a matter of priorities.
If caring means you lose your job, yeah, you're not gonna care.
And losing your job in the USA means: hunger, homelessness, no internet, less chance of being hired with unemployment record, assumption that you did something terrible, low/no medical, etc.
For many, especially those whom can't save a nest egg of appreciable value (6 months out of work kind), then it's better to STFU, apply elsewhere, and THEN make complaints.
It's all a matter of priorities.
If caring means you lose your job, yeah, you're not gonna care.
And losing your job in the USA means: hunger, homelessness, no internet, less chance of being hired with unemployment record, assumption that you did something terrible, low/no medical, etc.
For many, especially those whom can't save a nest egg of appreciable value (6 months out of work kind), then it's better to STFU, apply elsewhere, and THEN make complaints.
Sorry, I meant the company can’t choose to not care. I can certainly understand it from the employees point of view.
But even in the US I would assume that companies aren’t just allowed to break the laws regarding work environment. Isn’t there some control visits, some way of reporting a company?
But even in the US I would assume that companies aren’t just allowed to break the laws regarding work environment. Isn’t there some control visits, some way of reporting a company?
Likely only if/when someone complains to something like OSHA or the local Dept. of Labor. And that follows on whether you can handle looking for a new job.
If your name comes out, you might just loose your job, and most people in that situation aren't going to be able to pursue legal action regarding retaliation or the like unless they get lucky finding the right lawyer. Or, you could potentially cause the company to go under/get shut down (rightly so) which equally leaves you seeking a new job.
If your name comes out, you might just loose your job, and most people in that situation aren't going to be able to pursue legal action regarding retaliation or the like unless they get lucky finding the right lawyer. Or, you could potentially cause the company to go under/get shut down (rightly so) which equally leaves you seeking a new job.
Unfortunately, the US is extremely caveat emptor in many ways.
We have a legal system that greatly benefits rich people (companies are legally people).
Unions have the lowest numbers in our history.
Laws in different states like "Right to work" and similar kneecap workers rights.
And worst is the "gig work" which pays sub-minimum wage of 7.25$/hr or $2.35 for restaurant server work (and the min wage hasnt increased since 2009).
But if you're in software, it's a good life. Usually.
We have a legal system that greatly benefits rich people (companies are legally people).
Unions have the lowest numbers in our history.
Laws in different states like "Right to work" and similar kneecap workers rights.
And worst is the "gig work" which pays sub-minimum wage of 7.25$/hr or $2.35 for restaurant server work (and the min wage hasnt increased since 2009).
But if you're in software, it's a good life. Usually.
So don't work in these industries if the pay isn't good enough. Employers shouldn't be subjecting their employees to illegal working conditions, but neither does anyone owe anyone else a job.
Unless the company goes under this likely isn't going to happen. Half the things mentioned only cost a few hundred dollars to resolve. They'd have to be running on some crazy margins. And given that environment, anyone could have reported. It's anonymous.
Total, complete nonsense and lies. We have unemployment here - paid by the employer - and its substantial. I know several people who are even able to increase their savings while unemployed.
Yes you are correct that unemployment insurance is taken out of a check, and paid in part by the company.
HOWEVER in many states, and the further republican/red it is, the more onerous it is to be granted it. It'd be a whole different story if it were really employment insurance". Much of the time, it's "unemployment insurance after 6-12 weeks if the systems to register you actually work, and you arent excluded for inane reasons, and you aren't later excluded for $reasons". And hope you can survive on what you have currently in the bank for the SLOW state procedures to give you a ruling.
Turns out, the state doesn't want to pay out just as much as insurance companies don't want to pay out.
And to counter your narrative, I've seen the state point at unemployed people the local state park as a temp job. When they took it (else they lost benefits), the temp job ended and were excluded from filing for unemployment since they knowingly took a temp job.
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-states-unemployment-insu...
HOWEVER in many states, and the further republican/red it is, the more onerous it is to be granted it. It'd be a whole different story if it were really employment insurance". Much of the time, it's "unemployment insurance after 6-12 weeks if the systems to register you actually work, and you arent excluded for inane reasons, and you aren't later excluded for $reasons". And hope you can survive on what you have currently in the bank for the SLOW state procedures to give you a ruling.
Turns out, the state doesn't want to pay out just as much as insurance companies don't want to pay out.
And to counter your narrative, I've seen the state point at unemployed people the local state park as a temp job. When they took it (else they lost benefits), the temp job ended and were excluded from filing for unemployment since they knowingly took a temp job.
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-states-unemployment-insu...
In the US, employers pay unemployment insurance premiums to the state. The state then pays unemployment benefits to qualifying individuals. Individuals who resign (quit) or are terminated for cause are not eligible for unemployment benefits.
For example, an employer can slowly ratchet up requirements at work to the point where they can document an employee is not performing, terminate them, and the employee is not eligible for unemployment benefits. (This benefits the employer by keeping their unemployment insurance premiums low).
Also, unemployment benefit amounts vary greatly by state. They are a pittance in the vast majority of the states, especially if you consider most people don't have the cheapest possible lease/mortgage, and they can't just move out of where they live the week after they are terminated.
https://savingtoinvest.com/maximum-weekly-unemployment-benef...
There was a temporary supplement of unemployment benefits by the federal government due to COVID, but that is exceptional, and those are gone now.
Also, the process is the punishment. You should talk to people who had issues or who aren't proficient with the online applications how much of a pain it is to resolve issues with unemployment benefits over the past year. You have to call the minute the office opens up in the morning, and if you don't get in the hold queue immediately, you are told to call again the next day by the automated message. I know for a fact that this is still happening today, a year+ since COVID started.
Edit: I just tried Washington state's unemployment phone call line (open 8AM to 4PM). It's 9:07AM, and after 2m20s of various prompts on the phone, you are informed that "All agents are currently busy, call back at a later time". So imagine you have kids to take care of, jobs to look for, and you have to spend your time repeatedly calling the phone number, wait 2m20s each time to be told to call later. Your only chance is really to call at 7:59AM and hope you get through to the hold queue. If not, then your benefits are delayed one more day and you try the next day. As an American, it's embarrassing to me.
For example, an employer can slowly ratchet up requirements at work to the point where they can document an employee is not performing, terminate them, and the employee is not eligible for unemployment benefits. (This benefits the employer by keeping their unemployment insurance premiums low).
Also, unemployment benefit amounts vary greatly by state. They are a pittance in the vast majority of the states, especially if you consider most people don't have the cheapest possible lease/mortgage, and they can't just move out of where they live the week after they are terminated.
https://savingtoinvest.com/maximum-weekly-unemployment-benef...
There was a temporary supplement of unemployment benefits by the federal government due to COVID, but that is exceptional, and those are gone now.
Also, the process is the punishment. You should talk to people who had issues or who aren't proficient with the online applications how much of a pain it is to resolve issues with unemployment benefits over the past year. You have to call the minute the office opens up in the morning, and if you don't get in the hold queue immediately, you are told to call again the next day by the automated message. I know for a fact that this is still happening today, a year+ since COVID started.
Edit: I just tried Washington state's unemployment phone call line (open 8AM to 4PM). It's 9:07AM, and after 2m20s of various prompts on the phone, you are informed that "All agents are currently busy, call back at a later time". So imagine you have kids to take care of, jobs to look for, and you have to spend your time repeatedly calling the phone number, wait 2m20s each time to be told to call later. Your only chance is really to call at 7:59AM and hope you get through to the hold queue. If not, then your benefits are delayed one more day and you try the next day. As an American, it's embarrassing to me.
They are still active until early September
Oh, this was the most recent government website I could find quickly. Looks like its dated before the new stimulus.
https://blog.dol.gov/2021/01/11/unemployment-benefits-answer...
https://blog.dol.gov/2021/01/11/unemployment-benefits-answer...
An employer who fires a whistleblower for cause is begging for an NRLB lawsuit (constructive dismissal) for no benefit. The employeer doesn't benefit from blocking unemployment except if they try to fire a LOT of people.
Obviously Covid is an extreme special case at the division of unemployment
Obviously Covid is an extreme special case at the division of unemployment
Yes, that's why large employers will offer severance benefits or something else in exchange for laid off employees agreeing to forego unemployment benefit from the state.
And a large employer will be deterred by lawsuits, but smaller employers might have nothing to lose and/or the employees will be low wage and not in a position to deal with lawsuits and whatnot and have bigger things to worry about.
And a large employer will be deterred by lawsuits, but smaller employers might have nothing to lose and/or the employees will be low wage and not in a position to deal with lawsuits and whatnot and have bigger things to worry about.
Not sure where you're located at, but I've never heard unemployment referred to as "substantial". I've known a number of people who ended up on it, and it's generally a percentage of your normal wage, so I don't know how someone can increase their savings while unemployed unless they were blowing money left & right while employed.
Additionally, in most states you petition for unemployment and then generally have to prove you are eligible. All it takes is one spiteful manager to create a paper trail that you were let go with cause, and in most jurisdictions renders you ineligible. Then it becomes your word against theirs unless you have your own proof to fight back with.
Additionally, in most states you petition for unemployment and then generally have to prove you are eligible. All it takes is one spiteful manager to create a paper trail that you were let go with cause, and in most jurisdictions renders you ineligible. Then it becomes your word against theirs unless you have your own proof to fight back with.
Good luck with that. I was fired for having cancer while working remotely. The state EEOC said I might have a case for suing the business for wrongful termination but that it would be difficult to win. Unemployment was something like $250 a week when I had been making 4x that.
In many states if you leave your job willingly you don't qualify for unemployment.
Good luck "reporting anonymously" after rising issue multiple times in good faith in the first place.
It depends on the country/connectedness of the execs with the said authority. In a non-corrupt place, sure report away. In a slightly corrupt, what if the regulator plays golf with an exec at your company? Or went to the same grade school? Etc. Fully corrupt is the easiest to explain.
True, I just don’t get the impression that the author live in central american or sub-saharan africa. He might though, so yeah that’s a valid point.
Come on. Regulators who handle individual minor cases are low level finctioaries, not moustache twirling Rothschilds.
Golf is more of a US euphemism for connectedness/social shared sports, could be anything really - basketball, racketball, softball, whatever.
As for low level... I guess you have never lived in smaller cities/towns in Europe then. People know each other and afford those they know “courtesy” of a heads up. Word spreads, etc. From there, you are only one step away from someone retaliating against you. The kicker is that those involved might not even really understand this to be somewhat corrupt behavior.
As for low level... I guess you have never lived in smaller cities/towns in Europe then. People know each other and afford those they know “courtesy” of a heads up. Word spreads, etc. From there, you are only one step away from someone retaliating against you. The kicker is that those involved might not even really understand this to be somewhat corrupt behavior.
Where is "here"?
>was
I hope you left that shithole company and glassdoored their management hard.
I hope you left that shithole company and glassdoored their management hard.
>glassdoored
I hope you meant reported to regulators
I hope you meant reported to regulators
even in Texas this situation would be a phone call away from getting addressed.
Yeah, I understand the benefits of not having to commute, the peace and quite you get when working from home, but the complaint here is that the employer suck.
In this case, and depending on the country, working at this office is illegal. The assumption that working from home is better is a little naive. It’s a result of a terribly company, who will manage to make working from home equally terrible in the long run.
In this case, and depending on the country, working at this office is illegal. The assumption that working from home is better is a little naive. It’s a result of a terribly company, who will manage to make working from home equally terrible in the long run.
I worked at a building that was right next to the runway under the flight path for a major international airport. We could wave to people in the windows.
Our AC went out (In las vegas - it gets to 120+ some days in summer) and they brought in portable A/C units that were louder than the planes.
Then they took our bottled water away.
While these issues aren't normal they are out there and they are replicated by employers who don't value the sanity of their workers. Yes I got out of there. Yes I'm working from home now and agree with practically everything on this list. Especially the bathroom.
Our AC went out (In las vegas - it gets to 120+ some days in summer) and they brought in portable A/C units that were louder than the planes.
Then they took our bottled water away.
While these issues aren't normal they are out there and they are replicated by employers who don't value the sanity of their workers. Yes I got out of there. Yes I'm working from home now and agree with practically everything on this list. Especially the bathroom.
I'll bite. Why did they take away the water?
Not OP, but usually "bottled" water is taken away for environmental reasons, replaced by filtered faucets, which are often non maintained and cleaned properly.
Wow, ok. To be clear, I'm a water bottle kind of person but telling adults they can't drink bottled water just seems disrespectful.
Most of us thought it was cost savings. It was at a university where even the cost of bottled water somehow would be pointed to as the culprit for why we needed to be furloughed.
Regrading the jet fumes, yeah if you're within 3-5 miles of a major airport, there's definitely jet fumes drifting around.
Source: Helped someone one weekend re-roof their house that was probably 3 miles from Logan Airport in Boston. You'd get waves of fumes slowly drifting down from the big heavy jets taking off one after another after another.
Source: Helped someone one weekend re-roof their house that was probably 3 miles from Logan Airport in Boston. You'd get waves of fumes slowly drifting down from the big heavy jets taking off one after another after another.
>What kind of office was this person working in?
An office on the property of an international airport. Our maintenance hanger happens to be behind our parking lot and immediately on the other side of it is an active runway.
If you work at an airport, not in the terminals, you get used to smelling aviation fuel/jet exhaust.
As far as the indoor temperatures, it's a leased building and the HVAC is just inadequate (my guess is when the HVAC was designed, the building probably wasn't largely an open office). The front of the building the HVAC works great, but it still has walls and doors blocking it from where the bulk of the staff is.
The algae in the pex tubing coming off of the water filter is because, for some reason, there's a random tube coming off that just terminates which allows some water to not get circulated. The chalky white of the water is just pure hard water, if you put some water in a dark coffee mug and let it sit for a few hours then dump it out and let it dry the inside will have a noticeable white film. This will rapidly build up day after day and actually start to flake off from thermal shock.
>Some of them are even health and safety violations.
They aren't. You might think they are, but they aren't. If they were, any hanger or warehouse at any significantly sized airport would have long since been shut down. Yes, I'm sure there is some unacceptable level that once measured can have legal action taken but I'd bet my kidney that we aren't anywhere near those exposure levels. It's not like a turbine is backed up 3 feet from our door, with the doors wide open, spewing exhaust. That doesn't mean you can't smell it though, you can smell jet exhaust at considerable distances not unlike diesel exhaust from larger vehicles.
Many on HN are accustomed to nice offices with a bunch of perks or remote work, but for a lot of us we work in conditions like this (or far worse) and it's just life. We have it much better than our people working at our sort facilities, they're exposed to the elements with minimal HVAC for example.
When I was 18 I worked at a cemetary, I had to wear a "backpack" full of diesel for a weed eater/whacker and trim weeds for hours at a time with no shade, then dig graves and cut grass with no shade. I'd go home sunburnt and smelling like diesel frequently, even getting sun poisoning at one point. My current job is so much better than that job 18 years ago, but it's also a far cry from what I saw a Y Combinator and Open AI a couple of years ago when I was visiting someone and I imagine that's how a lot of tech offices are like give or take some perks and creature comforts.
An office on the property of an international airport. Our maintenance hanger happens to be behind our parking lot and immediately on the other side of it is an active runway.
If you work at an airport, not in the terminals, you get used to smelling aviation fuel/jet exhaust.
As far as the indoor temperatures, it's a leased building and the HVAC is just inadequate (my guess is when the HVAC was designed, the building probably wasn't largely an open office). The front of the building the HVAC works great, but it still has walls and doors blocking it from where the bulk of the staff is.
The algae in the pex tubing coming off of the water filter is because, for some reason, there's a random tube coming off that just terminates which allows some water to not get circulated. The chalky white of the water is just pure hard water, if you put some water in a dark coffee mug and let it sit for a few hours then dump it out and let it dry the inside will have a noticeable white film. This will rapidly build up day after day and actually start to flake off from thermal shock.
>Some of them are even health and safety violations.
They aren't. You might think they are, but they aren't. If they were, any hanger or warehouse at any significantly sized airport would have long since been shut down. Yes, I'm sure there is some unacceptable level that once measured can have legal action taken but I'd bet my kidney that we aren't anywhere near those exposure levels. It's not like a turbine is backed up 3 feet from our door, with the doors wide open, spewing exhaust. That doesn't mean you can't smell it though, you can smell jet exhaust at considerable distances not unlike diesel exhaust from larger vehicles.
Many on HN are accustomed to nice offices with a bunch of perks or remote work, but for a lot of us we work in conditions like this (or far worse) and it's just life. We have it much better than our people working at our sort facilities, they're exposed to the elements with minimal HVAC for example.
When I was 18 I worked at a cemetary, I had to wear a "backpack" full of diesel for a weed eater/whacker and trim weeds for hours at a time with no shade, then dig graves and cut grass with no shade. I'd go home sunburnt and smelling like diesel frequently, even getting sun poisoning at one point. My current job is so much better than that job 18 years ago, but it's also a far cry from what I saw a Y Combinator and Open AI a couple of years ago when I was visiting someone and I imagine that's how a lot of tech offices are like give or take some perks and creature comforts.
> Many on HN are accustomed to nice offices with a bunch of perks or remote work, but for a lot of us we work in conditions like this (or far worse) and it's just life.
I don’t know where you live, but I can assure you that what you’re describing is not “just life” in most developed countries. You’re not describing a normal office.
Offices like you describe continue to exist because employees put up with it. The tech job market is very hot right now. I would strongly encourage you to explore your options. What you’re describing is not normal or acceptable.
You don’t need to move to a Google type company with unlimited office budgets. Most companies are smart enough to know they need to address things like broken HVAC or not enough microwaves or unclean bathrooms by spending the relatively tiny amount of money to address the problem. It’s literally cheaper to address these issues than to lose good talent over such easily addressable frustrations.
When you move to a company that treats employees decently, you’ll find that you also get along with coworkers better because everyone is not already miserable and dreading their jobs.
I don’t know where you live, but I can assure you that what you’re describing is not “just life” in most developed countries. You’re not describing a normal office.
Offices like you describe continue to exist because employees put up with it. The tech job market is very hot right now. I would strongly encourage you to explore your options. What you’re describing is not normal or acceptable.
You don’t need to move to a Google type company with unlimited office budgets. Most companies are smart enough to know they need to address things like broken HVAC or not enough microwaves or unclean bathrooms by spending the relatively tiny amount of money to address the problem. It’s literally cheaper to address these issues than to lose good talent over such easily addressable frustrations.
When you move to a company that treats employees decently, you’ll find that you also get along with coworkers better because everyone is not already miserable and dreading their jobs.
Had to address the unclean bathroom comment. My company is a large insurance provider. Billions of dollars under management so money really isn't a big deal. You know how bad our cleaning us?
They have one guy per floor responsible for cleaning four large restrooms, vacuuming, dumping trash cans. The one who does my floor is a lazy idiot. The cleaning company tolerates this because they pay crap wages; they save their best employee for the 4th floor where the VPs and higher work. Everyone else gets a shitty bathroom. Once, a dude had explosive diarrhea in a stall. A year later, there were still shit stains on the wall...
Don't be surprised at how cheap even big successful business can be.
They have one guy per floor responsible for cleaning four large restrooms, vacuuming, dumping trash cans. The one who does my floor is a lazy idiot. The cleaning company tolerates this because they pay crap wages; they save their best employee for the 4th floor where the VPs and higher work. Everyone else gets a shitty bathroom. Once, a dude had explosive diarrhea in a stall. A year later, there were still shit stains on the wall...
Don't be surprised at how cheap even big successful business can be.
That’s funny.. when I read OP’s post, I was pretty underwhelmed by the complaints. He describes a pretty typical office environment, in my experience. The HVAC problems and disgusting facilities rang the most true to me. I remember a spider infestation in a break room that did not get addresses until an employee threatened to complain. (The place ended up spider-free but smelling of insecticide, and the complainer was fired for “poor performance”.) I agree that a lot of HN readers seem to have only been exposed to idyllic FAANG workspaces, and have no idea the conditions most office workers have to put up with.
I've worked in offices like that, its way more common than you think.
It is 'just life' the world that we get in tech is significantly different than what most people experience in a workplace.
It is 'just life' the world that we get in tech is significantly different than what most people experience in a workplace.
You're assuming he works in tech.
The jet fume exposure isn’t legal. Many people in your office will end up dying of cancer because of it. Call OSHA. Consider quitting anyway.
