Get Your Butt Back To The Office (1 Viewer)

[Poke_4_Life]

Unless productivity has been down during the last year plus, I don't get the reasoning for this other than "just because"....

While I don't disagree, we are big on culture.  In my role specifically, we rely a lot on the senior staff developing the younger staff and not just in hard skills, but also soft skills.  Upper management speaks to culture a lot, but they really mean they want that development to continue and it is most effective in person.  

I tend to agree with management overall, even tho I really do enjoy WFH.  It will be a balance going forward.  Consider we were at 2 WFH days/month before the pandemic, I will take it.  

Also, we're a very stodgy old company.  Just what it is.

 

[culdeus]

The days of 9-5 M-F are likely dead.  New hires out of school are expecting wfh and taking lower offers with more wfh.  

Another crazy sign.  The mega church down the street has more people working in it than my office.  Not working for the church. Working from the church.  

 

[Capella]

Yea people coming out of college aren’t going to accept these work in office gigs. The idea people went into the office 5 times a week will be completely laughed at by the end of the decade. If not sooner. 

 

[jwb]

I'm beginning to see a difference in "work from home" like a lot of us are talking about, and a full time remote job where you were hired for that. They are generally not the same.

"work from home" because of the pandemic or you negotiated a few days home from a long-standing job... that's usually pretty sweet. You have relationships and credibility built, you know what you can get away with, your company knows what to expect, etc. And likely, your company does not have serious, long-standing remote-worker policies and controls in place.

But a full-time "we're hiring you for a remote position" for a company that's been doing it a few years... they are probably going to dictate your hours. No starting when you want, because you simply won't have that trust and/or autonomy. You will be watched. And timed. You go to lunch at this time/etc. You're probably not taking your dog for a walk unless it's lunch or breaktime.  

Completely anecdotal, but I know a few fully remote workers who were hired that way by companies experienced with this - it's kind of like being in jail in your home. It's markedly different than almost everyone who went home because of the pandemic.  My neighbor won't even answer the door because she gets a "what's going on?" message if her computer is idle for more than 5 minutes. 

 

[Andrew74]

Good sized accounting firm.  I’m still fuzzy on the timeline but I think they want us in 3x a week starting July 1.   But then they mentioned the “new policy” starts Sept 1st.  I know I’ll wait as long as possible before routinely being there 3x/week.  It came across more of a flexible schedule vs hybrid.  “You can work at home 2x a week.  Need to clear it with your coach.”  Sounds like a big mess to me.  I have no idea how this will play out. 

 

[DallasDMac]

Even more reason to stop with the increased unemployment benefits ASAP

I'm pretty sure you don't qualify for unemployment if you quit except in a few special cases.

 

[jobarules]

I'm beginning to see a difference in "work from home" like a lot of us are talking about, and a full time remote job where you were hired for that. They are generally not the same.

"work from home" because of the pandemic or you negotiated a few days home from a long-standing job... that's usually pretty sweet. You have relationships and credibility built, you know what you can get away with, your company knows what to expect, etc. And likely, your company does not have serious, long-standing remote-worker policies and controls in place.

But a full-time "we're hiring you for a remote position" for a company that's been doing it a few years... they are probably going to dictate your hours. No starting when you want, because you simply won't have that trust and/or autonomy. You will be watched. And timed. You go to lunch at this time/etc. You're probably not taking your dog for a walk unless it's lunch or breaktime.  

Completely anecdotal, but I know a few fully remote workers who were hired that way by companies experienced with this - it's kind of like being in jail in your home. It's markedly different than almost everyone who went home because of the pandemic.  My neighbor won't even answer the door because she gets a "what's going on?" message if her computer is idle for more than 5 minutes. 

That's not at all my experience where I work

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Completely anecdotal, but I know a few fully remote workers who were hired that way by companies experienced with this - it's kind of like being in jail in your home. It's markedly different than almost everyone who went home because of the pandemic.  My neighbor won't even answer the door because she gets a "what's going on?" message if her computer is idle for more than 5 minutes. 

 My sister's kid had a WFH call center/data entry job like this last summer. Screen would turn green and lock out if the idle 2 minutes.  

Yeah jail would be a good description of that kind of arrangement. I'm sure there's some like this but few and far between. Says more about the company IMO (and lack of trust of their own).

 

[The Z Machine]

 My sister's kid had a WFH call center/data entry job like this last summer. Screen would turn green and lock out if the idle 2 minutes.  

Yeah jail would be a good description of that kind of arrangement. I'm sure there's some like this but few and far between. Says more about the company IMO (and lack of trust of their own).

So you have to schedule your poop breaks?

 

[jwb]

 My sister's kid had a WFH call center/data entry job like this last summer. Screen would turn green and lock out if the idle 2 minutes.  

Yeah jail would be a good description of that kind of arrangement. I'm sure there's some like this but few and far between. Says more about the company IMO (and lack of trust of their own).

The bolded is kind of key. Right now, the overwhelming majority of WFH are people who were sent home due to the pandemic. They have preexisting relationships, trust, etc. The companies also did this on the fly - they have no real control or systems in place. This is almost idyllic for workers - the best of both worlds. No commute, and for many, a contractor-like "I'm taking my dog for a walk and will finish that tonight after the kids go to bed - as long as my work gets done, it's all good" vibe. Plus health benefits, 401k, and vacation days.

I suspect that's going to slowly change. A decade from now, when the job/entire division is fully remote from day one (even hiring/onboarding/training = all remote), there will be a lot more control than we're seeing now. Taking your dog for a walk, unless it's scheduled breaktime, will probably not be a thing for most WFH people.   

Definitely will be interesting to see where this all goes. 

 

[TLEF316]

Starting to feel like I'm the sucker here. Been in the office 4x in the past week and a half and a large portion of the team (including younger healthy people that live in or much nearer to the city than me) haven't been in. 

And I'm doing the same exact thing I've been doing for the past 15 months, just with 2 hours less sleep and fancy clothes on

 

[Murph]

I suspect that's going to slowly change. A decade from now, when the job/entire division is fully remote from day one (even hiring/onboarding/training = all remote), there will be a lot more control than we're seeing now. Taking your dog for a walk, unless it's scheduled breaktime, will probably not be a thing for most WFH people

This is going to be really dependent on the field and the skill level of the employee as to who has the upper hand. We are desperate to add to our team right now and I'm beating recruiters away with a stick. If our company started implementing some BS like this there would be an exodus.

 

[The Z Machine]

Taking your dog for a walk, unless it's scheduled breaktime, will probably not be a thing for most WFH people.

Why?  Companies need control?

 

[jwb]

Taking your dog for a walk, unless it's scheduled breaktime, will probably not be a thing for most WFH people.

Why?  Companies need control?

In the big picture, yes. I think it would be very hard to build a good sized company if you had no idea when your workers would be available. Meaning, you can't let them have that level of autonomy. 

(In this scenario, I'm assuming there was never a time when the worker was previously in the office or knew anyone face to face.) 

I just have my doubts the average WFH worker of the future will have what a lot of pandemic WFH people have now: the working freedom of a contractor, but with the security of a "job"  / paid vacations / healthcare etc. 

This is going to be really dependent on the field and the skill level of the employee as to who has the upper hand. We are desperate to add to our team right now and I'm beating recruiters away with a stick. If our company started implementing some BS like this there would be an exodus.

Yup - superstars can generally make their own rules. But also, in the full WFH scenario that we're possibly moving towards, the entire country (or even the world) can be the talent pool as well.   

 

[acarey50]

In the big picture, yes. I think it would be very hard to build a good sized company if you had no idea when your workers would be available. Meaning, you can't let them have that level of autonomy. 

(In this scenario, I'm assuming there was never a time when the worker was previously in the office or knew anyone face to face.) 

I just have my doubts the average WFH worker of the future will have what a lot of pandemic WFH people have now: the working freedom of a contractor, but with the security of a "job"  / paid vacations / healthcare etc. 