My spouse, a flight attendant, comes home with a nice aroma smelling of perfume and jet exhaust. It might not be OSHA legal but it is what it is. Airports stink.
> Call OSHA
Yeah, OSHA recommends 76F as the maximum indoor temperature [0]. And there's indoor air quality guidelines too. It's not difficult to file a complaint [1], and I'm pretty sure any reasonable complaint is checked out. Even if the employer isn't fined, having an OSHA investigator come by will probably lead to some changes.
It also seems possible that an office with obvious jet exhaust fumes will be out of compliance with the fire marshal, who's more than capable of putting a chain and padlock on the building entrance until the problem is fixed.
[0] https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_tab...
[1] https://www.osha.gov/workers/file-complaint
Yeah, OSHA recommends 76F as the maximum indoor temperature [0]. And there's indoor air quality guidelines too. It's not difficult to file a complaint [1], and I'm pretty sure any reasonable complaint is checked out. Even if the employer isn't fined, having an OSHA investigator come by will probably lead to some changes.
It also seems possible that an office with obvious jet exhaust fumes will be out of compliance with the fire marshal, who's more than capable of putting a chain and padlock on the building entrance until the problem is fixed.
[0] https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_tab...
[1] https://www.osha.gov/workers/file-complaint
I've been to offices in the middle of nowhere deep south that are far better than what you are describing. No, they don't have the free food, comfortable chairs, etc that nice companies in The Bay have, but they do have AC, heating, and drinkable water. What you're describing isn't because you're not in silicon valley, or even California. What you're describing isn't right anywhere. It isn't just life and you shouldn't stand for that kind of abuse.
I've been at a job where projects have put us in vehicle bays with no insulation on the door, in Winter. Temperatures got down to 40 degrees Fahrenheit. Luckily, there was no dress code, so I would wear my mountain Winter gear, but even so, it was really hard to get any coding done as my fingers were too cold.
There are a lot of bad companies out there, and it's all well and good to say "find another job", but not everyone has that luxury.
There are a lot of bad companies out there, and it's all well and good to say "find another job", but not everyone has that luxury.
>Having to breathe jet exhaust fumes
That point was clearly about his home
"Working from home I:
...
• Breathe jet exhaust..."
Kidding aside, there's just not enough jobs in "not broken" offices for all the workers. I haven't seen an office which isn't broken in some way, even though I haven't seen many. And suggestion of looking for another job is just patronizing. If a person could done it easily, he would have done it long ago.
That point was clearly about his home
"Working from home I:
...
• Breathe jet exhaust..."
Kidding aside, there's just not enough jobs in "not broken" offices for all the workers. I haven't seen an office which isn't broken in some way, even though I haven't seen many. And suggestion of looking for another job is just patronizing. If a person could done it easily, he would have done it long ago.
My office building (the company owns it) is four stories. We have a backup diesel generator that is run every week during business hours for 1 hour. And every week the fumes waft upwards towards the air handlers on the roof. My first week I was shocked by how bad it smelled; kind of like a mown lawn that had rotted. After a few years, I stopped noticing it.
Sounds like when I was doing contract work for the air force
I believe they're describing a call center, and I agree vehemently: the title is broad and doesn't reflect the subject, someone on HN needs to hire this guy, not debate/agree with whether he needs to go back to the office
No, the solution to this isn’t “this guy seems cool so let’s hire him at our FAANG team.” (I mean, do what you want!) The solution to this is that OSHA or the appropriate counterpart needs to get involved.
Ah, good point, I was speaking allegorically and that wasn't clear, sounds like it implied I thought he's cool and thus needs to be come a software engineer. Thank you for clarifying.
Please do not try to launder him into FAANG! Passing someone to HR for interviews _certainly_ wouldn't be a way to help a call center worker :)
Please do not try to launder him into FAANG! Passing someone to HR for interviews _certainly_ wouldn't be a way to help a call center worker :)
My point is not that OP doesn’t deserve to work somewhere better, but that his coworkers deserve that as well.
Heartily agree! You're right, my comment wasn't clear, I only addressed the article author rather than noting the workplace is unacceptable for _everyone_ at the workplace :)
>I believe they're describing a call center
Nope, definitely not a call center. In fact only team leads and higher have phones.
> someone on HN needs to hire this guy,
I wish. GED + 15 years doing a job that doesn't translate to much of anything else doesn't help one's jobs prospects sadly.
Nope, definitely not a call center. In fact only team leads and higher have phones.
> someone on HN needs to hire this guy,
I wish. GED + 15 years doing a job that doesn't translate to much of anything else doesn't help one's jobs prospects sadly.
Hate to inquire directly to your situation while you've been careful to avoid specifics about role, but: are you a programmer/coder/software engineer/whatever they call hackers these days? :)
Sadly no, my LinkedIn is in the footer of the .com for anyone really curious though.
OT: holy smokes, you'd have to be in pretty bad shape not to be able to ride a bicycle from your house to my old house close to Cascade High School. Both are a long way from our current home of Seattle.
Anyway, I worked industrial/mechanical jobs in that area back in the day and about my coworkers often wondered, "do you live like this at home?" Now I write software in a different part of the country and rarely (but no never) brush up against such problems. Hopefully, you can continue with your WFH and not be bothered with it, either.
Anyway, I worked industrial/mechanical jobs in that area back in the day and about my coworkers often wondered, "do you live like this at home?" Now I write software in a different part of the country and rarely (but no never) brush up against such problems. Hopefully, you can continue with your WFH and not be bothered with it, either.
My wife is a teacher at Cascade MS!
Excellent, because if you doubt my story of living in the area, your wife can walk next door and see if the name of the track 3200m record holder matches my user name. It will also tell you how long ago it was that I lived there. :-) (Loooong time ago.)
Anyway, best of luck with your current work situation and may it only improve.
Anyway, best of luck with your current work situation and may it only improve.
I kid you not, she's one of the middle school track coaches haha.
Things I miss:
- interacting with my colleagues, going out to lunch
- the very high-speed and reliability of being on the network wire
- dedicated work-space outside of my home where home-chores don't press on my mind while I'm trying to work
- my commute: I cycled into work, and the daily exercise was great
- a clearer separation of work and home life
Things I don't miss:
- interacting with my colleagues, when i don't want to (group office, oy)
- having my boss pop in over my shoulder (my bosses are great though)
- my commute: I cycled into work, and the daily ride was sometimes a grind, in cold or wet weather. And it takes a lot of time
- not having my work at home when I need to work late (I have a work laptop, but still)
- having the campus police officer give me the eye when they see me working at 2am
I'm considering coming in Thursday/Fridays.
- interacting with my colleagues, going out to lunch
- the very high-speed and reliability of being on the network wire
- dedicated work-space outside of my home where home-chores don't press on my mind while I'm trying to work
- my commute: I cycled into work, and the daily exercise was great
- a clearer separation of work and home life
Things I don't miss:
- interacting with my colleagues, when i don't want to (group office, oy)
- having my boss pop in over my shoulder (my bosses are great though)
- my commute: I cycled into work, and the daily ride was sometimes a grind, in cold or wet weather. And it takes a lot of time
- not having my work at home when I need to work late (I have a work laptop, but still)
- having the campus police officer give me the eye when they see me working at 2am
I'm considering coming in Thursday/Fridays.
The absolute best thing about WFH: naps whenever I need it. No more slogging through the post-lunch mid-afternoon slump. I take a 15 minute nap and am good to go for the rest of the afternoon. Also, early meetings at 6~7AM scheduled to work with European coworkers can be followed by a short nap afterwards as well. This has done wonders for my energy throughout the day.
Power naps are glorious. In China taking a nap after lunch, right at your desk, is common and accepted practice.
So are the 996 work weeks.
one good thing, one bad thing - ruled out ?
I mean, "working 12 hour days, six days a week" - "naps after lunch" = "in the office 12 hours a day, six days a week, but only working 11 hours a day."
Not a trade that I'd make.
Not a trade that I'd make.
You can have this in an office setting too, just a matter of not having a stigma around it, and perhaps some dedicated spaces.
In my office, nobody really bats an eye if someone decides that they're too sleepy to be productive and just takes a short nap.
In my office, nobody really bats an eye if someone decides that they're too sleepy to be productive and just takes a short nap.
The dedicated space is the problem. Where can you go that is quiet, and that if you snore, you don't bother those around you? I used to skip out to my car for a nap in order to fulfill those two requirements.
I should try it.
As a WFH advocate, I totally support you having the option to work from the office. A lot of people really like the office and have been having a really bad time this past year and you should totally go back.
We just want the choice, too!
Almost no WFH advocates are asking to force everyone to WFH. They just want the option to do what works best for themselves. The people pushing to return to the office, however, tend to want to force everyone back to the office. That’s what we’re complaining about.
We just want the choice, too!
Almost no WFH advocates are asking to force everyone to WFH. They just want the option to do what works best for themselves. The people pushing to return to the office, however, tend to want to force everyone back to the office. That’s what we’re complaining about.
"Almost no WFH advocates are asking to force everyone to WFH."
*raises hand* the hybrid model of WFH is likely to revert to everyone back in the office as people realise that those that go into the office have an advantage over remote employees via side of desk conversations, building rapport with management and the general perception that those in the office are "working harder".
*raises hand* the hybrid model of WFH is likely to revert to everyone back in the office as people realise that those that go into the office have an advantage over remote employees via side of desk conversations, building rapport with management and the general perception that those in the office are "working harder".
I think the option of being in-office does not have to be incompatible with having remote workers not be disadvantaged, but I think it might be the result of 'doing nothing', if that makes sense. The default option, if you will. Explicitly stating that remote workers are first-class citizens along with the infrastructure to make that come true I think is doable.
I can see companies doing an office share. Basically, like co-working space/conference space.
Get everyone in the office for 1 or 2 days/week. When your company isn't there, another company is using the space.
Get everyone in the office for 1 or 2 days/week. When your company isn't there, another company is using the space.
I like WFH. But I also feel like it would be nice to go in occasionally. Some things are just easier that way. But my commute is 40 minute bike ride, or 15 min car ride. Not like the hour commute I used to have in Los Angeles.
> - my commute: I cycled into work, and the daily exercise was great
This one is not like the others, it's completely up to you to have a bike ride e.g. at lunch time around the block when you WFH.
This one is not like the others, it's completely up to you to have a bike ride e.g. at lunch time around the block when you WFH.
Oh, you're right. But when you have to cycle to get to work whether you want to or not, its easier to get that exercise in.
I'm not a leisure cyclist. I don't dress up in spandex and ride an expensive bike. In fact, I have difficulty containing my derision for leisure cyclists. I know that the equipment they use has utility, but it also signals: I don't have to ride a bike. I have an expensive SUV at home, and I didn't lose my drivers license to a DUI.
I'm not a leisure cyclist. I don't dress up in spandex and ride an expensive bike. In fact, I have difficulty containing my derision for leisure cyclists. I know that the equipment they use has utility, but it also signals: I don't have to ride a bike. I have an expensive SUV at home, and I didn't lose my drivers license to a DUI.
If anything, I would think “i didn’t lose my license to a DUI but I like to get some cardio” is a good thing, and any derision should be aimed at people who actually did endanger themselves and others by driving under the influence. I am very confused by your attitude.
The information it signals is fine. I like people without DUIs who are getting cardio too. What I don't like is the signalling. I come from a poor neighborhood. The signalling is tightly wrapped up in class attitudes. Frankly, its also something that poor people can't afford to participate in. And I believe it also gets in the way of greater acceptance of bicycling as commuting.
I remember several years ago, my work place had a "bike to work day". The gear and getups on display looked like a parade of peacocks, and certainly had very little to do in spirit with biking to work.
Perhaps it also irks me that these leisure cyclists will say crap about my cheap bike ... as I pass them on the road.
I remember several years ago, my work place had a "bike to work day". The gear and getups on display looked like a parade of peacocks, and certainly had very little to do in spirit with biking to work.
Perhaps it also irks me that these leisure cyclists will say crap about my cheap bike ... as I pass them on the road.
I created an account solely to reply here.
What? How did you get around to such an explicit and unfounded gate-keeping of cycling? Cycling is only 'good' if it has the purpose of commute? Cycling is only 'good' if you have a cheap bicycle? Sorry to be this direct, but this is utter nonsense!
I do not have an expensive SUV at home, I don't even own a driver's license, and I don't own a super expensive bike either, but I still go out in lycra to use my road bike as a training utility (almost) every day.
Why is it that we as cyclists have to gate-keep each other at every step and corner? Both hating on cyclists in general and and gate-keeping in cycling itself is stupid and should not exist, let's just embrace cycling whether we are on a super expensive road bike or a cheap mountain bike we bought second-hand.
What? How did you get around to such an explicit and unfounded gate-keeping of cycling? Cycling is only 'good' if it has the purpose of commute? Cycling is only 'good' if you have a cheap bicycle? Sorry to be this direct, but this is utter nonsense!
I do not have an expensive SUV at home, I don't even own a driver's license, and I don't own a super expensive bike either, but I still go out in lycra to use my road bike as a training utility (almost) every day.
Why is it that we as cyclists have to gate-keep each other at every step and corner? Both hating on cyclists in general and and gate-keeping in cycling itself is stupid and should not exist, let's just embrace cycling whether we are on a super expensive road bike or a cheap mountain bike we bought second-hand.
Welcome to HN.
In a post complaining about gate-keeping in cycling--that leisure cycling reinforces the idea that there is only kind of cycling that is totally above board, not sketchy--I get criticized for gate keeping. Maybe instead, gear head cyclists should introspect more on their hobby and how it reinforces class barriers.
In a post complaining about gate-keeping in cycling--that leisure cycling reinforces the idea that there is only kind of cycling that is totally above board, not sketchy--I get criticized for gate keeping. Maybe instead, gear head cyclists should introspect more on their hobby and how it reinforces class barriers.
Is it possible that maybe, just maybe, people dress in spandex to ride because that's what they've found works best for them, and not because they want to make you feel insecure about your your bike or your clothing or that you should get off the road? What you're saying is analogous to saying that because there are people who can't afford nice clothes you should dress as cheaply as possible, otherwise someone might feel that you're gatekeeping being dressed out in public.
As a fairly experienced road cyclist, I honestly don't care in the least what people ride or how they dress, I only care that they don't act stupid things around me. At the most I might compliment someone on their speed and that's about it.
As a fairly experienced road cyclist, I honestly don't care in the least what people ride or how they dress, I only care that they don't act stupid things around me. At the most I might compliment someone on their speed and that's about it.
I did say that the lycra has practical utility.
I cannot speak for you, but there are consequences to making cycling a specialized activity that is only respectably done for leisure and with the proper equipment and clothing. There is a symbol economy here that I feel you are just not willing to contemplate.
I cannot speak for you, but there are consequences to making cycling a specialized activity that is only respectably done for leisure and with the proper equipment and clothing. There is a symbol economy here that I feel you are just not willing to contemplate.
>I did say that the lycra has practical utility.
>There is a symbol economy here that I feel you are just not willing to contemplate.
Okay, so let's see. I go out for a ride in shorts and I get a saddle sore. I look online and see that wearing cycling shorts prevents chafing, so I buy a pair and I don't get sores anymore. Exactly what am I signalling? That I have enough money to buy cycling shorts? I'm not really signalling that, it's just that I have no way to wear the shorts without making it plainly obvious that I'm wearing them.
But fine, I don't want to "signal" that, so what are my options? I have to stop going on long rides that would give me sores because someone might feel bad that they can't afford my cycling shorts? Should I also get the cheapest possible bike I can find? Should I just walk everywhere barefoot in whatever rags I can find in a dumpster?
Seriously asking, what do you want? It seems you're not asking for a world without poverty, but rather a world where everyone lives like they're poor, even if they don't have to. Hopefully I completely misunderstood what you meant.
>making cycling a specialized activity that is only respectably done for leisure and with the proper equipment and clothing
"Respectably". Look, man, honestly: people do not give a toss about your bike or what you wear. When I'm out in traffic I have enough on my mind trying not to get killed to look if there's anyone plodding along on an old beater bike in shorts and a t-shirt to make fun of. Just do your thing and let other people do their thing. You're like those guys who get insecure at the gym because they see the buff guys bench press 70 kg instead of focusing on their own routine.
>There is a symbol economy here that I feel you are just not willing to contemplate.
Okay, so let's see. I go out for a ride in shorts and I get a saddle sore. I look online and see that wearing cycling shorts prevents chafing, so I buy a pair and I don't get sores anymore. Exactly what am I signalling? That I have enough money to buy cycling shorts? I'm not really signalling that, it's just that I have no way to wear the shorts without making it plainly obvious that I'm wearing them.
But fine, I don't want to "signal" that, so what are my options? I have to stop going on long rides that would give me sores because someone might feel bad that they can't afford my cycling shorts? Should I also get the cheapest possible bike I can find? Should I just walk everywhere barefoot in whatever rags I can find in a dumpster?
Seriously asking, what do you want? It seems you're not asking for a world without poverty, but rather a world where everyone lives like they're poor, even if they don't have to. Hopefully I completely misunderstood what you meant.
>making cycling a specialized activity that is only respectably done for leisure and with the proper equipment and clothing
"Respectably". Look, man, honestly: people do not give a toss about your bike or what you wear. When I'm out in traffic I have enough on my mind trying not to get killed to look if there's anyone plodding along on an old beater bike in shorts and a t-shirt to make fun of. Just do your thing and let other people do their thing. You're like those guys who get insecure at the gym because they see the buff guys bench press 70 kg instead of focusing on their own routine.
You can have perfect equality by lowering everyone to the lowest denominator. yay
I am having a hard time following what you are trying to communicate. Apparently some one performing an activity cause it is leisure / you come from a poor neighborhood / they can afford nice(r) things, invites your derision. Did I understand you correctly? I am not sure how those factors are related but apparently they are to you.
Must be hard to find someone / something which escapes your contempt.
Must be hard to find someone / something which escapes your contempt.
I expected defensiveness when I said what I did. Its also what I got. After all, no one likes to hear that the groups they belong to are the object of ridicule, contempt or derision, or that some one might think that their hobby is a problem; it might come as a short of shock that other people might think that way about them. Get over it.
It is not simply a matter of some people getting to do what they enjoy. It is the system of symbols tied to a specific activity. Everyone likes to ride bikes, poor, middle class, and rich. How do the middle class and rich make sure that no-one mistakes them for the kind of person who cannot afford a car? By the price of the bike, and all the specialized equipment they use along with it. Of course that equipment has practical utility--no one says that it doesn't--but that equipment is playing another, probably more important role as a signal of status (if you don't believe me, go biking with your cyclist buddies wearing jeans and riding $400 bike.)
So why is it a problem? Because it creates an environment that is not positive, possibly even dangerous, for other cyclists who cannot afford to, or are not willing to, participate in that cycling economy. It isn't really that complicated. Let me put it another way. Who do the police stop when riding through the neighborhood. The cyclist on his or her expensive bike, wearing their expensive equipment, that practically scream: I'm participating in a lifestyle activity? Or the cyclist on a cheap bike, wearing jeans and a t-shirt? Maybe with the wrong skin color. The answer quite obviously is the second.
It is not simply a matter of some people getting to do what they enjoy. It is the system of symbols tied to a specific activity. Everyone likes to ride bikes, poor, middle class, and rich. How do the middle class and rich make sure that no-one mistakes them for the kind of person who cannot afford a car? By the price of the bike, and all the specialized equipment they use along with it. Of course that equipment has practical utility--no one says that it doesn't--but that equipment is playing another, probably more important role as a signal of status (if you don't believe me, go biking with your cyclist buddies wearing jeans and riding $400 bike.)
So why is it a problem? Because it creates an environment that is not positive, possibly even dangerous, for other cyclists who cannot afford to, or are not willing to, participate in that cycling economy. It isn't really that complicated. Let me put it another way. Who do the police stop when riding through the neighborhood. The cyclist on his or her expensive bike, wearing their expensive equipment, that practically scream: I'm participating in a lifestyle activity? Or the cyclist on a cheap bike, wearing jeans and a t-shirt? Maybe with the wrong skin color. The answer quite obviously is the second.
Do you feel the same way about people that wear cleats for soccer? Or should they just tough it out in dress shoes? Like i get you read it as some sort class signaling, but i think that says more about you than the person wearing it.
Seriously cycling kit can be super cheap and makes a huge difference in comfort.
Seriously cycling kit can be super cheap and makes a huge difference in comfort.
Your attitude is really rather appalling and it seems you're even suggesting that you did lose your driver's license to a DUI.
I've never had a DUI. But I come from a neighborhood with many problems. I see many things.
Maybe leisure cyclists should spend more time critiquing their own culture a bit more. Have a little more introspection into how their hobby affects other people, reinforces class barriers.
Maybe leisure cyclists should spend more time critiquing their own culture a bit more. Have a little more introspection into how their hobby affects other people, reinforces class barriers.
What, they can't have their own identity? They shouldn't feel free to express themselves as they want?
Yes, exactly; it's completely up to you. Having exercise as part of your commute means that you don't get to put it off because you're busy with work, or you've got chores to run, or you don't feel like it, and then a few days go by and you've lost the habit.
Exactly! You can go both ways with this: at my house, I have exercise equipment, up to and including a barbell and plates. If I feel like grinding out some sets real quick, I can. There is absolutely no comparison to working in an office.
I have gym weights near my desk, and do curls etc. a few times a day; wouldn't do that in the office (maybe I would if I had a private office)
Chin up bar, dumb bells, etc, etc. Just too much to have at an office.
And the mention of the kitchen in the post is spot on too - it's just way too convenient to have my full kitchen at home for a quick smoothie. Some projects at my job don't even have a refrigerator for Pete's sake!
And the mention of the kitchen in the post is spot on too - it's just way too convenient to have my full kitchen at home for a quick smoothie. Some projects at my job don't even have a refrigerator for Pete's sake!
Pandemic is the only thing preventing organized lunch with coworkers. Nothing about wfh prevents it - just agree on a place and time.
Internet is a problem, but a solvable one - assuming you are in the US, we need competition for ISPs. I had ATT fiber for a while and it was for all practical purposes as good as office (symmetric gigabit).
Cycling has been covered :)
Separation - door closed to the space I work in works great for me. When I didn’t have that, putting everything away and leaving the work space for a few hours did the trick - it’s all in mental discipline.
Internet is a problem, but a solvable one - assuming you are in the US, we need competition for ISPs. I had ATT fiber for a while and it was for all practical purposes as good as office (symmetric gigabit).
Cycling has been covered :)
Separation - door closed to the space I work in works great for me. When I didn’t have that, putting everything away and leaving the work space for a few hours did the trick - it’s all in mental discipline.
> just agree on a place and time
It would require a commute longer than that of going to the office. An average employee has already organized their life around the necessity of commuting to the office. Office is probably a central location.
Most workers will be found within a circle of the tolerable commute time (isotropy assumption). Let for simplicity assume that all workers live at the same distance R from the office, and are distributed uniformly along that circle. The angular distance between any two employees is distributed uniformly in [0, pi]. Chord length is R 2 sin (theta/2). Integrating, we calculate the average distance between two employees: 4R/pi > R.
It would require a commute longer than that of going to the office. An average employee has already organized their life around the necessity of commuting to the office. Office is probably a central location.
Most workers will be found within a circle of the tolerable commute time (isotropy assumption). Let for simplicity assume that all workers live at the same distance R from the office, and are distributed uniformly along that circle. The angular distance between any two employees is distributed uniformly in [0, pi]. Chord length is R 2 sin (theta/2). Integrating, we calculate the average distance between two employees: 4R/pi > R.
So meet by the original office location? Why is it always being positioned as a choice - it’s completely a false dichotomy.
Before the pandemic it was hard enough to get people to stick around for a few hours after work to grab a beer. I can't imagine having people drop what they are doing for over an hour just to have a half hour lunch in a central spot. Adult coworkers do not drop everything in front of them for a short good time like college friends would have.
Sounds like those coworkers weren’t really looking to socialize and had other priorities.
But again, it’s being setup as a false choice - if it’s important to your orgs culture all you need to do is setup pre-arranged times for it, much like you pre-arrange a working schedule and have expectations on when people are in the office. It’s just not every day.
But again, it’s being setup as a false choice - if it’s important to your orgs culture all you need to do is setup pre-arranged times for it, much like you pre-arrange a working schedule and have expectations on when people are in the office. It’s just not every day.
But in practice it is will happen less frequently, and will be a longer commute for most. Not least because many people live in the suburbs, but work in places where places to eat are nearby.
On the plus, many more lunches with spouse and children.
On the plus, many more lunches with spouse and children.
For everyone that complains about interacting with colleagues. I feel that this can be addressed by having managers do periodic offsite meet-ups.
However there are those people that comes to the office to talk all day, and honestly, for everyone else's productivity, it's better they work from home.
However there are those people that comes to the office to talk all day, and honestly, for everyone else's productivity, it's better they work from home.
My boss on a project roped me into hobby chat as I was taking a five minute break to stretch my legs. He turned it into 40 (!) minutes of non-work chit chat.
I don't want to be unfriendly, but I'm at work to get shit done because I'm getting paid. If someone wants to talk hobbies, we can do that another time.
I don't want to be unfriendly, but I'm at work to get shit done because I'm getting paid. If someone wants to talk hobbies, we can do that another time.
>My boss on a project roped me into hobby chat as I was taking a five minute break to stretch my legs. He turned it into 40 (!) minutes of non-work chit chat.
I've had this happen in the past with managers doing reviews. While in these cases I've usually enjoyed the conversation and been at least as guilty as them as derailing the focus, it's still time where I could be doing work instead of discussing common interests/experiences with them. It's not like we're ever going to hang out outside of work so us discussing local shows we both were at two decades ago, or our morel hunting success this year, or what variety of potatoes we're planting, is just taking us both away from work (sure, sometime that is needed just to get in a different headspace, but the shareholders probably don't care about that).
I've had this happen in the past with managers doing reviews. While in these cases I've usually enjoyed the conversation and been at least as guilty as them as derailing the focus, it's still time where I could be doing work instead of discussing common interests/experiences with them. It's not like we're ever going to hang out outside of work so us discussing local shows we both were at two decades ago, or our morel hunting success this year, or what variety of potatoes we're planting, is just taking us both away from work (sure, sometime that is needed just to get in a different headspace, but the shareholders probably don't care about that).
Regarding communication, I find I actually communicate with people more when remote than not. Walking over to someone's desk is pretty distracting, while firing a quick message and waiting for when they're free has nearly zero cost. Plus with video chat we can share both our screens at the same time so we can see what the other person sees, which is very valuable for diagnosing problems that only happen to one person. I can't videochat at the office because the noise will absolutely disturb my other colleagues, but it's trivial at home. It's almost like having infinite quiet isolated meeting rooms that you don't have to reserve in advance.
- my commute: I cycled into work, and the daily exercise was great
- my commute: I cycled into work, and the daily ride was sometimes a grind, in cold or wet weather. And it takes a lot of time
I too used to bike in to work, but since the pandemic, I've replaced that commute ride with riding on my own (which is nicer than the commute was since I can stick to off road paths and not ride the busy roads near work). But now that I'm full time remote, I have another option -- I have a spinning bike, so when the weather is bad, I can ride indoors.
I too used to bike in to work, but since the pandemic, I've replaced that commute ride with riding on my own (which is nicer than the commute was since I can stick to off road paths and not ride the busy roads near work). But now that I'm full time remote, I have another option -- I have a spinning bike, so when the weather is bad, I can ride indoors.
I've taken up jogging. Their are some trails nearby, and a highschool running track.
I used to run quite a bit but my knees can't take it anymore, biking (so far) is fine. Based on family history, there's probably knee surgery in my future, but for now I'm fine with biking.
I also have knee problems. Hope all the best for you.
nprateem(1)
A pattern I notice (not necessarily directly related to this article) is that the people who loudly exclaim “I don’t want to go back to the office ever again!” are usually older folks who:
> have a house
> have a family
As a 20-something who lives alone in an apartment, I don’t get the luxury of having a nice backyard to go work in (like someone mentioned doing in another comment thread here). I don’t get the luxury of having a bunch of space to set up an office. And for that reason alone I’m excited to go back to an office setting. It’s nice that older people who have their lives figured out are enjoying WFH, but let’s not discount how WFH disproportionately is worse for early in career people.
As a 20-something who lives alone in an apartment, I don’t get the luxury of having a nice backyard to go work in (like someone mentioned doing in another comment thread here). I don’t get the luxury of having a bunch of space to set up an office. And for that reason alone I’m excited to go back to an office setting. It’s nice that older people who have their lives figured out are enjoying WFH, but let’s not discount how WFH disproportionately is worse for early in career people.
Parents with small children at home often prefer the office because it provides some context switching.
It’s really difficult to explain to a toddler why a parent is home but cannot play with them for half of the day.
That said, you’re not alone in preferring to work in an office. It’s actually very common outside of Internet forums for people to prefer working in an office. It’s just not a popular opinion online right now. To each their own, but let’s not pretend like one working style is inherently better than the other for everyone.
It’s really difficult to explain to a toddler why a parent is home but cannot play with them for half of the day.
That said, you’re not alone in preferring to work in an office. It’s actually very common outside of Internet forums for people to prefer working in an office. It’s just not a popular opinion online right now. To each their own, but let’s not pretend like one working style is inherently better than the other for everyone.
> It’s really difficult to explain to a toddler why a parent is home but cannot play with them for half of the day.
I've worked from home through 3 toddlers, and very rarely had a problem. But I've worked from home for their whole lives.
This is probably something harder to transition into. Kids only really know what you introduce to them. If you've worked from home their whole lives they don't know anything different. If they're used to mommy working from home and them not being able to play with her, then they pretty much accept it.
We never tried to explain, we just said: mommy is at work, you cannot play with her, you can see her at lunch/after work.
I've worked from home through 3 toddlers, and very rarely had a problem. But I've worked from home for their whole lives.
This is probably something harder to transition into. Kids only really know what you introduce to them. If you've worked from home their whole lives they don't know anything different. If they're used to mommy working from home and them not being able to play with her, then they pretty much accept it.
We never tried to explain, we just said: mommy is at work, you cannot play with her, you can see her at lunch/after work.
Wow, I am amazed that worked for you. Maybe cause the kids can entertain each other.
We have a 3 year old and restricting him / telling him that he cannot do something makes makes that his entire focal point. Hell, he might even be playing by himself or with me but if the Mom disappears even for a cat nap, he has to go interrupt/play with her.
Has caused a huge amount of stress between my wife and I this past year. Thankfully the day care has opened and they are very careful & rigorous.
We have a 3 year old and restricting him / telling him that he cannot do something makes makes that his entire focal point. Hell, he might even be playing by himself or with me but if the Mom disappears even for a cat nap, he has to go interrupt/play with her.
Has caused a huge amount of stress between my wife and I this past year. Thankfully the day care has opened and they are very careful & rigorous.
Related,
- I think 20-somethings gain more from in-person interactions given they have less experience so are regularly bumping into people with more experience. For the more experienced these interactions feel more like a tax/interruption, but for the person just starting out, they're often missed learning opportunities that add up over time.
- In-office amenities like free dinner are more valued by early-career folks who are less likely to have a family they need to go home to. Even the free drinks/snacks.
- I think 20-somethings gain more from in-person interactions given they have less experience so are regularly bumping into people with more experience. For the more experienced these interactions feel more like a tax/interruption, but for the person just starting out, they're often missed learning opportunities that add up over time.
- In-office amenities like free dinner are more valued by early-career folks who are less likely to have a family they need to go home to. Even the free drinks/snacks.
I'm a 30-something and married, so my situation isn't completely analogous to yours. But we have no kids and live in a pretty tiny 1br apartment with no backyard or other private outdoor space or even a balcony. Before covid we didn't really care, but covid makes us yearn for bigger, detached housing.
My home "office" is a corner of our tiny bedroom (that said, my home office setup is still vastly superior to my work office setup).
That said, I still vastly prefer WFH. I don't have to waste time on a miserable commute, and my office environment is just plain old dreary, depressing - probably the case for most offices for "old school" companies (vs. hot and hip Silicon Valley style tech companies). I've mentioned this in other posts, but I can imagine being happier at the office if the environment wasn't so depressing and dystopian.
My home "office" is a corner of our tiny bedroom (that said, my home office setup is still vastly superior to my work office setup).
That said, I still vastly prefer WFH. I don't have to waste time on a miserable commute, and my office environment is just plain old dreary, depressing - probably the case for most offices for "old school" companies (vs. hot and hip Silicon Valley style tech companies). I've mentioned this in other posts, but I can imagine being happier at the office if the environment wasn't so depressing and dystopian.
Before covid we didn't really care, but covid makes us yearn for bigger, detached housing
Wouldn't full time WFH make that easier to do? Presumably you live in a small one bedroom apartment because it's within commute distance of work. If your employer stuck with WFH, then you could move to a house in a small town, probably for less money than you're paying for the apartment.
Wouldn't full time WFH make that easier to do? Presumably you live in a small one bedroom apartment because it's within commute distance of work. If your employer stuck with WFH, then you could move to a house in a small town, probably for less money than you're paying for the apartment.
I have been noticing a line like this in job ads lately:
"this is a remote position but candidates must be able to commute to the office"
"this is a remote position but candidates must be able to commute to the office"
As long as they are up front about the commute requirements (once a week, once a month, once a quarter, whatever), that's fine. Employees can decide how far away they are willing to live.
I might be willing to do a 90 minute commute once a month, but not once a week. If once a quarter, then I'd even be willing to fly in at my own expense.
I might be willing to do a 90 minute commute once a month, but not once a week. If once a quarter, then I'd even be willing to fly in at my own expense.
[deleted]
Doesn't relate with me. While not 20 anymore, I live in a solo apartment and Covid has killed all my social life. Still never want to work in an office ever again. And I'm not going to. Despite the commute, everything about offices feels and is restricting. At home, I can work however I want. Way more productive. Way more hours of the day to myself. Never understood people who have their social life at work. You work there all day, interactions are limited, polite, professionell, uninteresting. The fun starts afterwards with people of your choice.
I am a 20-something who lives alone in a small studio apartment. I work at a tiny desk and barely have room for all my work equipment. still, I love working from home and I hope never to go back to the office. as soon as I get the message that this situation can go on indefinitely, I will buy a bigger desk and possibly shop for a larger apartment when my lease is up.
your experience is valid, but don't assume you speak for everyone in our cohort. I hope once quarantine is over, you and I will both have the freedom to find the work environment that suits each of us best.
your experience is valid, but don't assume you speak for everyone in our cohort. I hope once quarantine is over, you and I will both have the freedom to find the work environment that suits each of us best.
> WFH disproportionately is worse for early in career people
Based off working with a bunch of younger co-workers (the average age of my co-workers is in the early/mid 20's) I'd say it's worse for people whose primary source of social interaction is work. They didn't have social contacts they could lean on outside of work.
Without the office, they were alone.
Those with spouses, or friends outside of the office, all did pretty well, and aren't clamoring to go back to the office.
Personally, I have a spouse and a number of friends who I continued to interact with outside of the office. This saw me through the coronavirus better than any house or a yard could have.
Based off working with a bunch of younger co-workers (the average age of my co-workers is in the early/mid 20's) I'd say it's worse for people whose primary source of social interaction is work. They didn't have social contacts they could lean on outside of work.
Without the office, they were alone.
Those with spouses, or friends outside of the office, all did pretty well, and aren't clamoring to go back to the office.
Personally, I have a spouse and a number of friends who I continued to interact with outside of the office. This saw me through the coronavirus better than any house or a yard could have.
Just to offer a counter example, I'm in my mid 30s and engaged. I'm an introvert, but my fiancee is an extrovert, so I have a big social circle and even during the pandemic, I've had more social commitments than I can handle.
Our office opened last week and I've been back in every day (and am sitting here now).
For me, going back into the office has nothing to do with my social life. Even prior to the pandemic, for the last 4 years, I've had the option to WFH as much as I wanted and I was still in office 3-4 days a week. I feel less productive at home and I miss having the division between work and home. My commute is my wind down time that allows me to turn my brain off work mode at the end of the day.
I think after COVID is gone, the name of the game will be flexibility. Treat people like adults and, as long as they're getting their work done and not negatively affecting the team, we should let them work where and when they want.
Our office opened last week and I've been back in every day (and am sitting here now).
For me, going back into the office has nothing to do with my social life. Even prior to the pandemic, for the last 4 years, I've had the option to WFH as much as I wanted and I was still in office 3-4 days a week. I feel less productive at home and I miss having the division between work and home. My commute is my wind down time that allows me to turn my brain off work mode at the end of the day.
I think after COVID is gone, the name of the game will be flexibility. Treat people like adults and, as long as they're getting their work done and not negatively affecting the team, we should let them work where and when they want.
Nobody wants to force you to work from home. I think if you work better from the office you should work from the office, and if I work better from home I should work from home.
The execs advocating for work from office aren’t proposing this though: they are instead insisting everyone work from the office, regardless of preference. That’s what chafes people.
The execs advocating for work from office aren’t proposing this though: they are instead insisting everyone work from the office, regardless of preference. That’s what chafes people.
There are two facets to this.
First, productivity concerns are (mostly) an excuse. The real important thing that is desired is to be able to exert managerial control over employees. This is more easily done when you have employees in the office under watchful eyes.
Second, in an ideal world the people that like the office will commute to the office, and the people that like WFH will WFH.
The prefer-WFH people don't lose out either way from such a setup. However the prefer-office people still lose out, if, for example, the majority of a team chooses prefer WFH. What happens to all the social and organizational benefits of working in the office if you're in a team of 10 and only 3 people choose to come to the office? Or worse - if you're the only one? So it becomes an all or nothing scenario.
First, productivity concerns are (mostly) an excuse. The real important thing that is desired is to be able to exert managerial control over employees. This is more easily done when you have employees in the office under watchful eyes.
Second, in an ideal world the people that like the office will commute to the office, and the people that like WFH will WFH.
The prefer-WFH people don't lose out either way from such a setup. However the prefer-office people still lose out, if, for example, the majority of a team chooses prefer WFH. What happens to all the social and organizational benefits of working in the office if you're in a team of 10 and only 3 people choose to come to the office? Or worse - if you're the only one? So it becomes an all or nothing scenario.
Those of you who think that remote-work-by-default would be a good thing, can I ask how your companies are handling career progression and collaboration, as well as mentorship of junior developers?
Listen to Adam Savage [1] talk about his early career as a prop-maker. I just don't see how that sort of deep collaboration is possible remotely. As a recent graduate whose first full-time job has been full remote due to the pandemic, I'm terrified that this is going to kill my career progression, not only upwards but also laterally. I just don't have the same opportunities to 1) learn from people or 2) bump into new people as I would if we're all forced to be in the same place.
[1]: https://youtu.be/qvU5PZgSowk?t=148
Listen to Adam Savage [1] talk about his early career as a prop-maker. I just don't see how that sort of deep collaboration is possible remotely. As a recent graduate whose first full-time job has been full remote due to the pandemic, I'm terrified that this is going to kill my career progression, not only upwards but also laterally. I just don't have the same opportunities to 1) learn from people or 2) bump into new people as I would if we're all forced to be in the same place.
[1]: https://youtu.be/qvU5PZgSowk?t=148
Sure. The company I work at has always been remote-only, and I've been at it for over 5 years.
We pair new hires, regardless of ability, with a mentor. They have access to a full checklist of on-boarding tasks and an actively maintained Basecamp.
Perhaps the key point is that we do not have "hidden" discussions. Even the voice discussions have notes taken and recorded, and planning sessions are done via a recorded Miro board. Day-to-day project management is entirely in Basecamp and Slack. Anything in Slack that's worth noting is made into a Basecamp task for posterity.
We're a flat hierarchy, and we encourage team members to be vocal about what they want to work on. The entire team plans quarterly targets and goals.
It's, honestly, kinda awesome.
Edit: we're less than 50 people, and that makes it easier not to have a hierarchy since most features are built by one or two people.
We pair new hires, regardless of ability, with a mentor. They have access to a full checklist of on-boarding tasks and an actively maintained Basecamp.
Perhaps the key point is that we do not have "hidden" discussions. Even the voice discussions have notes taken and recorded, and planning sessions are done via a recorded Miro board. Day-to-day project management is entirely in Basecamp and Slack. Anything in Slack that's worth noting is made into a Basecamp task for posterity.
We're a flat hierarchy, and we encourage team members to be vocal about what they want to work on. The entire team plans quarterly targets and goals.