Yup - superstars can generally make their own rules. But also, in the full WFH scenario that we're possibly moving towards, the entire country (or even the world) can be the talent pool as well.   

I think that is totally dependent on the job you are talking about.

Hourly worker in a call center type setting where you need a butt in a seat/on a phone for certain shifts, etc., yes, I think it will be more regimented, same as any kind of a more transactional job (ie, data entry, etc.)

In a salaried job where it's more about getting a certain task done by a certain time, who cares when that is so long as the task is getting done by the deadlines.

Neither one of those scenarios is any different than it would be in a traditional office setting, as regardless of where the butt is sitting, call center folks need to be available/scheduled at certain times, and more project oriented jobs don't.

 

[PIK95]

The days of 9-5 M-F are likely dead.  New hires out of school are expecting wfh and taking lower offers with more wfh.  

Another crazy sign.  The mega church down the street has more people working in it than my office.  Not working for the church. Working from the church.  

I was looking for path of least resistance situations twenty years ago.  Man of leisure, and apparently ahead of my time.

 

[jwb]

I think that is totally dependent on the job you are talking about.

Hourly worker in a call center type setting where you need a butt in a seat/on a phone for certain shifts, etc., yes, I think it will be more regimented, same as any kind of a more transactional job (ie, data entry, etc.)

In a salaried job where it's more about getting a certain task done by a certain time, who cares when that is so long as the task is getting done by the deadlines.

Neither one of those scenarios is any different than it would be in a traditional office setting, as regardless of where the butt is sitting, call center folks need to be available/scheduled at certain times, and more project oriented jobs don't.

Yea, it's a given the call center folks are always going to be like that. But I definitely feel the majority of WFH positions are going to follow this direction more as well. 

There are a huge amount of people between the busy-every-second call center folks and the executives/professionals who really can be trusted to be autonomous. This includes prettymuch everyone in marketing, accounting/billing, IT, customer service, most of middle management, etc. Most of those folks cannot just waltz in and out of the office whenever they wish, and they typically work predetermined hours, salary or not, so I doubt they will be able to do it from home once companies fully implement it. 

I do think WFH is the future. It just won't be what we kind of have now with the pandemic - it'll become more regimented as companies go fully virtual and install systems to keep things predictable for hundreds and thousands of employees. It almost has to go that way. And maybe being a contractor will be far more common (if we got national health care, this would be the norm, imho - that's the big thing that keeps a lot of people at their jobs).    

 

[nirad3]

I'll be going back to my office twice a week starting next month.  There was a couple-month span where we were doing that and I went in a few times, which was great.  Then it got shut down again.  Now that vaccines have rolled out. we're ready to let folks back in.  

The first time around, we got to pick which two days we wanted to go in, which was great because I was able to choose Monday (kick the week off!) and Thursday.  I have been going to my parents to work on Wednesdays and I have to WFH on Tuesdays (wife is a barista, works all day).

Now they are making us choose either M/W or T/Th.... which makes sense because they can figure out who's working when better and allows for continued social distancing.

So now I have to flip things around a bit, choosing M/W and will likely start going to my parents on Thursdays.

That all said, it's a welcome change to what has become the "norm".  It'll be good to grab lunch with co-workers.  And it's not like my company will make me have my butt-in-seat from 9-5.  I'll go in around 9 and will probably leave around 2 every day.

 

[Murph]

This includes prettymuch everyone in marketing, accounting/billing, IT, customer service, most of middle management, etc. Most of those folks cannot just waltz in and out of the office whenever they wish, and they typically work predetermined hours, salary or not, so I doubt they will be able to do it from home once companies fully implement it. 

I still don't understand why these types employees need to be locked down. I may not have had complete freedom in the office, but I know I still spent plenty of time away from my desk.

If a WFH employee is constantly unavailable during expected working hours, that should be dealt with. Otherwise a policy of benign neglect seems the best course of action.