It's, honestly, kinda awesome.
Edit: we're less than 50 people, and that makes it easier not to have a hierarchy since most features are built by one or two people.
> We're a flat hierarchy, and we encourage team members to be vocal about what they want to work on. The entire team plans quarterly targets and goals.
To be quite sincere, I've heard this before. And it ALWAYS ends like Animal Farm. Some are "more equal" than others, especially if your company has the usual upper management.
To be quite sincere, I've heard this before. And it ALWAYS ends like Animal Farm. Some are "more equal" than others, especially if your company has the usual upper management.
I think it works fine for smaller organizations with less than 50 people. It may not work so well with companies that are rapidly going and already stretching their culture to its limits. It still greatly depends on who is running the company, what the goals are, etc. At your average tech company, mentorship and autonomy matter way more than someone assigning you a direct manager that simply checks boxes on some annual review form. I believe in a strong technical leadership model while keeping the "management hierarchy" flat. E.g. having "direct reports" becomes important when you have enough people that upper management can't give someone dedicated time. There are plenty of ways to keep things flatter and not fall into the traps of having a traditional management hierarchy. It simply takes some thought. You can't absolve your organization of needing management by simply declaring yourself "flat", but there are benefits to how agile an organization can be the flatter they can get, IMO.
This is the frustration I have with my current role. The company is great and the team is awesome. But getting to work on anything that interests me is impossible. All of the great, fun projects go to other team members. The issue compounds itself because now that I don't work on the stuff that I'm good at / want to do, people on my team have pigeonholed me into Team Garbageman (person who does the projects that nobody else wants).
This is definitely an issue in any team or organization. Unless you're smaller than 10 employees, eventually office/career politics will dominate. It's inevitable human nature.
Our company implements Holacracy which largely solves this problem.
Any time I read "flat hierarchy" in a job posting I feel the urge to run. That may be true contractually, but there is _always_ a hierarchy.
Yes, and it comes with the opposite problem of hierarchy - working for a manager who has 30-50 direct reports and no time for you or anyone on the team.
[deleted]
Same here. I've worked at a few companies like that, and it's always a ton of office politics with senior employees never being held accountable because they're not technically in charge. It's a prime example of "some are more equal than others".
Thanks for sharing, I think the "no hidden discussions" idea is important. I had a few internships in the before times, and I learned the most by pulling up a chair to other engineers / researchers who were already talking about something, and just listening to how they talk through problems. In my remote job I don't really get a chance to eavesdrop on someone's zoom call.
I think there are a lot of "implicit" benefits of being in-person that remote companies need to make more "explicit" to be successful. It sounds like your company has the right idea!
I think there are a lot of "implicit" benefits of being in-person that remote companies need to make more "explicit" to be successful. It sounds like your company has the right idea!
If you don’t mind me sharing, I’m also building something for making discussions more transparent and discoverable. https://AsyncGo.com just launched and I’d love to hear your feedback.
If it's any consolation, I've spent most of my career working remote and I'd say probably the richest experiences I've learned from depended on who and what they were working on WAY more than them being there in person, and those richer experiences didn't really have a hell of a lot of zoom meeting and other distracting nonsense. The communication simply shifts to text based chat with a nice handy record of communication to look back on and consider over a longer period of time, where the information is more salient.
Basically -- how do you think open source has been doing it since practically the 90s?
Basically -- how do you think open source has been doing it since practically the 90s?
I do get the issues with onboarding/mentorship (as well as social) especially right out of school. I suspect that many companies are just trying to do business as usual rather than adapting. It's also worth pointing out that we're talking about remote during a pandemic. In normal times, there's nothing to keep teams from traveling to a location for a week. (Yes, some people have travel issues for various reasons but in general the statement stands.)
I think the tough part is that fresh grads will benefit a lot from the senior developers being physically present, but I get the impression that many senior devs will choose not to come to the office unless they are required to.
So, I don't think it's as simple as letting people choose when and how often to come to the office. I could see a hybrid 2 days local / 3 days remote model working if physical presence is mandatory on those two days.
So, I don't think it's as simple as letting people choose when and how often to come to the office. I could see a hybrid 2 days local / 3 days remote model working if physical presence is mandatory on those two days.
The challenge with a hybrid model is that you pretty much want housing that has a comfortable private work area and an at least semi-reasonable commute. That's probably fairly doable in a lot of suburban areas but it's harder for an urban office.
That said, I expect this will be quite common and people are probably more willing to have a 90 minute each way commute, say, if they only have to do it once or twice a week. (That's about what I'd be to go into our Boston office. That would be lousy to do most days--as I can attest to from a prior company--but it's not that bad to do once a week especially in the nicer weather.)
That said, I expect this will be quite common and people are probably more willing to have a 90 minute each way commute, say, if they only have to do it once or twice a week. (That's about what I'd be to go into our Boston office. That would be lousy to do most days--as I can attest to from a prior company--but it's not that bad to do once a week especially in the nicer weather.)
> Basically -- how do you think open source has been doing it since practically the 90s?
This! I don't get how HN, a community of hackers who can't but be aware of FLOSS, could claim with a straight face that "remote doesn't work" in the face of things like LKML.
This! I don't get how HN, a community of hackers who can't but be aware of FLOSS, could claim with a straight face that "remote doesn't work" in the face of things like LKML.
It's killing me slowly right now. I got hired in the middle of the pandemic and I think just 6 people even know I exist. I've spent more time talking with HR than my team members. Not for what you think, I respond to their emails and chats so we get along great. My team is mostly on DnD, no idea what their working on and emails take 24-48 hours to respond.
Totally feel that, I'm in the same position.
Interns we've on-boarded, especially from non-CS background programs, all have had these kinds of issues.
It's been getting better, but I don't see how it's possible to have anything close to "real" mentor-ship schemes with full WFH. When I was interning most of learning happened not with my project but with interacting with the team and seeing/understanding what they did.
I have a sneaking feeling that the productivity boosts due to WFH mostly come from more senior devs w/ specific workstreams that are benefiting from more "head down" time, but without mentoring/training new ppl the quality hiring pool will go down over time.
Interns we've on-boarded, especially from non-CS background programs, all have had these kinds of issues.
It's been getting better, but I don't see how it's possible to have anything close to "real" mentor-ship schemes with full WFH. When I was interning most of learning happened not with my project but with interacting with the team and seeing/understanding what they did.
I have a sneaking feeling that the productivity boosts due to WFH mostly come from more senior devs w/ specific workstreams that are benefiting from more "head down" time, but without mentoring/training new ppl the quality hiring pool will go down over time.
Start making 1-1 meetings just to get to know people better and the kind of things they do. Make sure you mostly work on projects where you can collaborate closely with 1-3 other people.
I'd like to but unfortunately they are using that stupid department billing system. For me to collaborate I have to be invited in, basically. Can't have an engineer working on a project they aren't billing for no matter how interesting it looks.
I'm trying to find the project managers so they know I'm available and to include me on future projects. The current projects are staffed up and any change in manpower is a change request, client approval, etc.
I'm trying to find the project managers so they know I'm available and to include me on future projects. The current projects are staffed up and any change in manpower is a change request, client approval, etc.
I feel you, it's been really tough on me too, for many of the same reasons. I don't feel like part of the team, and it's not really clear what my purpose is. When this is all over maybe I'll take a break from this lonely career and spend some time in a more human-facing role like teaching.
Thanks for sharing. Your company definitely needs some “how to WFH” training. Taking 24-48 hours to respond to an e-mail is totally, absurdly unacceptable, and if I (as a fairly senior guy) saw this regularly happening, I’d bring it to the offender’s attention and to their manager if they didn’t take corrective action. If someone is too busy to respond to their e-mail, they need to discuss their workload with their manager.
>Those of you who think that remote-work-by-default would be a good thing, can I ask how your companies are handling career progression and collaboration, as well as mentorship of junior developers?
Frankly, my employer sucks-ass at this anyway. So no real difference. I suspect there are a LOT of small-time employers that are like this.
I've worked at other companies where they do much better at collaboration and even have formal mentorship programs (Lockheed-Martin). Yes, I very much miss working for those companies, but given that I've relocated since then, it's really not an option.
Frankly, my employer sucks-ass at this anyway. So no real difference. I suspect there are a LOT of small-time employers that are like this.
I've worked at other companies where they do much better at collaboration and even have formal mentorship programs (Lockheed-Martin). Yes, I very much miss working for those companies, but given that I've relocated since then, it's really not an option.
I feel those are traditionally handled very badly anyway. Career progression tends to happen more in job interviews.
This is a valid concern, but I don't think WFH affects it much. A company that values employee career progression and collaboration will do so regardless of work arrangement. most of the companies I've worked for haven't been very effective at managing any sort of career progression.
I'm working towards my promotion to Senior engineer right now. My manager and I have weekly video-call one on ones, discussing my progress.
I'm also mentoring a new hire, fresh from college. He's kicking ass and it's going really well. We mostly talk over slack, but we also do weekly video calls, or ad-hoc when he's stuck on something.
I'm not saying it's as good at this as it was in-person, but we find ways to make it work.
Remember, the goal is to find the best solution possible, not to discount any solution that doesn't have 100% coverage of the old solution. We may lose ground in some respects in order to gain it in many more.
I'm also mentoring a new hire, fresh from college. He's kicking ass and it's going really well. We mostly talk over slack, but we also do weekly video calls, or ad-hoc when he's stuck on something.
I'm not saying it's as good at this as it was in-person, but we find ways to make it work.
Remember, the goal is to find the best solution possible, not to discount any solution that doesn't have 100% coverage of the old solution. We may lose ground in some respects in order to gain it in many more.
We’ve had several onboarded some right out of college since quarantine started and they are all doing well.
Bumping into people is actually a problem, but career progression is less so, as there is a lot more time for 1-1 mentorship, pairing, etc.
The bumping into people part can be solved though, especially with occasional in person events. We’ve had whole teams not located within our area and have worked with them just fine. Being noticed is also fine - people still give presentations, do launch events, and connect with others through managers, pms, etc.
Bumping into people is actually a problem, but career progression is less so, as there is a lot more time for 1-1 mentorship, pairing, etc.
The bumping into people part can be solved though, especially with occasional in person events. We’ve had whole teams not located within our area and have worked with them just fine. Being noticed is also fine - people still give presentations, do launch events, and connect with others through managers, pms, etc.
>We’ve had whole teams not located within our area and have worked with them just fine.
A lot of people look at in-office through the lens of entire companies or at least pretty much everyone they interact with being co-located. I, on the other hand, am on a broader team spread over about 9 time zones and, on a given day, I can be talking with people in 5 different offices plus remote/traveling. If I went into a local office pre-pandemic, there was a good chance I wouldn't run into anyone I knew.
A lot of people look at in-office through the lens of entire companies or at least pretty much everyone they interact with being co-located. I, on the other hand, am on a broader team spread over about 9 time zones and, on a given day, I can be talking with people in 5 different offices plus remote/traveling. If I went into a local office pre-pandemic, there was a good chance I wouldn't run into anyone I knew.
I worked in distributed teams (though in a local office) for about 10 years. The organization was fairly good at this, in terms of structure and policy and procedure. In fact, we would very frequently run short-term projects where teams formed, and then broke up at the end. Furthermore, we frequently did collaboration with external groups (particularly when we were collaborating with a client).
I really miss working there, and wish I could go back. Switching to a traditional in-office company 3 years ago, I really tried to impress upon them how badly run they are, and how they could improve their processes - but the culture was just too ossified and toxic. People have to want to change, and the people I have worked with since then just don't want to, and they're comfortable with the inefficiencies, and enabling of toxic team members. Don't get me wrong, we have some really smart coders, but as team-mates, they're hell to work with.
That said: I don't really want to go back to the office, even if it helps smooth out projects with my passive-aggressive team mates. I'd rather tough it out until I can find my way into a better employer with a sane work environment, and if that's 100% remote, that's cool.
I really miss working there, and wish I could go back. Switching to a traditional in-office company 3 years ago, I really tried to impress upon them how badly run they are, and how they could improve their processes - but the culture was just too ossified and toxic. People have to want to change, and the people I have worked with since then just don't want to, and they're comfortable with the inefficiencies, and enabling of toxic team members. Don't get me wrong, we have some really smart coders, but as team-mates, they're hell to work with.
That said: I don't really want to go back to the office, even if it helps smooth out projects with my passive-aggressive team mates. I'd rather tough it out until I can find my way into a better employer with a sane work environment, and if that's 100% remote, that's cool.
How is there more time for 1-1 mentorship, pairing, etc?
Not the parent but I actually have a lot more flexible time at the moment because I'm not traveling and I'm just dipping in and out of virtual events rather than attending them.
Your concerns are valid. I think this is really an opportunity to get intentional about networking and learning within your company. Everyone else is presumably in the same boat, so if I was early in my career I would focus on becoming the best remote networker and learner possible.
Most people will just go with the flow and not really adapt intentionally to the situation so in some ways you may be able to actually stand out more than normal with less effort.
Most people will just go with the flow and not really adapt intentionally to the situation so in some ways you may be able to actually stand out more than normal with less effort.
I feel like making a career change to teaching as well. But the horror stories I hear about how hostile parents are towards teachers, and the fact that I'd take a pay-cut to about 1/3 of what I'm making have prevented me from considering it seriously.
While the cross-pollination of ideas from different teams and departments is lost, along with interesting and serendipitous discussions, I'm also in the boat of hoping I never have to go back to an office. Not having a commute, being able to spend more time with my kids, not eating less-healthy fast-food rather than home-cooked meals, being able to spend my (lunch) breaks working in my garden... I never want to go back!
Lucky you. I live in a top-floor apartment so don't have the luxury of a garden and I'm isolated by myself as I live alone.
It's not the same for everyone.
It's not the same for everyone.
That’s fine. Don’t make me come back to the office because you have undesirable accommodations.
I'm not sure this "you can't make me X" attitude is particularly helpful. The reality is that lots of people have undesirable accommodations, and whether you do or not a lot of people do and don't want to go back into the office. IMO this has to be a group conversation not an individualistic one.
Full disclosure: I don't really want to return to 100% office requirement either. I'm really excited to see other humans again - though I suspect we'll see a 2-3 day a week in-person expectation and then 2-3 day flex moving forward.
Full disclosure: I don't really want to return to 100% office requirement either. I'm really excited to see other humans again - though I suspect we'll see a 2-3 day a week in-person expectation and then 2-3 day flex moving forward.
I believe my company is going to end up maintaining a small office with a set of open desks that people can come in an work at. At least for us, this seems like the right balance. We've grown in the pandemic, so keeping a smaller office lets the company save money. Hiring remotely expands our pool of candidates. At the same time, employees who benefit on the whole from remote work get to keep it, while employees who thrive on in-person interaction and a dedicated space outside their home get to keep it. It's a little tricky to set up blended in-person and remote meetings, but once that's in place, the office can be much more fluid.
Surely this works both ways though? Remote workers always bring an implied expectation that their coworkers will do a certain amount of extra work in order to bridge the larger communication boundary. This means more documentation, more aggressive status tracking, more time spent on communication (zoom calls and slack simply aren't as high fidelity as in person communication - body language is important), more independent investigation as the activation energy of a remote call is higher, etc.
Now, many of those things are probably good for the business anyway, but they are nevertheless obligations that remote workers force on their colleagues in order to achieve that cleaner, "API-like" working relationship that remote workers often need to succeed independently.
It's even more stressful if some employees are gelling well and some aren't. Many remote workers feel they should be treated like contractors but given fuzzier expectations like salaried workers - I've seen this misalignment of expectations about culture destroy teams, and in an office culture transitioning from full time in office to partially remote, all of this is fundamentally caused by the "benefits" that the remote workers are receiving at the cost of their colleagues. It's absolutely not a win-win.
Now, many of those things are probably good for the business anyway, but they are nevertheless obligations that remote workers force on their colleagues in order to achieve that cleaner, "API-like" working relationship that remote workers often need to succeed independently.
It's even more stressful if some employees are gelling well and some aren't. Many remote workers feel they should be treated like contractors but given fuzzier expectations like salaried workers - I've seen this misalignment of expectations about culture destroy teams, and in an office culture transitioning from full time in office to partially remote, all of this is fundamentally caused by the "benefits" that the remote workers are receiving at the cost of their colleagues. It's absolutely not a win-win.
This. Plus, I myself am living in a top floor apt, but over the past year I learnt the power of just taking walks, having quality weekend times, taking trips, and exercising. Just because I'm supposed to work at home does not mean that I should stay home all the time. If anything, this has taught me what I was doing wrong in my pre-covid life.
Nobody’s making you do anything, if your employer forces a return to the office and you don’t like it you can find a new employer.
If the only option to stay remote is to quit then that's the definition of "My employer is making me return to the office".
They are voicing a very US view on the relationship. From my understanding, in EU there are jurisdictions that any concession extracted from employees by employer is effectively done under duress because the employer controls employees livelihood, even if temporarily. Actual reality depends on how desirable your skills are and how good the existing employment is.
I expect the bigger legal pushback would be the other way around. I definitely heard some grumbling early in the pandemic when some still saw office closures as an over-reaction. The complaint was that companies were making a unilateral change to the working conditions agreed-upon when they were hired.
[deleted]
Don't mistake pandemic conditions for forever. There is no reason you need to stay permanently isolated and can't get social needs filled somewhere other than an office.
Don't mistake the post pandemic conditions for granted. Even after isolation working alone in a small apartment can be miserable, I find myself in the same situation, getting out for a bar or club in non working hours is not the same as working in a office. There are some simple idiotic social needs like small talk, or throw some jokes or even curse out loud in frustration that are difficult to get right outside the office.
Anyways, any argument down playing a situation is futile, let's just agree that every one is in a different situation and the best is to analyze case by case
Anyways, any argument down playing a situation is futile, let's just agree that every one is in a different situation and the best is to analyze case by case
Isn't analyzing case-by-case exactly what remote work is though? Obviously some people really like working at home in isolation and some people like the social aspects of being in an office. But with a remote-first company you have the option. If you want to work at home you obviously can and if you want a more social work environment then you can rent a co-working space (hopefully your company could even foot the bill with all the money they are saving on office rent) or co-work with a group of friends, etc.
I think a lot of people who have worked remotely for the first time due to COVID have a misleading impression of what remote work is. In normal times you have ample options to be able to work in an environment with other people if that's what you want. You also have the option to spend the time you save on commuting doing other non-work social activities.
I think a lot of people who have worked remotely for the first time due to COVID have a misleading impression of what remote work is. In normal times you have ample options to be able to work in an environment with other people if that's what you want. You also have the option to spend the time you save on commuting doing other non-work social activities.
I am pretty much in the same boat, i cannot afford a house where i live, and probably will never be able to at least within the next couple of years. Unfortunately between the ongoing construction, and the fact our building is slowly renovating most of the units has hurt my productivity.
While people say "oh just move somewhere else outside the city", unfortunately that means i need to now buy/maintain a car on top of everything else. Then commute into the city to be social with my friends group, or to do physical activities.
Neither of those things appeal to me, and since our work is strongly leaning to switching to be fully remote, it is kind of frustrating. A bunch of coworkers are very much just move to a city where you can buy a house! That is what i did. Or even worse a lot of people who are just "buy a house!", and are completely ignorant of how insane the housing prices have become.
Honestly the end result is probably just going to lead to me finding employment at a company that still has the ability to work onsite. A few of my like mininded coworkers pitched the idea that we could rent a small office area for people like us, and were promptly shot down by management.
While people say "oh just move somewhere else outside the city", unfortunately that means i need to now buy/maintain a car on top of everything else. Then commute into the city to be social with my friends group, or to do physical activities.
Neither of those things appeal to me, and since our work is strongly leaning to switching to be fully remote, it is kind of frustrating. A bunch of coworkers are very much just move to a city where you can buy a house! That is what i did. Or even worse a lot of people who are just "buy a house!", and are completely ignorant of how insane the housing prices have become.
Honestly the end result is probably just going to lead to me finding employment at a company that still has the ability to work onsite. A few of my like mininded coworkers pitched the idea that we could rent a small office area for people like us, and were promptly shot down by management.
Eventually you’ll have the choice to work in the office at most places, but with a permanent remote option you could also move.
But isn't that the point? If your location doesn't matter you could live somewhere with a garden because you wouldn't be forced to live near the arbitrary location of the office.
You had more than a year now to get out of your top floor apartment lease.
Not to mention that a pandemic is not an accurate reflection of what real remote work looks like.
Not to mention that a pandemic is not an accurate reflection of what real remote work looks like.
It's a mortgage so it's not that easy.
You have the city though, no? I understand it's pandemic conditions now, but when things open back again, it should become fun again?
We were in this situation and have been lucky enough to move back in with family, in a more rural location.
I've loved it so far, being able to be around family more and take care of them and just be around.
If full-time remote becomes more the norm, I hope people are able to take the opportunity to be closer to family and friends.
I've loved it so far, being able to be around family more and take care of them and just be around.
If full-time remote becomes more the norm, I hope people are able to take the opportunity to be closer to family and friends.
get a co-working membership. It's like adult daycare for working people, they organize little activities and mixers from time to time.
Luck had nothing to do with the choices I made in my career and life.
Oooh BOOOOY is that a self-unaware statement :->
While I will give full marks for your agency and initiative if appropriate, to think ANY of us (myself and all of us included) don't have a large amount of probability/luck/circumstance involved is hilarious.
Heck, I'm a refugee from a civil-war country who came to Canada with literally nothing but a loan for the ticket; I could try to make the claim that I "made it on my own". Yet though I've certainly put in an effort, I'm extremely lucky compared to those who couldn't leave, didn't speak the language, don't have the skillset or capability, don't look or behave in career-enhancing ways, haven't been picked up by mentors and coaches, haven't moved to a country which accepts new people, with educational and business framework that's conducive to advances, haven't found or been given the same opportunities, etc. I've certainly had bad luck and obstacles and negative externalities, but I could spend all day counting things that went well too!
I mean, I agree that I don't want to necessarily go back to the office; but it's with full view of how lucky & privileged I am. Even on very granular level, even with decisions I've made and career I've chosen and skillset I've developed - I have colleagues with same skillset and position and broadly similar projects, which have not switched to remote nearly as much as my project has. That alone is luck/circumstance/beyond my control.
While I will give full marks for your agency and initiative if appropriate, to think ANY of us (myself and all of us included) don't have a large amount of probability/luck/circumstance involved is hilarious.
Heck, I'm a refugee from a civil-war country who came to Canada with literally nothing but a loan for the ticket; I could try to make the claim that I "made it on my own". Yet though I've certainly put in an effort, I'm extremely lucky compared to those who couldn't leave, didn't speak the language, don't have the skillset or capability, don't look or behave in career-enhancing ways, haven't been picked up by mentors and coaches, haven't moved to a country which accepts new people, with educational and business framework that's conducive to advances, haven't found or been given the same opportunities, etc. I've certainly had bad luck and obstacles and negative externalities, but I could spend all day counting things that went well too!
I mean, I agree that I don't want to necessarily go back to the office; but it's with full view of how lucky & privileged I am. Even on very granular level, even with decisions I've made and career I've chosen and skillset I've developed - I have colleagues with same skillset and position and broadly similar projects, which have not switched to remote nearly as much as my project has. That alone is luck/circumstance/beyond my control.
Meh, the network of choices and outcomes you took couldn't have been pre-planned, but the attitude and work ethic that made you work on the skills, capabilities, mindset, etc and made you take action despite major setbacks had nothing to do with luck. To think otherwise is to deny your own agency.
My point/perspective is that it's not a binary proposition. It's not all luck/circumstance, or all agency; it's a combination of the two.
The OP to which I replied implied that ONLY their agency mattered; I disagree with that sentiment vehemently. This is not to say that agency that does not matter - I'm not a fatalist and certainly enjoy my personal freedom and take personal responsibility :)
The OP to which I replied implied that ONLY their agency mattered; I disagree with that sentiment vehemently. This is not to say that agency that does not matter - I'm not a fatalist and certainly enjoy my personal freedom and take personal responsibility :)
Luck has something to do with everyone's path, no exceptions.
Intentions and planning matter too, of course.
Intentions and planning matter too, of course.
Where, when and to who you were born, and your health. There is plenty of luck involved.
Really? It made a lot of difference to mine. If I didn't have a mild skeletal problem I'd probably be in the air force right now, rather than a software engineer.
Almost implies you have _bad_ luck, then, if there's nothing at all you can ascribe to fortuitous chance.
My career was made by someone finding my resume in a trash can.
My career was made by someone finding my resume in a trash can.
I wish you good luck then!
While I'm sure there's some kernel of truth to the benefits of chit chatting about random stuff and coming up with better ideas through that, until I see some evidence that in-office work provides this to a substantial degree, I have a hard time believing it's as beneficial as it's made out to be. What it actually feels like is a hand wavy attempt for some old people in management to try to justify them holding onto their outdated ways.
For companies like Amazon there must be a huge element of the sunk cost fallacy coming into play. I'm sure they have spent hundreds of millions on office locations around the world. To suddenly decide that these are completely unnecessary would be a bold move, and there is unlikely to be a queue of people rushing to lease or buy unused office space in the immediate future.
>To suddenly decide that these are completely unnecessary
Not a very bold move for the world's largest cloud provider.
Not a very bold move for the world's largest cloud provider.
If I understand your point, you are saying that Amazon has virtually made the data centre redundant, so the idea that offices are similarly redundant given the right tools shouldn't come as too much of a surprise to them?
I take that point but let me counter that there is presumably a sliding scale here between "traditional office space is redundant" and "when the dust settles everyone will be back at their cubicles". The majority of people, and the companies they work for, are probably somewhere in the middle. However, even if Amazon are 100% convinced their office space is now redundant, it is probably, from a game theory type point of view, not in their best interests to publicly declare that position. Because to do so would only weaken the value of their existing office spaces.
I take that point but let me counter that there is presumably a sliding scale here between "traditional office space is redundant" and "when the dust settles everyone will be back at their cubicles". The majority of people, and the companies they work for, are probably somewhere in the middle. However, even if Amazon are 100% convinced their office space is now redundant, it is probably, from a game theory type point of view, not in their best interests to publicly declare that position. Because to do so would only weaken the value of their existing office spaces.
> While I'm sure there's some kernel of truth to the benefits of chit chatting about random stuff and coming up with better ideas through that, until I see some evidence that in-office work provides this to a substantial degree, I have a hard time believing it's as beneficial as it's made out to be. What it actually feels like is a hand wavy attempt for some old people in management to try to justify them holding onto their outdated ways.
Yup. I'm wondering how many people are taking advantage of the tools available to them. I've seen remote workers be online in a video chat room so you could "stop by and pitch an idea." This was well over a decade ago.
Those old school managers you mention are the ones I find most likely to stick with things like audio only teleconference, even when there are things like shared whiteboards/documents available, and then they'll talk to slides they didn't send out over email. Incredibly frustrating.
Yup. I'm wondering how many people are taking advantage of the tools available to them. I've seen remote workers be online in a video chat room so you could "stop by and pitch an idea." This was well over a decade ago.
Those old school managers you mention are the ones I find most likely to stick with things like audio only teleconference, even when there are things like shared whiteboards/documents available, and then they'll talk to slides they didn't send out over email. Incredibly frustrating.
> not eating less-healthy fast-food rather than home-cooked meals
Anecdotally, the people I know reluctant to go back to the office have some combination of lovely homes into which they've put care, terrible offices reflecting zero care or empathy and/or introversion, sometimes to the point of social anxiety. (Stark minority in the third, but a life changer for them.)
Offices don't have to have terrible meal options. Nice homes can be chosen close to work, thereby negating commute. And co-workers don't have to be inept to the point of constantly interrupting your work flow.
There will always be a section of the population happier and more productive working from principally home. (Though for how long we can command a wage premium remains to be seen.) But I suspect, if offices were a bit more desirable and city center housing a bit more affordable, that slice would narrow quickly.
Anecdotally, the people I know reluctant to go back to the office have some combination of lovely homes into which they've put care, terrible offices reflecting zero care or empathy and/or introversion, sometimes to the point of social anxiety. (Stark minority in the third, but a life changer for them.)
Offices don't have to have terrible meal options. Nice homes can be chosen close to work, thereby negating commute. And co-workers don't have to be inept to the point of constantly interrupting your work flow.
There will always be a section of the population happier and more productive working from principally home. (Though for how long we can command a wage premium remains to be seen.) But I suspect, if offices were a bit more desirable and city center housing a bit more affordable, that slice would narrow quickly.
Do you live in Silicon Valley? Nice homes cannot be chosen close to work. All homes in the South Bay that aren’t literally falling down are multi-million-dollar. I personally know people who bought a $2.5m home with a rat infestation.
> Do you live in Silicon Valley? Nice homes cannot be chosen close to work.
And in large parts of the rest of the country, it's illegal to put homes close to work.
Where I work is on the edge of an office campus on the edge of a suburb of Seattle. By city ordinance, virtually no housing is allowed anywhere near where I work. If you live in the same municipality as this office and work at it, your only choice to get there is a twenty-minute drive (with pre-pandemic traffic levels). There is no local bus service that goes from the rest of the town to the office park. Bus service from Seattle to this office park exists, however, so I live in Seattle.
"Just live close to work" is a physical impossibility for so many people, and not solely because they want the stereotypical standalone house with a picket fence. My family has zero interest in that, yet there's no housing anywhere near where I work. What little exists is largely short-term corporate rentals and AirBnBs.
When we've lived in other places, the dynamic is the same. Office parks in the suburbs or all clumped together in a large downtown, with housing as far as you can get from them.
This is, in my opinion, one of the few things Amazon did right: plopping its office campus in the middle of a very mixed-use area with rental apartments and condominium units for ownership, shops, restaurants, parks, and so on. (Of course, after having run out of land there, now they're building traditional office towers in the suburban downtown with virtually no housing to speak of. And yes, it is sky-high expensive to live near Amazon because that's basically the only mixed-use office park in the whole county.)
And in large parts of the rest of the country, it's illegal to put homes close to work.
Where I work is on the edge of an office campus on the edge of a suburb of Seattle. By city ordinance, virtually no housing is allowed anywhere near where I work. If you live in the same municipality as this office and work at it, your only choice to get there is a twenty-minute drive (with pre-pandemic traffic levels). There is no local bus service that goes from the rest of the town to the office park. Bus service from Seattle to this office park exists, however, so I live in Seattle.
"Just live close to work" is a physical impossibility for so many people, and not solely because they want the stereotypical standalone house with a picket fence. My family has zero interest in that, yet there's no housing anywhere near where I work. What little exists is largely short-term corporate rentals and AirBnBs.
When we've lived in other places, the dynamic is the same. Office parks in the suburbs or all clumped together in a large downtown, with housing as far as you can get from them.
This is, in my opinion, one of the few things Amazon did right: plopping its office campus in the middle of a very mixed-use area with rental apartments and condominium units for ownership, shops, restaurants, parks, and so on. (Of course, after having run out of land there, now they're building traditional office towers in the suburban downtown with virtually no housing to speak of. And yes, it is sky-high expensive to live near Amazon because that's basically the only mixed-use office park in the whole county.)
> "By city ordinance, virtually no housing is allowed anywhere near where I work."
Must be specific to your suburb. I can look out the window of my downtown Seattle office straight into the windows of the condo complex across the street. As for the suburbs, having passed by innumerable times, the north edge of Microsoft's main campus is directly across the street from apartments and rowhomes.
Must be specific to your suburb. I can look out the window of my downtown Seattle office straight into the windows of the condo complex across the street. As for the suburbs, having passed by innumerable times, the north edge of Microsoft's main campus is directly across the street from apartments and rowhomes.
> Microsoft's main campus
I was wondering if someone would mention Microsoft in a reply.
Yes, there are apartments near there, but Redmond has the same failing as most other suburbs in the area: housing stock woefully inadequate for the number of people working there, and ordinances that artificially restrict building any more. Microsoft's campus is also adjacent to the Bellevue city limits, where residents on the other side of Bel-Red have fought vociferously against new housing for decades.
Meanwhile, SR 520 is a mess all the way back to the 405 interchange (and beyond, some mornings). After the much-vaunted light rail arrives, that station will serve fewer residences than the one in Angle Lake.
My point is that lots of people just throw out "well, live near where you work" as a panacea to life's commuting and office ills. Under our current idea of what counts as zoning and land use, it's not possible for any more than a small sliver of people to do that. So we have a choice: change how we do land use, change how we work with offices, or both.
I was wondering if someone would mention Microsoft in a reply.
Yes, there are apartments near there, but Redmond has the same failing as most other suburbs in the area: housing stock woefully inadequate for the number of people working there, and ordinances that artificially restrict building any more. Microsoft's campus is also adjacent to the Bellevue city limits, where residents on the other side of Bel-Red have fought vociferously against new housing for decades.
Meanwhile, SR 520 is a mess all the way back to the 405 interchange (and beyond, some mornings). After the much-vaunted light rail arrives, that station will serve fewer residences than the one in Angle Lake.
My point is that lots of people just throw out "well, live near where you work" as a panacea to life's commuting and office ills. Under our current idea of what counts as zoning and land use, it's not possible for any more than a small sliver of people to do that. So we have a choice: change how we do land use, change how we work with offices, or both.
Contemporary zoning laws really are the worst.
> Do you live in Silicon Valley? Nice homes cannot be chosen close to work.
Nope. Largely for this reason. And when I'm in the Bay Area, I'm strategic about when I travel, to where and for whom.
My point is that the hesitance to go back to the office is not something fundamental. It's rooted in a variety of personal and environmental factors that can and do change. Targeting those factors, directly or indirectly, personally or through policy, has not been a conversation I've heard of.
Nope. Largely for this reason. And when I'm in the Bay Area, I'm strategic about when I travel, to where and for whom.
My point is that the hesitance to go back to the office is not something fundamental. It's rooted in a variety of personal and environmental factors that can and do change. Targeting those factors, directly or indirectly, personally or through policy, has not been a conversation I've heard of.
The south bay has hordes of pretty nice apartment complexes for newly arrived renters, and newish condos and townhouses for entry level buyers.
Eventually you trade up to a 3 bedroom house or whatever you need.
I have worked at various tech companies since the 90s, am by no means rich but I've have always lived somewhere decent that's within 15 minutes drive of work.
I have worked at various tech companies since the 90s, am by no means rich but I've have always lived somewhere decent that's within 15 minutes drive of work.
(Yes I know my bio says "Oakland" right now. I am working out of my partner's house during Covid. I still own a place in the South Bay).
It sounds very nice to be a decamillionaire.
Surely it is those people who demand to work from an office who should be worried about commanding a premium, if the employer start including the cost of providing an office, especially in a premium area.
> it is those people who demand to work from an office who should be worried about commanding a premium
Before the pandemic, certain employers had to pay a premium for real estate and a premium for talent in prime locations. The former no longer looks justified. That doesn't really give employee or employer any leverage. The latter, which was built on scarcity of accessible talent and the concentration of high-paying jobs in prime locations, however, solely reduces employees' leverage.
One of the barriers to this shift was the massive cost of installing remote-working infrastructure. Financially, technically and culturally. That's now done. How this shakes out, whether it results in lower prices for customers or better returns to shareholders or higher take-home pay for employees, remains to be seen.
Before the pandemic, certain employers had to pay a premium for real estate and a premium for talent in prime locations. The former no longer looks justified. That doesn't really give employee or employer any leverage. The latter, which was built on scarcity of accessible talent and the concentration of high-paying jobs in prime locations, however, solely reduces employees' leverage.
One of the barriers to this shift was the massive cost of installing remote-working infrastructure. Financially, technically and culturally. That's now done. How this shakes out, whether it results in lower prices for customers or better returns to shareholders or higher take-home pay for employees, remains to be seen.
I work in a company where without a boring meeting you are not going to get absolutely anything from anybody, even if you have a simple question. Working remotely helped a lot as we were forced to use MS Teams then information suddenly started free flowing. Meetings and walkthroughs can be recorded with everyone's permissions and the knowledge builds up. I am not looking forward at going back to the office at all! I'm even considering taking a break and then finding something remote only even with a reduced compensation.
> While the cross-pollination of ideas from different teams and departments is lost, along with interesting and serendipitous discussions
While this always sounds good, in my experience it rarely amounts to anything. A company I used to work for tried to make "hacks" and "hackathons" etc happen. People did make hacks, but they remained as hacks. Products were finished just like any other product is finished: as a result of hard, dedicated work.
While this always sounds good, in my experience it rarely amounts to anything. A company I used to work for tried to make "hacks" and "hackathons" etc happen. People did make hacks, but they remained as hacks. Products were finished just like any other product is finished: as a result of hard, dedicated work.
> While the cross-pollination of ideas from different teams and departments is lost
I don't think this needs to be lost. It just needs to be done more deliberately now if it is desired.
Remote work basically tosses out anything extra beyond your tasks as nothing happens naturally. You then get to craft what you want.
I don't think this needs to be lost. It just needs to be done more deliberately now if it is desired.
Remote work basically tosses out anything extra beyond your tasks as nothing happens naturally. You then get to craft what you want.
You're cross polinating ideas right now! My company has been pushing yammer or some such garbage since it became available. There may finally be a use for it.
Also: not contributing nearly as much to global warming by running my gas-burning engine while I sit in traffic.
I wonder how 50-500 individually heated/cooled homes from 8-6 compares to the energy required to heat/cool a single office/office block?
Covid WFH is a real issue for our new developers. Especially the ones who are fresh out of college. They're missing out on so much institutional knowledge transfer. Especially the kind of monkey-see-monkey-do experience you need to build confidence using tools such as git.
They're also hesitant to ping coworkers and ask for screen sharing time because they can't sense if the more senior developers are working on something. Mentorship has also been difficult when the mentor and mentee cannot work side by side.
Management is looking into alternatives, such as having volunteers come into the office on a rotating basis.
They're also hesitant to ping coworkers and ask for screen sharing time because they can't sense if the more senior developers are working on something. Mentorship has also been difficult when the mentor and mentee cannot work side by side.
Management is looking into alternatives, such as having volunteers come into the office on a rotating basis.
It seems to me that the issues you raised could be addressed through simple technological solutions or better management, assuming your company actually wants to embrace remote work.
New hires afraid to ask for help? Make it clear that it's part of their job. Developers need to see another developer's screen? Screen share over Zoom. Multiple employees don't know how to use a tool? Provide a one-hour presentation. Rinse. Repeat.
New hires afraid to ask for help? Make it clear that it's part of their job. Developers need to see another developer's screen? Screen share over Zoom. Multiple employees don't know how to use a tool? Provide a one-hour presentation. Rinse. Repeat.
If the senior developers are grumbling about not wanting to be in the same room as their coworkers, I wouldn't be surprised if the junior devs feel nervous about asking for a few minutes of their time.
It is the job of senior devs to make new employees feel like part of the team.
It is the job of senior devs to make new employees feel like part of the team.
Even worse when you're in an isolated zoom meeting with a senior dev, and they're talking trash about other developers on your team. There's constructive criticism, and there's macho posturing by fucking douchebags. Even worse when you mention it to management, and they do nothing.
In addition to this, I can wholeheartedly recommend 'screen control sharing' (maybe there's a better name for the category of software I'm referring to?) such as Tuple or Drovio. Being able to pair program with two sets of input devices for the same screen is kind of revolutionary, actually, and has been a key part of collaborating remotely for our team.
They can be solved, but they often aren't. A lot of things that happen implicitly and organically in person need to be explicitly planned and scheduley in a virtual environment.
There should be no hesitation to ping via email. The recipient can respond as quickly as they're able. If they aren't busy that should ideally be within a couple minutes, and the response given will frequently be of higher quality than an off the cuff answer, since external resources can be consulted.
There are many situations in which synchronous feedback won't be possible, wfh or not. For example, when the coworker in question is in a meeting or on vacation. All developers must be able to handle this situation and avoid blockages by switching to another task or an unblocked portion of the same task. The sooner new devs learn to juggle their time and attention in this way, the better.
There are many situations in which synchronous feedback won't be possible, wfh or not. For example, when the coworker in question is in a meeting or on vacation. All developers must be able to handle this situation and avoid blockages by switching to another task or an unblocked portion of the same task. The sooner new devs learn to juggle their time and attention in this way, the better.