Honestly what it seems to boil down to is the argument the boss needs to see you working. But two year olds understand object permanence. If the management can't handle this, then that seems like the clearest evidence yet that capitalism as it practiced in the United States is an abomination.

 

[jwb]

To give an example, I know someone who recently got a job with a large national insurance company. I don't know the exact details of her position, but it wasn't the mindless repetitive data entry or answering phones for $12 an hour - it was a 60k+ job with projects and deadlines. This division has been WFH for a few years, so they have systems in place. Here are a few things they do:

1) You worked a shift, and got 2 breaks and lunch at somewhat predetermined times. 

2) You use their equipment, not yours. Calls were through the computer, so you can't answer your cell as you're walking your dog.

3) Hardwired connection only. No wifi from your porch (or Starbucks).

4) If you seemed idle / weren't there for a call, there would be a "what's up?". Yes, you can go to the bathroom, but answering the door or having a ten-minute conversation with a neighbor was a no-no. Picking up your kid from school was out unless it was on your lunch.  

 

[culdeus]

To give an example, I know someone who recently got a job with a large national insurance company. I don't know the exact details of her position, but it wasn't the mindless repetitive data entry or answering phones for $12 an hour - it was a 60k+ job with projects and deadlines. This division has been WFH for a few years, so they have systems in place. Here are a few things they do:

1) You worked a shift, and got 2 breaks and lunch at somewhat predetermined times. 

2) You use their equipment, not yours. Calls were through the computer, so you can't answer your cell as you're walking your dog.

3) Hardwired connection only. No wifi from your porch (or Starbucks).

4) If you seemed idle / weren't there for a call, there would be a "what's up?". Yes, you can go to the bathroom, but answering the door or having a ten-minute conversation with a neighbor was a no-no. Picking up your kid from school was out unless it was on your lunch.  

60k is way low to tolerate that type of nonsense.  I think this type of monitoring is the overwhelming exception and the job is probably alot closer to a call center person than they let on.

 

[jwb]

I still don't understand why these types employees need to be locked down. I may not have had complete freedom in the office, but I know I still spent plenty of time away from my desk.

If a WFH employee is constantly unavailable during expected working hours, that should be dealt with. Otherwise a policy of benign neglect seems the best course of action.

Honestly what it seems to boil down to is the argument the boss needs to see you working. But two year olds understand object permanence. If the management can't handle this, then that seems like the clearest evidence yet that capitalism as it practiced in the United States is an abomination.

I can't disagree with anything here on a personal level. I've spent the last 20 years working for myself because I don't like being told "where / when" for arbitrary reasons.

But do you really think a company can have thousands of people working on a "as long as I get it done, it's all good" schedule? I don't see how that works out long term on a large scale. 

 

[Murph]

But do you really think a company can have thousands of people working on a "as long as I get it done, it's all good" schedule?

I'm not saying it will work for all roles. But for most cubicle jockey kind of roles, it's really a question of whether you trust the people you've hired. If you do, let them get it done. If you don't, why are they there in the first place?

 

[jwb]

60k is way low to tolerate that type of nonsense.  I think this type of monitoring is the overwhelming exception and the job is probably a lot closer to a call center person than they let on.

Heh, I agree.

I'm pretty sure her job is something that happens in the accounting or claims dept or whatnot. It's not mindless type work. 

But honestly, is what I listed THAT different from having an office job from 9-5? Maybe there's more idle water cooler talk at an office, but otherwise, you have somewhat scheduled lunches and breaks, you use their equipment their way, you're onsite, your boss is typically around, you can't just leave whenever you want, etc.

 

[jwb]

I'm not saying it will work for all roles. But for most cubicle jockey kind of roles, it's really a question of whether you trust the people you've hired. If you do, let them get it done. If you don't, why are they there in the first place?

I understand what you mean (I don't think you're saying it will work for all roles.)

But let's talk cubicle jockeys for a second: Why do cubicle jockeys have hours and such at the office without it being called a trust issue? Why not start whenever? Why not take lunch hour at 9:30am after you've answered your morning e-mails so you can do XYZ? Why didn't people just leave in the middle of the day and get it done later that night?