For sure. The job I had during March 2020 was difficult because my boss came off as unwelcoming to questions at points (even in the office I could see him open my slack messages and ignore them), which made working much more difficult when you're adapting to new systems. Thankfully, I had some great coworkers who were very welcoming and helped me a lot. If there is anything I learned from that, it's that being welcoming and open to questions from a coworker is extremely important. Sometimes it's easy to get frustrated with a coworker, but being able help them kindly is such a huge skill I will continue to appreciate and reciprocate.
Interesting...I'm not a fan of read receipts and typing indicators for messaging applications for reasons like this. If I need to craft a lengthy reply, it could take a day depending on the schedule. If someone never replies though when it is the de-facto-company messaging platform, that is highly problematic.
A coworker even mentioned how anxiety-inducing typing a lengthy reply is that involves some lengthier research.
I'm not exactly in that position, but I am in the more junior side of things
In my opinion, what helped me the most is: when an issue arises, like something during an on-call, have the person resolving the issue share their screen and talk through the workflow/debugging process, to whomever is being mentored. The tools/logic/reasoning they use during a live debugging session is invaluable knowledge for incoming engineers.
In my opinion, what helped me the most is: when an issue arises, like something during an on-call, have the person resolving the issue share their screen and talk through the workflow/debugging process, to whomever is being mentored. The tools/logic/reasoning they use during a live debugging session is invaluable knowledge for incoming engineers.
Honestly I don't see this (and I'm currently working in a large organization onboarding many newer developers every week). It feels easier to communicate knowledge and practices via Slack and Zoom shared screen sessions than it would be trekking around some cube-farm to find someone who probably isn't there because they're playing roller hockey in the parking lot.
> They're missing out on so much institutional knowledge transfer.
What this sounds like to me is your organization isn't documenting things properly. I know, because I've run into this exact same problem on projects at my organization.
"Send me your coding standard."
"Uh, we don't have one."
"Okay, well what's your code review process for integrating changes?"
"It's not written down, I'll have to walk you through it."
"What's my tasking?"
"I'll need to sit down with you in person to discuss that."
The lack of communication skills in software people has never been more obvious than during the quarantines. It's a serious deficit that needs to be addressed. I mean, what happens when one of these people leave, either for greener pastures, something happens to them, or they just simply retire?
What this sounds like to me is your organization isn't documenting things properly. I know, because I've run into this exact same problem on projects at my organization.
"Send me your coding standard."
"Uh, we don't have one."
"Okay, well what's your code review process for integrating changes?"
"It's not written down, I'll have to walk you through it."
"What's my tasking?"
"I'll need to sit down with you in person to discuss that."
The lack of communication skills in software people has never been more obvious than during the quarantines. It's a serious deficit that needs to be addressed. I mean, what happens when one of these people leave, either for greener pastures, something happens to them, or they just simply retire?
I think that this is something senior devs/admins need to try and influence. I've made it a goal to actively mentor the less experienced on my team (and even some senior admins) during COVID. Sometimes I phrase this as "Check out this stupid thing I did." That lowers everyone's guard, and then you can explain how you solved an issue, or how you dealt with a stakeholder in a professional manner. If us senior folks want to have WFH, then we have an obligation to other employees to help them adjust and learn.
> They're also hesitant to ping coworkers and ask for screen sharing time because they can't sense if the more senior developers are working on something.
My team's solution is for one developer to just ping another when needed and if they don't reply for a while, they are busy. Don't be afraid to ask, but don't take a lack of a quick reply personally.
With Slack, whether they are currently working on something is not important. If they are busy, the message can just sit there until they have time.
My team's solution is for one developer to just ping another when needed and if they don't reply for a while, they are busy. Don't be afraid to ask, but don't take a lack of a quick reply personally.
With Slack, whether they are currently working on something is not important. If they are busy, the message can just sit there until they have time.
My $BIG_CO has access to third-party online training materials for things like Git. I've shamelessly used them to learn quickly about new topics, like GraphQL. They'd be a great tool to fill the gap for junior developers. Even for mid-level developers who want to brush up.
While those are useful. I've learned so much from watching more senior developers use their tools. The things you couldn't ask about because you didn't know it existed. Productivity hacks, IDE shortcuts, custom key mappings, codebase traversal, git commands/shortcuts.
management should explicitly invest senior developers' time
build tutorials for things like git
allocate hours of their week to pairing
encourage juniors to ping seniors. and encourage seniors to respond promptly in efficient ways (written communication compounds over time)
etc
build tutorials for things like git
allocate hours of their week to pairing
encourage juniors to ping seniors. and encourage seniors to respond promptly in efficient ways (written communication compounds over time)
etc
It almost sounds like this has exposed flaws in co-working, where nothing gets written down, people are not inviting others to request help/collaboration, and training has to be done manually.
> where nothing gets written down
This is a big problem. More often than not "institutional knowledge" is short hand for "I'm too lazy to write this down, hope I don't get hit by a bus!"
People pretend like writing wasn't invented thousands of years ago.
This is a big problem. More often than not "institutional knowledge" is short hand for "I'm too lazy to write this down, hope I don't get hit by a bus!"
People pretend like writing wasn't invented thousands of years ago.
I agree that this seems to be an issue for new hires that I've seen.
But I think the blame for this lies in management and the seniors on the team. If a fresh out of college grad feels hesitant to ping a coworker then that coworker is doing something wrong. I'm seeing a lot of companies and teams seem to shift this blame to the WFH situation, where really it is a failure of the team to not integrate and work well together in a shifting situation.
Plenty of companies that are remote first have no issue mentoring junior engineers, so I don't see what the excuse is for companies that are not.
But I think the blame for this lies in management and the seniors on the team. If a fresh out of college grad feels hesitant to ping a coworker then that coworker is doing something wrong. I'm seeing a lot of companies and teams seem to shift this blame to the WFH situation, where really it is a failure of the team to not integrate and work well together in a shifting situation.
Plenty of companies that are remote first have no issue mentoring junior engineers, so I don't see what the excuse is for companies that are not.
> the blame for this lies in management and the seniors on the team
It absolutely does. Point is a lot of industries never formalized training, instead relying on osmosis across teams. That creates a--hopefully temporary--disadvantage for new hires. Again, in some fields.
It absolutely does. Point is a lot of industries never formalized training, instead relying on osmosis across teams. That creates a--hopefully temporary--disadvantage for new hires. Again, in some fields.
Management are fixing it - they are requiring everyone to go back to the office.
There’s no shortage of git training available, go send them on a day or two. I guarantee that they’ll be much better teachers than your senior engineers.
> Covid WFH is a real issue for our new developers
I'm seeing this across the board. Learning curves are shallower. Matt Levine commented on it with respect to the Goldman Sachs B.S.:
"...it's usually that 100 hours of work for a first year analyst is probably closer to 80 hours of work for a second year analyst. But first years aren't learning as quickly working remotely, so the time isn't being shaved down, it's just staying at 100 hours a week."
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-25/matt-l...
I'm seeing this across the board. Learning curves are shallower. Matt Levine commented on it with respect to the Goldman Sachs B.S.:
"...it's usually that 100 hours of work for a first year analyst is probably closer to 80 hours of work for a second year analyst. But first years aren't learning as quickly working remotely, so the time isn't being shaved down, it's just staying at 100 hours a week."
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-25/matt-l...
Something I've noticed without formal study is that people my age (college seniors and recent grads) don't like working from home. I was working at a new internship (8 months, starting January 2020) and the initial working from home was draining, unmotivating, and a bit depressing (that's partially due to being alone during the start of the pandemic).
I thought I was in the minority because all of HN and Reddit seemed to love working from home, but as I spoke more to my peers about it, it seems like they didn't like it for the most part either. I believe that people who have families are more likely to prefer working from home because they have more contact with their loved ones, where as a single new grad has less contact with the people they know.
Now, to be fair, I'm a lot more open to remote work now that the pandemic is more handled since I can at least get some human interaction outside of work. If anything, the thought of working remote when I graduate in May is a bit exciting since I'd be able to move every few months for a little while before deciding where to live.
I thought I was in the minority because all of HN and Reddit seemed to love working from home, but as I spoke more to my peers about it, it seems like they didn't like it for the most part either. I believe that people who have families are more likely to prefer working from home because they have more contact with their loved ones, where as a single new grad has less contact with the people they know.
Now, to be fair, I'm a lot more open to remote work now that the pandemic is more handled since I can at least get some human interaction outside of work. If anything, the thought of working remote when I graduate in May is a bit exciting since I'd be able to move every few months for a little while before deciding where to live.
What you're seeing is the demographics that are over-represented on different platforms.
Working people in their 20s mostly live in cheap apartments whereas a huge chunk of Reddit lives with their parents (if they're employed at all) and HN skews older and wealthier to the point where people have nice houses in nice suburbs or can justify a higher end apartment.
Working people in their 20s mostly live in cheap apartments whereas a huge chunk of Reddit lives with their parents (if they're employed at all) and HN skews older and wealthier to the point where people have nice houses in nice suburbs or can justify a higher end apartment.
> a huge chunk of Reddit lives with their parents
This seems lost on most people but is painfully clear if you read post histories. For instance, most of /r/childfree (an interesting topic no doubt) is a younger sister overexposed to her parents' excitement (because she's living at home) about older sister's kid. Most of /r/QAnonCasualties is the same sort of angst, directed at parents. Most city subs are the same way, edgy "right wing" guy turns out to live with his dad, who he's parroting. It's incredible that the site is taken any more seriously than 4Chan; there ought to be some great business studies on Reddit's "teflon" nature.
This seems lost on most people but is painfully clear if you read post histories. For instance, most of /r/childfree (an interesting topic no doubt) is a younger sister overexposed to her parents' excitement (because she's living at home) about older sister's kid. Most of /r/QAnonCasualties is the same sort of angst, directed at parents. Most city subs are the same way, edgy "right wing" guy turns out to live with his dad, who he's parroting. It's incredible that the site is taken any more seriously than 4Chan; there ought to be some great business studies on Reddit's "teflon" nature.
[deleted]
Totally relate to your experiences. I think WFH while living alone is super hard! You have to take a lot of responsibility for your life that you normally don't have to. I.e you won't see anyone in person unless intentionally plan to leave the house. Its surprising how big of an effect in person meetings can have!
I always wondered how much of the push towards open offices and that sort of working conditions was driven, or perhaps, enabled, by recent grads who were accustomed to hot-desking in the library and working in study groups.
Sounds like an place I wouldn't want to go back to, either. If my office environment was anything even close to that, I think I'd be looking for another job. I actually look forward to going back in and seeing people again, but only like twice a week.
I've come to hate being in my house, having worked from home for 3 years. My brain just associates it with work. I haven't got a very big house. I resent it so much I don't even have the will to do maintenance and repairs. I can't wait for on-site interviews to resume and find a job in an office.
EDIT: I've never worked at a job/office as hellish as the post describes. Better office jobs than that exist.
EDIT: I've never worked at a job/office as hellish as the post describes. Better office jobs than that exist.
unsolicited advice- please pertain work to a desk/ one place of the house, and not spread it to the entire house.
This can help restrict resentment to that one spot and not your entire place.
That’s exactly what I do but I still associate the entire house with work. Having a small house doesn’t help :/
Many people have decided in the last couple of months that it's safe to restart the war on remote working. I think the attacks are likely to get increasingly intense and blunt.
And, as a matter of fact, we now have the proof that remote work is efficient at large scale in our industry. It shatters all the false ideas about loss of productivity, lack of communication. I never communicated as efficiently as now as opposed to when I was in my open space, always disturbed by subjects that did not concern me.
I don’t think we have this proof? At best, we have evidence it works ‘well enough.’ There are still people who hate online meetings, who have a negative physical reaction to it and are unable to engage. The people playing online video games during the day I run into who have to go afk for a few moments to ‘get a work call’ are likely to have reduced productivity. (Probably double for kids who are doing online school.)
I also have seen productivity issues between two office locations that are suddenly resolved by having someone travel to the other site for a week. Sometimes this is even followed up with an writeup about the sudden revelations gleaned from the visit.
On the other hand, I’ve also seen engineers take vacation days so they can be heads down on a project they care about. So, I’m not sure what the ideal situation is, exactly.
I also have seen productivity issues between two office locations that are suddenly resolved by having someone travel to the other site for a week. Sometimes this is even followed up with an writeup about the sudden revelations gleaned from the visit.
On the other hand, I’ve also seen engineers take vacation days so they can be heads down on a project they care about. So, I’m not sure what the ideal situation is, exactly.
[deleted]
It ought to be noticeable in terms of output if individuals play video games instead of working. If it's not, maybe they just manage their time differently than you expect, but still effectively.
If it is not noticeable, then it probably means that their work is some kind of bullshit, so why would they waste their time doing nothing instead of gaming ? I mean when your job is fullfulling you don't need to do something else during your work hours.
There are already employers committing to supporting remote. If your company isn’t one of them, and you need it, change employers. Frankly I want not only to go back to the office but also to not have to work with remote people, so I hope my employer does not allow remote and all of the hardcore WFHers leave the company.
vote with your butt!
they can't make you put your butt in a seat!
they can't make you put your butt in a seat!
It's a combination of some companies that want to return to mostly office and individuals who really want to go back to an office for various reasons, including social ones, who are afraid they'll be some combination of empty and teams having focused "off sites."
And those of us who want to work remote will take our services elsewhere, as there’ll be plenty more places available to work remote than we’re before even if FAANG goes back to the office forever.
The main reason I hope WFH is here to stay, is because there's no tech hubs left that are livable for families.
Austin and Denver use to qualify. But an out of control real estate market, basically makes it impossible to buy a home there. Every listing gets 20 all cash, no contingency offers for hundreds of thousands over list price.
Unless we embrace full remote work, the only people who will be able to work in the tech industry are either those who bought property in a tech hub before 2020. Or the young and single who are unencumbered and willing to live in small expensive apartments.
Insisting that engineers live in the Bay Area or Seattle or NYC or Austin will essentially lock out a huge pool of talent. Blame America's dysfunctional housing market and NIMBY culture. Tech generates a ton of wealth, but essentially all that wealth gets slurped up by land owners in tech hubs. The only solution to break the cycle is industry wide embrace of full remote work.
Austin and Denver use to qualify. But an out of control real estate market, basically makes it impossible to buy a home there. Every listing gets 20 all cash, no contingency offers for hundreds of thousands over list price.
Unless we embrace full remote work, the only people who will be able to work in the tech industry are either those who bought property in a tech hub before 2020. Or the young and single who are unencumbered and willing to live in small expensive apartments.
Insisting that engineers live in the Bay Area or Seattle or NYC or Austin will essentially lock out a huge pool of talent. Blame America's dysfunctional housing market and NIMBY culture. Tech generates a ton of wealth, but essentially all that wealth gets slurped up by land owners in tech hubs. The only solution to break the cycle is industry wide embrace of full remote work.
Being in an office is useless unless you:
-Need to synthesize lots of stuff daily -Truly enjoy being around your coworkers -Have a terrible homeworking environment
If you just have jiras and you sit down, drink some coffee, music, code, chat people once every few hours to ask about something... it's useless lol.
Think of all the wasted energy going to and from the office, to do the same thing but less efficiently. So dumb.
-Need to synthesize lots of stuff daily -Truly enjoy being around your coworkers -Have a terrible homeworking environment
If you just have jiras and you sit down, drink some coffee, music, code, chat people once every few hours to ask about something... it's useless lol.
Think of all the wasted energy going to and from the office, to do the same thing but less efficiently. So dumb.
I personally really like the chatting with coworkers and I find it helps refresh me between tasks at work. It's hard to replicate "water-cooler" or "coffee-maker" talk remotely, but I imagine a lot of people don't feel the same way.
That's actually something I'd love to see. A good way to replicate water-cooler talk remotely. I don't see a good way to do it initially, but I'm interested in the idea.
That's actually something I'd love to see. A good way to replicate water-cooler talk remotely. I don't see a good way to do it initially, but I'm interested in the idea.
I agree, but it's a small price to pay. Maybe worth going in every month or so just for that.
Back when I was the boss, long before covid was a thing, I let people work from home because I liked working from home. One thing I did that I've not seen many other people do, but which really helped make it work, was to get everyone to formalize their working time by announcing their virtual arrival at and departure from work every day. So the first thing everyone would do everyday is send an email to the team with the subject, "I'm in", with a few very brief sentences saying what they were working on and hoping to accomplish that day. When they were done for the day, they would do the same thing with "I'm out" and again a few brief sentences saying what they had actually done. the guideline was that they should spend no more than five minutes, and probably more like one or two, composing these emails.
This policy had a dramatically positive effect, including on me. The overhead was negligible but it made it harder to slack off because that would be more immediately visible to the entire team. It also made it clear when one could expect timely responses to emails sent out during the day. And just forcing everyone to actually think about and what they were working on and rendering that into words made it obvious when there were organizational problems and tasks were not being distributed effectively.
This policy had a dramatically positive effect, including on me. The overhead was negligible but it made it harder to slack off because that would be more immediately visible to the entire team. It also made it clear when one could expect timely responses to emails sent out during the day. And just forcing everyone to actually think about and what they were working on and rendering that into words made it obvious when there were organizational problems and tasks were not being distributed effectively.
This is a tough problem, because some people do work much better from home and aren’t particularly interested in interacting outside of pure work discussions.
However, some people’s productivity is significantly worse from home (mine, for example,) even if it’s their primary choice. While I wish work was as simple as treating everyone as responsible adults, I’ve experienced working with well-entrenched coworkers who barely contribute at all, and whose productivity is weakened by their inability to interact in-person.
Further, even the heads down antisocial developer needs to communicate with a project/product manager or a support engineer on a regular basis. In this situation, talking in person seems to help communication between coworkers that often make too many assumptions otherwise.
However, some people’s productivity is significantly worse from home (mine, for example,) even if it’s their primary choice. While I wish work was as simple as treating everyone as responsible adults, I’ve experienced working with well-entrenched coworkers who barely contribute at all, and whose productivity is weakened by their inability to interact in-person.
Further, even the heads down antisocial developer needs to communicate with a project/product manager or a support engineer on a regular basis. In this situation, talking in person seems to help communication between coworkers that often make too many assumptions otherwise.
Amazon is bringing back their office employees as the default operating mode; citing inefficiencies in the creative process.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/31/amazon-expects-some-employee...
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/31/amazon-expects-some-employee...
Is Amazon really a model company?
With all of the horror stories about their warehouses I have to imagine the offices aren't great either. Like I would expect them to be as miserable as Amazon leadership thinks it can get away with.
With all of the horror stories about their warehouses I have to imagine the offices aren't great either. Like I would expect them to be as miserable as Amazon leadership thinks it can get away with.
From what I've heard there are nice parts of Amazon (as an office employee), but that on the whole they don't really see it as a priority.
There's the fairly normal things like charging for lunch at the office canteen (fine, but for a big tech company this is a little different), the slightly odd things like charging for parking at their office (seems like an easy win to not bother?), and then there's the downright crappy ("your role entitles you to 4GB RAM in your laptop, even though Excel needs much more, if you want more buy it yourself").
I think there are better companies to use as role models for creating a good working environment.
There's the fairly normal things like charging for lunch at the office canteen (fine, but for a big tech company this is a little different), the slightly odd things like charging for parking at their office (seems like an easy win to not bother?), and then there's the downright crappy ("your role entitles you to 4GB RAM in your laptop, even though Excel needs much more, if you want more buy it yourself").
I think there are better companies to use as role models for creating a good working environment.
A lot of the big companies (Amazon, Google, etc) are pretty poor model for...almost everything.
While they may have been great at some point, they're largely carried by a few segments of their businesses and can no longer really fail. Google is mostly carried by their success in ads, and most of the non-ads things they pump out + the way they do it, is mediocre at best, extremely inefficient at worse. Their technological innovations are mostly meant to support these inefficiencies. Sure some stuff they do is cool, but they do a LOT of stuff. Most isn't. The same applies to all these other companies.
While they may have been great at some point, they're largely carried by a few segments of their businesses and can no longer really fail. Google is mostly carried by their success in ads, and most of the non-ads things they pump out + the way they do it, is mediocre at best, extremely inefficient at worse. Their technological innovations are mostly meant to support these inefficiencies. Sure some stuff they do is cool, but they do a LOT of stuff. Most isn't. The same applies to all these other companies.
beatings will continue until I see that creative spark light up again
I'm sorry I don't understand. What beatings/punishments?
I believe it's a reference to the phrase "The beatings will continue until morale improves" - https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/371325/origin-of...