The reason likely is it doesn't work on a large scale, or long term. 

All I'm saying is WFH will eventually resemble what happens at the office more than many think it will at this time. Right now, it's so new companies have no choice but to "trust", and it seems almost weird/wrong when they don't.

 

[nirad3]

To give an example, I know someone who recently got a job with a large national insurance company. I don't know the exact details of her position, but it wasn't the mindless repetitive data entry or answering phones for $12 an hour - it was a 60k+ job with projects and deadlines. This division has been WFH for a few years, so they have systems in place. Here are a few things they do:

1) You worked a shift, and got 2 breaks and lunch at somewhat predetermined times. 

2) You use their equipment, not yours. Calls were through the computer, so you can't answer your cell as you're walking your dog.

3) Hardwired connection only. No wifi from your porch (or Starbucks).

4) If you seemed idle / weren't there for a call, there would be a "what's up?". Yes, you can go to the bathroom, but answering the door or having a ten-minute conversation with a neighbor was a no-no. Picking up your kid from school was out unless it was on your lunch.  

Granted I am well past the $60K type of position, but man... this would suck.

We were given a laptop and we use Teams quite a bit... but we can use our own cell phones for everything else.

I go and pick up my kids, go to the store, lay down and watch ESPN for an hour here or there...

Generally, if our work gets done in a timely fashion and our clients are happy, then all good.

I'm lucky to work for a pretty cool company altogether though.  Lots of good things about where I'm at.  WFH has only enhanced it.

 

[Murph]

Why do cubicle jockeys have hours and such at the office without it being called a trust issue? Why not start whenever? Why not take lunch hour at 9:30am after you've answered your morning e-mails so you can do XYZ? Why didn't people just leave in the middle of the day and get it done later that night?

I guess it's just my bias, but I've never had a "real" job that vigorously enforced start times, lunches, or break times. If there's a problem, it's dealt with.

If the pre-pandemic culture of a company was overly rigid then I guess I wouldn't expect it to change now. But I don't think WFH is a great reason to start implementing more controls.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

So you have to schedule your poop breaks?

No question.  Kid quit before training ended and decided to mow lawns instead for the summer.

Said they'd be asked to watch many 15-30+ min training videos and unless hit mouse less than every 120 seconds of it the screen would lock with a green screen saying "Please sign back in".  I get wanting to try to police things a bit but a bit overboard.

Jail was prob a good description of it. I do think that type setup is few and far between outside call center/data entry positions. 

 

[jwb]

Granted I am well past the $60K type of position, but man... this would suck.

We were given a laptop and we use Teams quite a bit... but we can use our own cell phones for everything else.

I go and pick up my kids, go to the store, lay down and watch ESPN for an hour here or there...

Generally, if our work gets done in a timely fashion and our clients are happy, then all good.

I'm lucky to work for a pretty cool company altogether though.  Lots of good things about where I'm at.  WFH has only enhanced it.

This is how I work too (sans the kids).

But let me ask: do you think this would work well for companies if every WFH person could do this? And we can exclude the call center types too. They're a given.

I don't think a large company would be long term successful with every office worker having this kind of freedom. A very small company may.

 

[jwb]

I guess it's just my bias, but I've never had a "real" job that vigorously enforced start times, lunches, or break times. If there's a problem, it's dealt with.

If the pre-pandemic culture of a company was overly rigid then I guess I wouldn't expect it to change now. But I don't think WFH is a great reason to start implementing more controls.

But that's just it - asking people to work 9-5, not leave the office unless it's lunch, and similar is not really rigid - it was a normal workday for millions of people. And let's be honest, no company seemed untrustworthy because of that.

WFH (eventually) isn't going to be all that much different. At least that's how I see it.   

 

[MAC_32]

We received our notice that full time in-person begins Monday, but with the understanding there would be a phase-in period for those who lack the ability to just flip the switch (hi). I expected this, but my part time WFH request was denied. Not going to bother with the details, but while my specific role is one that can be done effectively remotely most cannot so my employer drew a hard line. That said, my previously narrow criteria for considering leaving is a little wider now than it was this time last week.

 

[gianmarco]

But that's just it - asking people to work 9-5, not leave the office unless it's lunch, and similar is not really rigid - it was a normal workday for millions of people. And let's be honest, no company seemed untrustworthy because of that.

WFH (eventually) isn't going to be all that much different. At least that's how I see it.   

Because when you're home, that type of rigidity isn't necessary. You are dealing with adults. So, as long as productivity is being met, let the worker decide how they get there. As long as work is done, is done well, it's not late, and it's not costing the company more money, then stop trying to police how someone gets from A to B.

And I get this doesn't work for all jobs, but it should work for many.

 

[Murph]

my previously narrow criteria for considering leaving is a little wider now than it was this time last week.

For all the BS that we've all had to deal with for the last year plus, we should all be fighting to get something good out of it. We've certainly earned it.

 

[acarey50]

But let's talk cubicle jockeys for a second: Why do cubicle jockeys have hours and such at the office without it being called a trust issue? Why not start whenever? Why not take lunch hour at 9:30am after you've answered your morning e-mails so you can do XYZ? Why didn't people just leave in the middle of the day and get it done later that night?

The reason likely is it doesn't work on a large scale, or long term. 

All I'm saying is WFH will eventually resemble what happens at the office more than many think it will at this time. Right now, it's so new companies have no choice but to "trust", and it seems almost weird/wrong when they don't.

I think the real reason up until a few years ago was a lack of technological capability, or for some companies a perceived lack of technological capability.

The last year + has shown that this was a largely overblown excuse.

Also, I think it is also largely the antiquated idea that if a manager could not see your butt in a seat, you weren't working. The problem generally lies in that many companies set policies/rules for the lowest common denominator rather than for the higher performers.

If I end up back in a spot where management is asking me where I am at from 8-5, then all they will get from me is the bare minimum from 8-5 and nothing a minute earlier or a minute later and nothing during breaks or lunch. Fortunately I am not in that type of position or under that type of management, so if I need to jump on a call or work on a project late at night, I will try to accommodate, conversely, if I have a light schedule or an open afternoon with no meetings, I will go do the grocery shopping or run some errands. I've got my phone with me so I am reachable if needed. At the end of the day, the hours all are a wash and the job gets done.

 

[belljr]

I understand what you mean (I don't think you're saying it will work for all roles.)

But let's talk cubicle jockeys for a second: Why do cubicle jockeys have hours and such at the office without it being called a trust issue? Why not start whenever? Why not take lunch hour at 9:30am after you've answered your morning e-mails so you can do XYZ? Why didn't people just leave in the middle of the day and get it done later that night?

The reason likely is it doesn't work on a large scale, or long term. 

All I'm saying is WFH will eventually resemble what happens at the office more than many think it will at this time. Right now, it's so new companies have no choice but to "trust", and it seems almost weird/wrong when they don't.

Cube jockey here.  Start when I want, as long as we are in a 3 hour window, and take lunch whenever.  Certain jobs require certain business hours, some don't.   I think is more business oriented than position for your cube dwellers

 

[jwb]

Because when you're home, that type of rigidity isn't necessary. You are dealing with adults. So, as long as productivity is being met, let the worker decide how they get there. As long as work is done, is done well, it's not late, and it's not costing the company more money, then stop trying to police how someone gets from A to B.

And I get this doesn't work for all jobs, but it should work for many.

On the surface, it should. But it won't (again, imho). I see waaaay too much chaos if everyone gets to choose how they get there - I doubt productivity (a tough thing to really measure anyway) is going to be the same. Eventually it falls apart if thousands of employees can all take their dog for a walk whenever. 

 

[culdeus]

On the surface, it should. But it won't (again, imho). I see waaaay too much chaos if everyone gets to choose how they get there - I doubt productivity (a tough thing to really measure anyway) is going to be the same. Eventually it falls apart if thousands of employees can all take their dog for a walk whenever. 