The one where they make you waste 2 hours of your day traveling in potentially dangerous/uncomfortable/inconvenient circumstances so that you can physically sit a desk and do the same thing you would do at home, all in the name of optics.
I believe the parent is most likely referring to all the costs that are externalized on to the employee related to e.g., commuting; the office-induced inefficiencies related to lack of control of one's work environment; poor communication that relies on face-face happenstance vs intentional and document oriented exchanges; and the executive-induced mal-control syndrome, such as 'if I can't see you you aren't working' kinds of things.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Eric_WVGG(1)
Can't say I'm surprised by this.
You'd think that the world's larges cloud provider, would have the tooling and policies in place to deal with this issue (creative inefficiencies). Because that's literally what they're asking their customers to deal with when they sign on to the concept of cloud-computing.
You'd think that the world's larges cloud provider, would have the tooling and policies in place to deal with this issue (creative inefficiencies). Because that's literally what they're asking their customers to deal with when they sign on to the concept of cloud-computing.
Copying from a less popular thread
>The conspiracy theorist in me believes this is more about stimulating the local economy around tech jobs then actual productivity. Millions of people essentially work in support roles in cafes or bars that cater to office workers. Even auto mechanics will eventually start to lose work as less people need to drive.
I seriously never want to return to the office. It's useless. I don't miss spending hours a week trying to commute to and from work.
Has anyone ever thought working in an office actually spreads illness ? At most you can go to a concert once a week, you need to come into work 5 days a week exposing you to various illnesses
>The conspiracy theorist in me believes this is more about stimulating the local economy around tech jobs then actual productivity. Millions of people essentially work in support roles in cafes or bars that cater to office workers. Even auto mechanics will eventually start to lose work as less people need to drive.
I seriously never want to return to the office. It's useless. I don't miss spending hours a week trying to commute to and from work.
Has anyone ever thought working in an office actually spreads illness ? At most you can go to a concert once a week, you need to come into work 5 days a week exposing you to various illnesses
I’m completely the opposite to be honest.
I’ve found working from home lonely and isolating, and am badly missing the structure of getting up, showered and going into an office!
For people at a certain stage of life, I’m sure working from home is great, but have some empathy for those of us it sucks for.
I’ve found working from home lonely and isolating, and am badly missing the structure of getting up, showered and going into an office!
For people at a certain stage of life, I’m sure working from home is great, but have some empathy for those of us it sucks for.
> For people at a certain stage of life
Nobody seems to discuss this, but yeah for me working from home means working from my bedroom, the only room I can really work in in my small shared apartment. It definitely affects my productivity.
On the other hand, I've basically stopped getting sick. Open office plans are very bad for certain types of people, and not just those who struggle with distraction, so still a net positive for me
Nobody seems to discuss this, but yeah for me working from home means working from my bedroom, the only room I can really work in in my small shared apartment. It definitely affects my productivity.
On the other hand, I've basically stopped getting sick. Open office plans are very bad for certain types of people, and not just those who struggle with distraction, so still a net positive for me
The long-term effects of not getting sick might be an issue as regular exposure helps the immune system.
i really enjoy working from home and will change jobs if forced to go back in.
I know what you're talking about though, my wife has friends that are wfh now and that, along with the general isolation of the pandemic, is having a serious effect on them.
I think when this is over there will be various compromises that will probably not work out very well. If WFH works for you then it's great, if it doesn't then it's miserable. There's not a lot of middle ground.
a good compromise leaves everybody mad. - Calvin and Hobbes
I know what you're talking about though, my wife has friends that are wfh now and that, along with the general isolation of the pandemic, is having a serious effect on them.
I think when this is over there will be various compromises that will probably not work out very well. If WFH works for you then it's great, if it doesn't then it's miserable. There's not a lot of middle ground.
a good compromise leaves everybody mad. - Calvin and Hobbes
Ditto for me. This is the loneliest I've ever been and worst my mental health has ever been. I had no idea this is how I would react to remote work, but I'm counting the days until I get to separate home and work again.
I hear you, but remember this is pandemic-enforced WFH, it's not normal.
Non-pandemic remote work gives you more time to socialize out and about with friends and family, travel (and maybe even work there), and do all sorts of fun things to relax and recharge that we can't really do right now because of the pandemic.
I'm pro-WFH/anti-RTO simply because I want us all to have the choice. Before the pandemic it was all office, during the pandemic it's all remote, and now it feels like the pendulum is swinging all the way back to all office, instead of landing in the middle ground of individual choice.
Non-pandemic remote work gives you more time to socialize out and about with friends and family, travel (and maybe even work there), and do all sorts of fun things to relax and recharge that we can't really do right now because of the pandemic.
I'm pro-WFH/anti-RTO simply because I want us all to have the choice. Before the pandemic it was all office, during the pandemic it's all remote, and now it feels like the pendulum is swinging all the way back to all office, instead of landing in the middle ground of individual choice.
I miss the ability to be in an office, but I must say: my biggest obstacle to productivity during COVID-19 WFH has been COVID-19 related stress and depression, and related familial issues.
I thought WFH was doomed to be low productivity and highly distracting. And to be honest, it is. But so was the office environment. On a good WFH day, I will be way more productive than any day in an office could ever be.
The fact that some companies are deciding to not offer permanent WFH, especially as people are trying to deal with familial issues during the COVID-19 pandemic, is going to do some harm to them, in my opinion.
I thought WFH was doomed to be low productivity and highly distracting. And to be honest, it is. But so was the office environment. On a good WFH day, I will be way more productive than any day in an office could ever be.
The fact that some companies are deciding to not offer permanent WFH, especially as people are trying to deal with familial issues during the COVID-19 pandemic, is going to do some harm to them, in my opinion.
I've been at a remote-first company for nine years now. I'll go back to an office as an absolute last resort. All of the wins the author described just begin to touch the surface of what's available to you. Once you can do your work even slightly asynchronously the quality of life improvements are just too overwhelming to go back.
This comes down to individual preferences, but does anyone prefer going to the office? Here's my list of reasons why:
- Better relationships with co-workers. I enjoyed smalltalk, getting coffee, lunch, or drinks afterwards with them. It was also easier to interact with others outside your immediate team.
- Separation of a work environment and home environment.
- If I had a question, it is more likely and quicker to get answered in person instead of over slack/email/zoom.
- Had fewer meetings
- Company dependent but we got free food and other perks.
- Better relationships with co-workers. I enjoyed smalltalk, getting coffee, lunch, or drinks afterwards with them. It was also easier to interact with others outside your immediate team.
- Separation of a work environment and home environment.
- If I had a question, it is more likely and quicker to get answered in person instead of over slack/email/zoom.
- Had fewer meetings
- Company dependent but we got free food and other perks.
> it is more likely and quicker to get answered in person instead of over slack/email/zoom.
It was more likely quicker because you felt like you could just walk to the person's desk and interrupt whatever they were doing to demand that they solve your problem.
It was more likely quicker because you felt like you could just walk to the person's desk and interrupt whatever they were doing to demand that they solve your problem.
I keep in mind others may be focused on something and interrupting them would be detrimental. When wfh, it is easier to miss responding back to a quick question and I’m guilty of it myself.
I am wondering what kind of companies and office environments people who prefer working at the office are at.
I work somewhere that requires a ~1.5 hour miserable commute to get to; unresolvable without paying significantly more for smaller/older/inferior housing closer to the office.
The office itself is your typical dystopian Dilbertesque environment - I'd say this is par for course for most "old school" companies where tech is a cost center. Atmosphere itself is pretty dreary, everyone must wear at least business casual (dress shirt, dress pants, dress shoes).
I've been to the offices of some Silicon Valley style tech companies and the atmosphere and environment could not be more different from mine. I know grass is greener from the other side, and eventually work is work, but I could imagine myself enjoying being at the office much more in such a place.
I work somewhere that requires a ~1.5 hour miserable commute to get to; unresolvable without paying significantly more for smaller/older/inferior housing closer to the office.
The office itself is your typical dystopian Dilbertesque environment - I'd say this is par for course for most "old school" companies where tech is a cost center. Atmosphere itself is pretty dreary, everyone must wear at least business casual (dress shirt, dress pants, dress shoes).
I've been to the offices of some Silicon Valley style tech companies and the atmosphere and environment could not be more different from mine. I know grass is greener from the other side, and eventually work is work, but I could imagine myself enjoying being at the office much more in such a place.
> I could imagine myself enjoying being at the office much more in such a place.
It gets old too. There is a reason why companies create an environment like that and it's not to make you genuinely happy. I hope this dip into remote work makes people move somewhere they like, being able to create a work from home environment, work (remotely) for a company that doesn't make them miserable and focus on the things that really matter in life.
It gets old too. There is a reason why companies create an environment like that and it's not to make you genuinely happy. I hope this dip into remote work makes people move somewhere they like, being able to create a work from home environment, work (remotely) for a company that doesn't make them miserable and focus on the things that really matter in life.
While I enjoy working from home (fewer distractions and interruptions) I miss the social aspect of the office. I consider many of my colleagues friends and having the occasional beer after work, coffee maker chit-chat and common lunch breaks added a lot of texture to my life as a "worker".
The office is such an archaic appendage of manual labor and management’s desire to oversee and micromanage it.
Biggest for me was "I don't actually like my job, but it's easy and pays well, and working from home gives me the time to pursue other interests so I don't feel the need to look for a new job to escape the boredom".
Even that didn't last too long though, and I ended up finding another job after a few years of working from home.
Even that didn't last too long though, and I ended up finding another job after a few years of working from home.
Remote work (at least in industries where it's easy to do) as a norm is likely inevitable at this point and companies that push back against it will likely have to change their stances sooner or later. At least as long as tech workers are in more demand than there is supply. If we have another dotcom crash though, things could flip around.
What I find unfortunate however is how the high level discussion (yes or no on remote work at all) is preventing meaningful debates on how to best do it, and how to be inclusive of all types of people. The old model was that everyone had to have butts in seat even if it didn't work for them. The new model is that everyone will be remove even if THAT doesn't work for them.
"But most companies are giving people a choice!". Not really: the thing about remote is that "one remote, everyone's remote", at least at a team level. As soon as one team member is remote, everyone needs to deal with Meet/Zoom/whatever, conversations all need to happen in front of a screen, you need physical whiteboard alternatives (or at least use devices that project whiteboards), you need to share your screens, you need to be deliberate about all discussions, etc. Some people have real personal issues that makes these things very difficult for them. We're trading one set of challenges for another.
I find that remote works better when everyone's remote in a team, and vice versa for in person. But the counter argument is that talent isn't fungible, making this kind of split impractical.
More importantly, right now it's very hard to have these discussions at all, because any talk about how to optimize for the various preferences/needs is getting pushed back as if remote was a no brainer that's better for 100% of people with no tradeoffs.
Hopefully once people who want to be remote no longer have to be afraid they'll be forced back into the office, we can move on and talk about how to make it better.
What I find unfortunate however is how the high level discussion (yes or no on remote work at all) is preventing meaningful debates on how to best do it, and how to be inclusive of all types of people. The old model was that everyone had to have butts in seat even if it didn't work for them. The new model is that everyone will be remove even if THAT doesn't work for them.
"But most companies are giving people a choice!". Not really: the thing about remote is that "one remote, everyone's remote", at least at a team level. As soon as one team member is remote, everyone needs to deal with Meet/Zoom/whatever, conversations all need to happen in front of a screen, you need physical whiteboard alternatives (or at least use devices that project whiteboards), you need to share your screens, you need to be deliberate about all discussions, etc. Some people have real personal issues that makes these things very difficult for them. We're trading one set of challenges for another.
I find that remote works better when everyone's remote in a team, and vice versa for in person. But the counter argument is that talent isn't fungible, making this kind of split impractical.
More importantly, right now it's very hard to have these discussions at all, because any talk about how to optimize for the various preferences/needs is getting pushed back as if remote was a no brainer that's better for 100% of people with no tradeoffs.
Hopefully once people who want to be remote no longer have to be afraid they'll be forced back into the office, we can move on and talk about how to make it better.
> Do not have to go to work sick, because they act like you murdered 30 children if you call in sick.
> Do not have to be exposed to multiple sick coworkers at any given time.
This is a really important one and something that occurred to me recently. Now that we've all established that we can, in fact, work from home just fine, we should at the very, very least stop the ridiculous practice of coming into work sick. Prior to COVID it was perfectly acceptable for someone to be in meetings or sitting next to you with a cold in full flow. This wasn't something you could complain about. In fact, it was more likely someone would complain if they took time off for having a cold.
I agree wholeheartedly with all of the author's other points. At this point, going back to the office every day would be an enormous regression. I don't want to work for such a place ever again.
This is a really important one and something that occurred to me recently. Now that we've all established that we can, in fact, work from home just fine, we should at the very, very least stop the ridiculous practice of coming into work sick. Prior to COVID it was perfectly acceptable for someone to be in meetings or sitting next to you with a cold in full flow. This wasn't something you could complain about. In fact, it was more likely someone would complain if they took time off for having a cold.
I agree wholeheartedly with all of the author's other points. At this point, going back to the office every day would be an enormous regression. I don't want to work for such a place ever again.
The thing that baffled me as I read this point is that the choice set when sick is (a) go to work and work, or (b) stay home and work. What we should be discussing is not working at all when you're sick. Rest and get better.
I can't be the only one that finds this odd?
I can't be the only one that finds this odd?
If I have a cold, it's annoying and makes it hard to breathe but it doesn't prevent me from working. Getting a few colds a year while working in an office is normal. I'm more than happy to work with a cold, I'd just prefer to do it from home than at an office where I'm probably going to share it with at least one other person.
If I have to make a mad dash to the toilet every few minutes, then working isn't practical. If I'm burning up with fever and feel like a truck hit me, working isn't practical.
If I have to make a mad dash to the toilet every few minutes, then working isn't practical. If I'm burning up with fever and feel like a truck hit me, working isn't practical.
If you're too sick to work, then don't work. That should be simple. When you have a bad flu or tonsillitis or something, there is no choice. You are in bed.
This is about those times when you can still work. Most people come into work whenever they can, even if they are carrying an infectious virus. That needs to stop. If you are sick but can still work, you should work from home.
This is about those times when you can still work. Most people come into work whenever they can, even if they are carrying an infectious virus. That needs to stop. If you are sick but can still work, you should work from home.
I think it's mainly an American thing where sick leave comes out your holiday AIUI.
Once we do get back to "normal" I wonder how the job market will change for me, someone who switched to remote work prior to the pandemic and have no desire to go back to an office ever again. I've seen companies that have decided to just switch to remote on a permanent basis(or at least become more open to remote workers if the company itself doesn't go full remote) and I've seen lots of people who don't want to go back to the office after their taste of remote work. Will I see a wider variety of opportunities and open positions as more companies offer more remote roles, or will the market for remote work becomes squeezed as people decided they want to find new remote jobs rather than go back to the office. Of course it could also balance out I suppose.
I work on a beautiful campus with amazing work facilities and it is only 2 miles from my house. We have fitness facilities, walking trails, tons of food options, etc. But having to go back and work there instead of working from my house is giving me major anxiety. I do not want to return to the office, at all. It's not my coworkers or boss, they are all fantastic. I just love being able to see my wife and kids more frequently. I love using my own bathroom. I love being able to roll out of bed and start working instead of having to get ready for the day and then riding my bike to and from work. I love working from home, I'm almost in tears thinking about having to go back to campus.
Oh, and also I have 1 gigabit internet service to my house which is much faster than what I had at work ;-)
Oh, and also I have 1 gigabit internet service to my house which is much faster than what I had at work ;-)
>Oh, and also I have 1 gigabit internet service to my house which is much faster than what I had at work ;-)
Same. I am fortunate t have gigabit in a very rural town as we are 2 blocks from US40 which apparently has some serious fiber runnning along side it, it's MUCH faster than the internet at work which is wonderful for work-related searches as we often have to research what something is throughout the day to figure out what it is and when you have a hundred something people crammed onto some crappy connection a simple Google query can sometimes take several seconds just to load when people are using their work computer for trying to stream something (a big no-no) bogging down the speeds for everyone.
Same. I am fortunate t have gigabit in a very rural town as we are 2 blocks from US40 which apparently has some serious fiber runnning along side it, it's MUCH faster than the internet at work which is wonderful for work-related searches as we often have to research what something is throughout the day to figure out what it is and when you have a hundred something people crammed onto some crappy connection a simple Google query can sometimes take several seconds just to load when people are using their work computer for trying to stream something (a big no-no) bogging down the speeds for everyone.
This is why co-working spaces may be the next "office". Companies are cancelling their leases left and right. For many software companies, this is likely the way it will unfold. Why pay huge amounts to rent an office space, when you can do without at no cost.
My boss remarked how surprised he was on how well our team worked remotely. But I suspect he'll want us back in the office anyway.
> ox tail and greens that smell worse than burnt popcorn.
Sorry, but ox tails and greens are awesome. And there is a shortage at the moment so I don't eat it as often as I used to. Damn hipsters are even gentrifying Caribbean foods.
Sorry, but ox tails and greens are awesome. And there is a shortage at the moment so I don't eat it as often as I used to. Damn hipsters are even gentrifying Caribbean foods.
Yeah this dude is missing out. I'm married to a Trini woman and her and her family's cooking is like 87% of the reason why.
In the fancy offices, the situation is flipped, with the HVAC freezing in the summer and sweltering in the winter. This is actually much worse, because everyone has to dress for the opposite during their commute.
People focusing on specifics about his particular workspace are very much missing the point. People calling him antisocial, as if he's somehow defective are very much missing the point.
Look, you might enjoy working in an office. That's fine, I don't think anybody's saying you're not allowed to return to an office. But for many people, probably most people, productivity is lower in an office, despite more time being spent "working." This has been demonstrated and reported on many, many, many times. To say that you don't care, you enjoy yourself more in an office is fine, but it doesn't mean an office is better for everyone, or even for you.
I have friends, I have family, I have activities in my neighborhood, and I would gladly never see any coworker in person ever again for the extra hour per day I can spend with my family and friends vs commuting. That doesn't make me anti-social any more than it does Mr Mercer. My office didn't suck, but I think the entire concept of a shared office kinda sucks. It's just so normalized that we don't realize how much it sucks until we step away for a year.
I mean, I was spending an hour a day to relocate to a place where I could be overall less productive for my company. Maybe some days I enjoyed myself more, sure, but that's an separate issue. If you want to spend time with coworkers, go ahead! Just don't pretend it's providing value for your company.
Look, you might enjoy working in an office. That's fine, I don't think anybody's saying you're not allowed to return to an office. But for many people, probably most people, productivity is lower in an office, despite more time being spent "working." This has been demonstrated and reported on many, many, many times. To say that you don't care, you enjoy yourself more in an office is fine, but it doesn't mean an office is better for everyone, or even for you.
I have friends, I have family, I have activities in my neighborhood, and I would gladly never see any coworker in person ever again for the extra hour per day I can spend with my family and friends vs commuting. That doesn't make me anti-social any more than it does Mr Mercer. My office didn't suck, but I think the entire concept of a shared office kinda sucks. It's just so normalized that we don't realize how much it sucks until we step away for a year.
I mean, I was spending an hour a day to relocate to a place where I could be overall less productive for my company. Maybe some days I enjoyed myself more, sure, but that's an separate issue. If you want to spend time with coworkers, go ahead! Just don't pretend it's providing value for your company.
My employer sold their office because they were saving so much money having everyone work from home
My employer has been adding so many customer support positions and basing those in the office that we cannot bring the developer teams back into the office. That, combined with an INCREASE in productivity since working from home the plan for now is for all of the software dev teams to continue to work from home while the customer support team swells to occupy the whole space of the office.
But are they passing on the savings to the employees? Not everyone has the same internet access or home office amenities.
Hahaha, of course they aren't. Really, you should be able to calculate how much they paid for your facilities need (square footage of your workspace, connection, IT equipment, etc) and it should be directly reflected in your salary.....
My office is now in storage because they canceled the lease. When I get back to the office the developers and sys/net admins will be hotdesking until they can figure out what to do with us.
I don't think I have worked in an office this disgusting before in my life, I would have left. I live in a tropical country where people are clean and care about hygiene which probably has a lot to do with it because otherwise you just end up having roaches everywhere. I get the sense people higher in the northern hemisphere get away with a lot of disgusting stuff because they don't get infested with roaches and flies right away.