I'm not sure what industry you are in, but I mean for the high paying jobs out there this is just not the case.  Anyone making 100k+ is not having their time card watched.  You are either on some level of incentive or commission bonus structure where if you don't produce you don't get paid, or if you can't deliver certain items on time with certain KPIs you are out on your ###.

Maybe in some service sector type jobs you need people chained to a desk, but in a world of projects driven into manufacturing or finance it's not that hard to identify the ####-offs and shed them.  Quickly.  

 

[jwb]

I'm not sure what industry you are in, but I mean for the high paying jobs out there this is just not the case.  Anyone making 100k+ is not having their time card watched.  You are either on some level of incentive or commission bonus structure where if you don't produce you don't get paid, or if you can't deliver certain items on time with certain KPIs you are out on your ###.

Maybe in some service sector type jobs you need people chained to a desk, but in a world of projects driven into manufacturing or finance it's not that hard to identify the ####-offs and shed them.  Quickly.  

I agree. But you're talking about a very small segment of the workforce. I'm talking more rank and file people making under 100k. 

(I work for myself)

 

[The Z Machine]

But do you really think a company can have thousands of people working on a "as long as I get it done, it's all good" schedule? I don't see how that works out long term on a large scale. 

My company has been doing it for over a year and our revenue and profits have never been higher.  Probably 5k US based workers and another 1k worldwide.  The other 25k work in factories, or are critical on-site.

 

[flranger]

I think one thing this thread hasn't discussed is the availability of legitimately skilled workers.  There is going to be incredible demand and short supply.  Businesses are going to have to offer incentive to attract, hire, and retain talent.  

WFH is going to be a bigger incentive than benefits, retirement/401k, and likely even pay (when it's close) for a very high number of people coming into the workforce.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Really good Freakanomics podcast episode on working from home.

One interesting thing from it: it’s argued that working from home is 50% less productive, but that a mix of wfh and office could actually still be beneficial.

I’m not sure the way they measured productivity is actually accurate or not, but that’s the argument made by the guy being interviewed.

Personally, I found that I actually work less hours by going into the office, even when accounting for commute time. I’m definitely more efficient working at the office than at home and create better work/life boundaries.

 

[Angry Beavers]

This is how I work too (sans the kids).

But let me ask: do you think this would work well for companies if every WFH person could do this? And we can exclude the call center types too. They're a given.

I don't think a large company would be long term successful with every office worker having this kind of freedom. A very small company may.

What is the difference between taking the dog for a walk and BS'ing with a co-worker for 20 minutes? I have a FT remote position - I am 2.5 hours from the "office". In 9 months I have been to the office 3x - once to get some software installed before the job started and two other work related reasons that were my choice to go in as it made logistical sense.  I think if you have clear parameters and effective management, I do not need to see you everyday to make sure the job is getting done. 

 

[bostonfred]

Back in the 90s I remember talking about this new globalization and thinking how is this going to work, companies are hiring people in other countries for pennies while Americans want dollars?  Either our wages will go down or theirs will go up, there's no way around it.  It ended up being a mix of the two but the wage disparity is much different now.  

What i hope to see over the next few years is that more international firms compete for us labor and offer benefits like working from home, more vacation, four day work weeks and more. 

Right now the single biggest barrier to that is our Healthcare system - if we had single payer, the cost of US labor would be drastically reduced.  But we don't, so our employers pay a huge premium to hire Americans. 

 

[culdeus]

Really good Freakanomics podcast episode on working from home.

One interesting thing from it: it’s argued that working from home is 50% less productive, but that a mix of wfh and office could actually still be beneficial.

I’m not sure the way they measured productivity is actually accurate or not, but that’s the argument made by the guy being interviewed.

Personally, I found that I actually work less hours by going into the office, even when accounting for commute time. I’m definitely more efficient working at the office than at home and create better work/life boundaries.

There's clearly a threshold where the commute time exceeds the value add.  This is where a lot of my co workers are at, knowing the 90 min+ in the car could be spent in a more effective way.  Even if that's 30 min of more work, they get 60 minutes back.

 

[AAABatteries]

Starting to feel like I'm the sucker here. Been in the office 4x in the past week and a half and a large portion of the team (including younger healthy people that live in or much nearer to the city than me) haven't been in. 

And I'm doing the same exact thing I've been doing for the past 15 months, just with 2 hours less sleep and fancy clothes on

Didn't you say you wanted to go in to the office though?  Or am I remembering that incorrectly.  Is the lack of other people being there changing your mind or is it more the commute and convenience?

 

[TLEF316]

Didn't you say you wanted to go in to the office though?  Or am I remembering that incorrectly.  Is the lack of other people being there changing your mind or is it more the commute and convenience?

Not really. I was sort of looking forward to things getting "back to normal" and seeing some people. I'd much rather the expectation be 2x a week rather than 3 (just because of the commute) but its not the end of the world (at least right now. Who knows how I'll feel in october when I'm walking to and from the train station in the dark)

I just feel like maybe I gave up some leverage by coming back in right away. Pretty clear that others just decided "nah, I'm good" and are waiting until there's more pressure.

 

[Pipes]

Been going to the office pretty much the whole time and love it.  Though I have a 5 min commute and work in a new building that has a small gym, a full kitchen and a bar and I have my own office.  Based on many of these responses didn't realize how lucky I am.

 

[[icon]]

Looks like we are targeting Q4 return with 2 day in-office / 3 day at home. I'll likely do 1.5 but I can live with this. 

 

[beer 30]

Really good Freakanomics podcast episode on working from home.

One interesting thing from it: it’s argued that working from home is 50% less productive, but that a mix of wfh and office could actually still be beneficial.

I’m not sure the way they measured productivity is actually accurate or not, but that’s the argument made by the guy being interviewed.

Personally, I found that I actually work less hours by going into the office, even when accounting for commute time. I’m definitely more efficient working at the office than at home and create better work/life boundaries.

I'll give it a listen, thanks for posting.

I was 100% work from office guy my whole career. WFH was always a PITA because I set up at the dining room table and had constant interruptions all day so I hated it. When COVID forced the issue, I made it clear with the wife and the dog, I was working & just happened to be at home. I was NOT at home and happened to be working. It actually went really well and as I kinda got used it, we changed our schedules to accommodate and I actually enjoyed it. One thing I was missing was a door to afford some privacy for calls and keep my loud voice contained. We addressed that and are not setting up two separate offices in our house to accommodate her needs and mine. We have a large, empty house (kids are gone) so we have the room.

And now my company is opening the building back up to any who want to come back  . I live 4 miles away from the office so it's hard for me to come up with any excuse (especially since I was "at the office" guy) that makes sense for me to stay home. I still want to go ahead and finish out an office for me so I have it available if needed but will probably go back soon full time.

 

[jwb]

What is the difference between taking the dog for a walk and BS'ing with a co-worker for 20 minutes? I have a FT remote position - I am 2.5 hours from the "office". In 9 months I have been to the office 3x - once to get some software installed before the job started and two other work related reasons that were my choice to go in as it made logistical sense.  I think if you have clear parameters and effective management, I do not need to see you everyday to make sure the job is getting done. 

There is none. That was never my take. I just think companies are going to want more control over the WFH rank and file than they have now because the pandemic exodus happened so quickly. Bs'ing for 20 minutes with a co-worker will probably be looked at wistfully as a lost perk of the office, but is balanced out by no commute.  

Like others have mentioned (and I agree), the big jobs - the 150k engineering group, the six-figure salespeople, the C-Suite, etc they will still get/keep their autonomy. But I don't foresee a $55k junior accountant or mid level marketing person or the person who tracks past due invoices hired for a WFH position getting to sneak out on a Wednesday for a round of golf, even if they can get the work done at night or whenever. Maybe some can now, but I don't see this being the norm in the future - I see way more control over rank and file WFH people. In my opinion anyway.