On the other hand alot of the other points stand
On the other hand alot of the other points stand
Why is nobody mentioning their digestive system?
Humans fart, it's healthy and remote works makes it viable. I never want to go back a) holding farts b) farting on colleagues.
Throwaway for obvious reasons.
Humans fart, it's healthy and remote works makes it viable. I never want to go back a) holding farts b) farting on colleagues.
Throwaway for obvious reasons.
I'm seven years into working remotely (from home) this week. While I don't miss some of the things the authored mentioned, the pros were greater than the cons since I worked for a company that rented out a snazzy office at CIC in Cambridge, MA. In a CODIV-19-world, I'm not sure I'd ever want to be in those sort of close quarters again, though a change of scenery would be nice!
[deleted]
Ugh, office air conditioning - ours is like that too.
And the gents restroom <barf>
Please let me work from home from now on, I'll even take a small cut in salary!
And the gents restroom <barf>
Please let me work from home from now on, I'll even take a small cut in salary!
Your employer will be saving on rent, utilities, insurance, etc. Don't offer to cut your pay.
I wouldn't accept a pay cut - there should be enough companies to work at that realize that WFH post-pandemic is in their interest.
For the record, I have no intention of returning to the office either.
For the record, I have no intention of returning to the office either.
I wonder how much of the split is going to be down to parents vs singles. As a single person, I have seen more pushing from managers with kids to go remote, singles or DINKs who live in small apartments in cities are more open to a flexible life style. 3-2 weeks, 60%-40% weeks, whatever people end up calling them seem to be quite a good compromise, but i can see many working 5 days in the office.
There are still a lot of people who treat work seen in a higher regard than work complexity. Someone who is proactive and seen to be, pair programming, mentoring, conducting interviews etc. This can all be done remote, but there might be an advantage to going to the office.
As much as I want to believe that people will work together and both approaches can work, office types will most likely cut out remote types if it isn’t easy to get on with work. I have seen this before COVID, I can see it happening again.
When it comes to it, if you pr whole team is remote, would you feel forced into staying at home and vice versa?
There are still a lot of people who treat work seen in a higher regard than work complexity. Someone who is proactive and seen to be, pair programming, mentoring, conducting interviews etc. This can all be done remote, but there might be an advantage to going to the office.
As much as I want to believe that people will work together and both approaches can work, office types will most likely cut out remote types if it isn’t easy to get on with work. I have seen this before COVID, I can see it happening again.
When it comes to it, if you pr whole team is remote, would you feel forced into staying at home and vice versa?
The thing is, 3/2 hybrid is the worst type of compromise - it still forces you to live close enough to the office to commute and it forces the company to maintain offices as well. It doesn't really provide the major benefit of WFH or from having people there.
(Having said that, being able to skip days and stay at home when you feel like it should be the default.)
(Having said that, being able to skip days and stay at home when you feel like it should be the default.)
Not only would I not like to go back to the office described in this article, I would have left ages ago (and am lucky enough to be able to choose that).
One interesting thing about all this should-we shouldn't-we discussion about offices is that it gives everyone a bit better view - positive and negative - of how different people work lives can be.
One interesting thing about all this should-we shouldn't-we discussion about offices is that it gives everyone a bit better view - positive and negative - of how different people work lives can be.
[deleted]
I was fully remote for several years before the pandemic. It’s the only way I ever want to work again.
I’m a copywriter, so sometimes I need time to marinate on an idea. If I left the office to take a 90 minute bike ride in the middle of the day, no one would believe it had anything to do with work. But that’s where I get a lot of ideas and generally just recharge my brain.
Same goes for power naps. Some offices have “nap pods” or whatever, but I would feel self conscious napping at work. Whereas at home, if I’m feeling run down, I can take twenty minutes for a nap or meditation whenever I need to.
My attitude has always been that if my work isn’t up to snuff or I’m missing deadlines, I would be open to suggestions about my workflow.... but as long as I maintain a high level of output and quality, I will continue doing things my way, bike rides, naps, and all.
I’m a copywriter, so sometimes I need time to marinate on an idea. If I left the office to take a 90 minute bike ride in the middle of the day, no one would believe it had anything to do with work. But that’s where I get a lot of ideas and generally just recharge my brain.
Same goes for power naps. Some offices have “nap pods” or whatever, but I would feel self conscious napping at work. Whereas at home, if I’m feeling run down, I can take twenty minutes for a nap or meditation whenever I need to.
My attitude has always been that if my work isn’t up to snuff or I’m missing deadlines, I would be open to suggestions about my workflow.... but as long as I maintain a high level of output and quality, I will continue doing things my way, bike rides, naps, and all.
Working from home means setting boundaries at home. I don’t want to set those boundaries at home.
I’d rather set those boundaries in a workplace. Maybe it’s sometimes hard to set those boundaries in the workplace, but to me it feels like the appropriate place. My home is not, and will never be, an office.
I’d rather set those boundaries in a workplace. Maybe it’s sometimes hard to set those boundaries in the workplace, but to me it feels like the appropriate place. My home is not, and will never be, an office.
Maybe it's different for me because I have a dedicated work room but I don't really get that mindset. I love being at home, being able to switch between work and personal life multiple times a day, it's so liberating.
[deleted]
The reality is the WFH scenario is subjective. Depends on your seniority, industry, role, and other factors. For kids coming out of college, how do they get mentorship? You're lying to yourself if you think apprenticeship means zoom calls and retreats. The model doesn't work for most companies, but it sure feels good to get that first shot of WFH freedom. After 5 years working from home, this last year put the exclamation point on me getting back into an office working shoulder to shoulder with a like minded community of people. I need people more than WFH comfort, after a while, WFH is a predictable numbing experience. While the efficiencies are there, and there are many valid points, WFH has severe limitations to professional growth.
OK so, we of the tech/startup/modern white collar world don't tend to think of these as "labour issues." Besides money, the big returning theme in modern labour "complaints" is autonomy.
A similar thought occurs to me when the old "open office plans" debate flares up on HN. It's a labour issue. An autonomy issue. People want a work environment that they like more, and no one has an interest in the goodness of an office/desk than the person sitting in it for 2000 hours per year.
WFH has its benefits and drawbacks, but it does put more control in workers hands... allows them to make their own choices and tradeoffs.
On an unrelated note, algae is good for you. It's the fungi you need to watch out for.
A similar thought occurs to me when the old "open office plans" debate flares up on HN. It's a labour issue. An autonomy issue. People want a work environment that they like more, and no one has an interest in the goodness of an office/desk than the person sitting in it for 2000 hours per year.
WFH has its benefits and drawbacks, but it does put more control in workers hands... allows them to make their own choices and tradeoffs.
On an unrelated note, algae is good for you. It's the fungi you need to watch out for.
Not only this, I think these days it is environmentally and financially irresponsible to have an in-person company unless the work you are doing absolutely necessitates it. Think of all the extra carbon footprint and money that could be saved.
The FANG companies going back to work right now is solely because they need to justify their multi-billion dollar campuses. Remember, they experienced _increased_ productivity during this work from home stint, so there is literally no justification to ever return to those offices other than attempting to save face for an irresponsible purchase.
The FANG companies going back to work right now is solely because they need to justify their multi-billion dollar campuses. Remember, they experienced _increased_ productivity during this work from home stint, so there is literally no justification to ever return to those offices other than attempting to save face for an irresponsible purchase.
I think there is a lot of people here who hate their offices/coworkers. I haven't worked at a FAANG(?) company but I've always enjoyed my office. I've learned a lot from random coffee runs with people in the sales team or support team. I've randomly glimpsed someone traversing our logs in a way I didn't know possible and asked them to teach me. I've had great technical discussions with people at lunch that couldn't be planned. I hope to have these again some day.
Could there be an alternative model where companies give up (often illusory) secrecy for most things, and have employees working in shared spaces near their accommodations, with employees of other companies?
I think that's already the case for a lot of startup accelerators because it helps spread and nurture ideas. You trade internal knowledge transmission for transfers with other companies, most likely not competitors anyway.
Covid WFH completely gives up on offices, but post-Covid does not have to be that extreme.
I think that's already the case for a lot of startup accelerators because it helps spread and nurture ideas. You trade internal knowledge transmission for transfers with other companies, most likely not competitors anyway.
Covid WFH completely gives up on offices, but post-Covid does not have to be that extreme.
I'm preparing to return of office in next few weeks and have realized errands to be my most cherished feature of WFH. I could run to the mechanic, store, vet, doctor, etc. without much inconvenience as these are all things that I utilize in my neighborhood. Commuting has common complaints (time, money, stress) but spending your time 30min/hour away from your home also makes it difficult to leave mid-day without making a simple errand consume a half-day.
I'm a bit conflicted, because I see pros/cons both ways, but I think I'm ready to go back to the office.
My main reason is because I've felt that I end up working more when I work from home, because most people take the time saved in the commute and put it towards work. And ramping up people on the team, mentoring, coordinating with others for project ideas, planning, goals, progress, and all form of collaboration is more tedious and less efficient.
My main reason is because I've felt that I end up working more when I work from home, because most people take the time saved in the commute and put it towards work. And ramping up people on the team, mentoring, coordinating with others for project ideas, planning, goals, progress, and all form of collaboration is more tedious and less efficient.
I've been 100% WFH for just over a year, and I'm really looking forward to /occasionally/ going back into the office. But certainly not every day!
Some backward companies will call their employees back to the office. They will lose: maintaining on site employees in high-cost cities will be so much more expensive than recruiting from a vast global pool of people that don't require an office at all.
The sentiments of the employees won't matter much (many will prefer remote work, many won't). Bottom line is that the companies that develop remote work routines and strategies will win.
The sentiments of the employees won't matter much (many will prefer remote work, many won't). Bottom line is that the companies that develop remote work routines and strategies will win.
I also hope to never go back to the way it was before. But I still think it is important to meet face to face every once in a while.
Maybe I’m just old/old-school.
Maybe I’m just old/old-school.
I'm not that worried about returning to the office. I think most office jobs will be some form of remote work forever.
We worked in offices because it's the way we always did it. But we now know we don't have to.
It reminds me of post World War 2, where women were expected to just return to their previous lives.
There will be a big push to get people back in the office. But companies that embrace remote work will be more profitable.
We worked in offices because it's the way we always did it. But we now know we don't have to.
It reminds me of post World War 2, where women were expected to just return to their previous lives.
There will be a big push to get people back in the office. But companies that embrace remote work will be more profitable.
Companies that get this right won't make anyone "comeback" -- however their office spaces wont go vacant either. It's a learning opportunity & especially for reconsiderations around cross-functional teams and open environments. The at home argument works for parents in stable home environments, recluse individual contributors, and nomads. I think it tends to stop there.
The one and only reason I want to stay permanently remote is because I can vacation and work at the same time. It's glorious. I can stay with family or friends for a week and work, or spend a week at a resort in Mexico and work, or stay in a cabin somewhere beautiful and work. Offices are fine, but they aren't usually next to beaches or trails or my loved ones.
I don't understand why more companies don't do remote work as a strategic hiring advantage. I will leave my current job to work for you if I can work remote, and you can pay me less than the going rate in your office's expensive metro area. Why are more companies not picking up on this, unless it's totally irrational on their part?
The only real advantage of going back to the office would be getting away from the wife, who has also been working from home for the past year, once in a while. On the whole, it's still better to just say "Honey, I'm going to the grocery store/Home Depot/Tractor Supply" when I need to get away and get out from under thumb.
"Have to deal with random coworkers coming to my desk/cornering me at the urinal and blabbing incessantly about their divorce/kids/wife's boyfriend/vet bill, this was a regular occurrence in person and has happened exactly once via teams since work from home started."
This is real everywhere...and not healthy on many levels.
This is real everywhere...and not healthy on many levels.
ITT: Everybody saying how awful OP's workplace is. But ~10mins of commuting? That's heaven! If I had to commute to a local company it would take me 90mins in a good day, or rent a place for half the salary such local company would be paying me.
I've been working remotely for 14 years now and I'm never coming back. Ever.
I've been working remotely for 14 years now and I'm never coming back. Ever.
It's "an hour a day(+/- 10 minutes)" which I read as "an hour a day give or take 10 minutes"
Silly me. You're right.
I believe you have misread it - the commute is an hour +/- 10 minutes.
I am an idiot. Thanks for the correction.
Sounds like your issues are with your particular company and not with the office life in general. Life in my office is absolutely nothing like that and I don't dread the return at all. If my office were like yours I'd be job hunting almost immediately.
Not to mention the reasons towards the end started to become quite a stretch.
Not to mention the reasons towards the end started to become quite a stretch.
So curious to see what happens to salaries, and where people live, if WFH is common in many sectors. Will salaries go up or down on average if employers must compete nationally to find good employees? Will people flee high cost of living areas? Anyone know of good data regarding this?
Some companies will force return to the office, some companies won’t. Then all the people complaining about one or the other will have to switch employers. There will be some grumbling but then we will get a long-term nonrandomized comparison of remote vs in-office companies.
Sadly, RTO is going to happen much quicker than people think. My guess is almost everyone will be in the office 2-3 days per week by July 1 and full time (or whatever arrangement they had pre-pandemic)right after Labor Day. I hope I'm wrong, because I love WFH.
This very much depends on where you live and how your local government is handling the pandemic.
Working from home definitely has advantages, but I've been absorbing costs e.g., heating, cooling, electricity just to name a few. I think if given the option I would prefer a majority WFH situation, but these other costs do affect one's total compensation.
Everything about this post is spot on, and what I've been saying for years.
But management doesn't care. They don't even care about productivity. It's all about keeping up appearances, having butts in seats, and I'm so, so sick of it.
But management doesn't care. They don't even care about productivity. It's all about keeping up appearances, having butts in seats, and I'm so, so sick of it.
I worked at a pretty miserable company. The executive was like Cersei Lanister, and the office was mostly a clique of young, bitter, overpaid and educated staff. Working from home would’ve lessen the impact of bullying by others and the boss.
I wonder about the advantages for folks who have room at home to work from home efficiently.
I have a big house, a space just for work.
I worked with folks who didn't work from home because they simply didn't have the space to do so. I wonder how they're doing.
I have a big house, a space just for work.
I worked with folks who didn't work from home because they simply didn't have the space to do so. I wonder how they're doing.
People in the comments criticizing "remote work" seem to focus only on the 2 extremes of the pendulum "work from home" and "work from the office". Co-working spaces are a thing.
Sounds like literally every office I've been in. Only thing we can do is start prioritising remote only companies to the point of employers seeing that they lose good talent if they don't go remote
I live 10 minutes from my office but even just not having to wake up an hour before work and being home on my lunch break has given me so much of my life back.
I am never going back on any sort of regular basis.
I am never going back on any sort of regular basis.
I really want to tell my company that the key to keeping me happy is our lack of communication, and I would know why they would jeopardize that by having me return to an office.
Everybody here posting on HN throughout the workday - whether you are in the office or working from home - is incredibly privileged, including myself.
Over my lunch break today I threw a pork shoulder on my smoker. It will be ready at dinner time, just as I finish work.
Yeah. I'm never going back to an office.
Yeah. I'm never going back to an office.
I am eager to return to the office.
I intend to work one week in the office, and the rest of the month remotely. Trying to balance the best of both worlds.
I intend to work one week in the office, and the rest of the month remotely. Trying to balance the best of both worlds.
I have my own list of pros and cons about returning to the office, but I had completely forgotten about the dreaded urinal conversation.
I think everyone should be made to watch "Male Restroom Etiquette" before returning to offices https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzO1mCAVyMw
It seems that he works at a pretty crappy place.
I just hope that the new normal will be less days at the office and that that will make traffic better.
I just hope that the new normal will be less days at the office and that that will make traffic better.
Saving commute time is the only reason I don't want to go back to an office unless it's less than 20mins away from my home.
The article mentions the cost of commuting that is now saved by working from home, but fails to mention the new added cost of maintaining a workspace in your home. Prior to covid I would work from the couch on WFH days, but that's not sustainable for full time work. Now my wife and I have to have two permanent setups, and it's a challenge to make it all work.
If my industry goes mandatory WFH forever, I'll probably eventually have to think about a new industry.
If my industry goes mandatory WFH forever, I'll probably eventually have to think about a new industry.
I haven't heard anyone talk about "mandatory WFH forever" but lots of companies are talking about mandatory RTO forever.
Time and money spent on commuting is mostly just lost. In contract, investing in a comfortable chair, good desk/computer workspace, and high-speed internet is still beneficial when you're not working.
Time and money spent on commuting is mostly just lost. In contract, investing in a comfortable chair, good desk/computer workspace, and high-speed internet is still beneficial when you're not working.
I think the author was a bit extreme in a few items but for the most I 100% agree. I am never going back to the office
I have learned the dings in my new car and my old car are almost certainly caused by my neighbors lawn guy.
[deleted]
[deleted]
> Do not have to fight 100-130 people for 1 of 3 microwaves on my 30-minute lunch break,
Does not compute :].
Does not compute :].
i see the future people and it's RDO: https://andrewarrow.substack.com/p/my-vision-for-the-roaring...
There're people who like WFH, there're people who don't. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
HR wants you back, they basically have nothing to do without inter-office drama.
Reading a lot of these points, the author needs a union as much as WFH.
I forgot about half of these things already. Thanks for the reminder!
If I had to go back to the office I would simply work for big tech.
I'd like to add "Working out at home anytime"
So this is another benefit for me. If I'm feeling sluggish, I'll hammer out some light accessory work that compliments my programming for the day and I can do it while working. It takes me 30 seconds to hammer out a set of dumbell presses or hammer curls or whatever while I'm actively reading an email/teams message/looking at documents to figure out what to do with a case. Or sometimes I'll just go down and back up the basement stairs when I go to the kitchen to top my water off, takes less time than walking to the breakroom at the office and lets me fight gravity a little more than walking.
I can't do that at an office.
I can't do that at an office.
I just got a set of modular dumbbells, great investment and doesn't take up almost any space!
But what is life without all those disgusting things ?
The website looks nice but the contrast is too low.
Yeesh - where the hell does this guy work?
This sounds like the office from hell
Holy crap this guy needs a new job.
wow you work in a pretty bad place...
Way the covid-19 waves are returning , looks difficult any time soon. I hope vaccination could help.
There is no reason for knowledge based employee living in suburbs to commute to a local commuter station for 30 mins and get on a train, travel for another hour and half and take another hour to settle down at the office cubicle.
If the employee was successfully able to work for an entire year remotely its totally unnecessary to be in the office.
Of course there are vested interests. Corporate Real Estate divisions who scare the crap out of Csuite that they are going to lose control of their employees if they dont "herd" them back (yes this is nothing more than herding sheep) into their pens at the offices.
If the employee was successfully able to work for an entire year remotely its totally unnecessary to be in the office.
Of course there are vested interests. Corporate Real Estate divisions who scare the crap out of Csuite that they are going to lose control of their employees if they dont "herd" them back (yes this is nothing more than herding sheep) into their pens at the offices.
if you allow people to work from home you can pay them less because they will be able to cut their living expenses in half when they move out of LA/SF/NY. there are tons of great places to live all over the place. work-from-home would be a boon for the whole country and undo some of the damage that was done after the middle of the country lost all its manufacturing jobs.
That said, I share most of the opinions even though I quite like the office environment of my company.
I abso-fking-love choosing where I work (and to some degree, when). Being able to take my laptop and go sit under a canopy in my back yard when the weather is nice, seeing my rabbits hopping around the yard, my cats avoiding the aggressive she-rabbit, hearing the birds, etc., while working, is just about as happy as I can be while also working on stuff that doesn't really matter much.
As I begin to form my own company, one of my priorities is to allow my employees to have at least some of their time completely at their own discretion. They choose when and where they work as long as they can attend some important anchor meetings (and obviously be productive). And for the social aspect, weekend or week-long dev retreats are ideal. 4 hours of intense serious work, plus a couple of hours of colleague social interaction, and the rest left to the individual to spend however they like, is the kind of situation I would have not even been able to dream of when I was younger.
And from a bean-counter owner perspective, do not underestimate the employee loyalty and overachievement motivation you can get by giving some nice free trips, nice free food, and quality equipment.
Big companies lack this freedom to treat their creative talent not because they cannot afford it but because the people in charge tend to not be creative thinkers. This is why most interesting things happen in smaller companies (and ultimately tend to get bought by the laggard big companies).