Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why don't I see gold at the end of the remote working rainbow?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 830 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why don't I see gold at the end of the remote working rainbow?

#231

Post by Dawnyhf5 »

BaseballPhysics wrote: post #180
bodge5000 wrote: post #118

With all due respect, this is mostly my problem with the "work-from-office" (WFO for ease) crowd. Generally, the stance of the WFH crowd is that each individual should get a choice of what makes that individual happy. Very few, if any, of the WFH crowd want mandatated WFH, it would make no sense. But then the WFO crowd often says no, I don't care what makes you happy, because you being in makes me happy. That doesn't…

I'd also add that comments like this: > Now, I am fully aware that there's a low of people for whom the horror of commute doesn't make up for the gains of socializing and others that just abhor having to talk to real-life people. Then there are people who work mainly to get paid and do not care to invest themselves beyond what is necessary. Are remarkably condescending. Folks opting for a better work-life balance, wh…

No post body was provided.

Re: Ask HN: Why don't I see gold at the end of the remote working rainbow?

#232

Post by vaidhy »

BaseballPhysics wrote: post #180
bodge5000 wrote: post #118

With all due respect, this is mostly my problem with the "work-from-office" (WFO for ease) crowd. Generally, the stance of the WFH crowd is that each individual should get a choice of what makes that individual happy. Very few, if any, of the WFH crowd want mandatated WFH, it would make no sense. But then the WFO crowd often says no, I don't care what makes you happy, because you being in makes me happy. That doesn't…

I'd also add that comments like this: > Now, I am fully aware that there's a low of people for whom the horror of commute doesn't make up for the gains of socializing and others that just abhor having to talk to real-life people. Then there are people who work mainly to get paid and do not care to invest themselves beyond what is necessary. Are remarkably condescending. Folks opting for a better work-life balance, wh…

I think you are reading three different reasons and you are mentally adding “do not care to invest” to all three. That is not what the OP said.

Re: Ask HN: Why don't I see gold at the end of the remote working rainbow?

#233

Post by w0m »

stingraycharles wrote: post #172
bodge5000 wrote: post #118

With all due respect, this is mostly my problem with the "work-from-office" (WFO for ease) crowd. Generally, the stance of the WFH crowd is that each individual should get a choice of what makes that individual happy. Very few, if any, of the WFH crowd want mandatated WFH, it would make no sense. But then the WFO crowd often says no, I don't care what makes you happy, because you being in makes me happy. That doesn't…

I think there are many “subcultures” (for lack of better description) within WFH and WFO. You’re describing two of them, but there’s also a group of WFH’ers that believes the whole organization should be remote as to standardize the processes to be asynchronous, and there are WFO’ers that still like to work from home one or two days a week. There’s also WFH but within the same country, WFH globally across all timezon…

This is the best way to think about it imo, there are all kinds. I'm lucky enough to be able to comfortably bike to work. Unsurprisingly; I like to go in a few times a week for a change of scenary (and to still keep a big screen. A number of my teamates aggressively defend their right to 'never come in ever again' up to and including shaming those who like the option of WFO.

I think we're at an odd almost feverish inflection point right now. I say this typing on my (giant) home monitor.

Re: Ask HN: Why don't I see gold at the end of the remote working rainbow?

#234

Post by ay0n_b »

Going into the office reminds me that I’m part of a team, working on something important, and gives me a space where I can focus and get things done. Also helps me build deeper relationships with people. I have very rarely gotten into an impromptu conversation about someone’s kids remotely. Stuff like that happens every time I go in.

Working from home gives me flexibility and uninterrupted heads down time (in theory) but I’m generally much more distracted.

I think people (myself included) overestimate their ability to get stuff done at home. There’s an adverse incentive, because being honest with yourself about that means you might have to go in more. But people vary. Some people are very disciplined working from home.

Hybrid is the way.

Re: Ask HN: Why don't I see gold at the end of the remote working rainbow?

#235

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

mirchibajji wrote: post #109
samuel_backend wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I feel this is a bit of a black-and-white view that grossly oversimplifies things. And I am downright insulted by the last sentence to be frank. Blaming shitty management on extroverted techies. Are you sure about that?

Sorry you see it this way. I agree with a lot of what the parent said. The post started the black-and-white framing - the current situation is bad, and we need to fix it. A popular three wishes joke goes: "Three men are stranded on a desert island, when a bottle washes up on the shore. When they uncork the bottle, a genie appears and offers three wishes. The first wishes to be taken to Paris. The genie snaps his fing…

I've never seen anything that so perfectly encapsulates my feelings about this whole return to office thing.

Re: Ask HN: Why don't I see gold at the end of the remote working rainbow?

#236

Post by rayiner »

unethical_ban wrote: post #181
bodge5000 wrote: post #118

With all due respect, this is mostly my problem with the "work-from-office" (WFO for ease) crowd. Generally, the stance of the WFH crowd is that each individual should get a choice of what makes that individual happy. Very few, if any, of the WFH crowd want mandatated WFH, it would make no sense. But then the WFO crowd often says no, I don't care what makes you happy, because you being in makes me happy. That doesn't…

Work is a third of our life, and it seems reasonable that many people would want social interaction during that time. Further, at least in the workplace I had before Covid, people could work from home as needed, or even part time, depending on their management. Granted this was for IT, not for the whole company though. You think WFH is every individuals choice in this new world. It isn’t. The last place I worked had…

That’s an interesting observation about the effect of social norms and the inability of granular individual choice to make everyone happy. The WFH people say the same thing—the WFO folks have advantages in hybrid meetings, etc. Allowing individual choice doesn’t necessarily lead to everyone being happy, because you give up synergies that arise from everyone doing the same thing.

The same is true for parenting as well. In 1970, almost 35% of the population was kids. Today, it’s closer to 20%, and in many states and cities less than that. There has been a resulting collapse in the infrastructure supporting parents. Parenting is just a lot better and easier if everyone around you, especially in your cohort, also has kids. I think the only way around this is pluralism. If you want to have a lot of kids and be around people who have a lot of kids, go to Utah and let Utahans maintain the social norms that encourage everyone to have kids. If you don’t want that, move to New York.

Same thing applies to WFH. I don’t think letting people choose at a granular level is optimal. Instead, organizations should probably decide whether they want to be an office-first or remote-first organization. And then people can self select into the organization that fits their needs.

Re: Ask HN: Why don't I see gold at the end of the remote working rainbow?

#237

Post by kotlin2 »

bodge5000 wrote: post #118

With all due respect, this is mostly my problem with the "work-from-office" (WFO for ease) crowd. Generally, the stance of the WFH crowd is that each individual should get a choice of what makes that individual happy. Very few, if any, of the WFH crowd want mandatated WFH, it would make no sense. But then the WFO crowd often says no, I don't care what makes you happy, because you being in makes me happy. That doesn't…

WFO isn't necessarily about personal preference. People who want everyone to WFO believe that WFO produces better outcomes for the company. That is different than someone who desires to work from an office or remotely out of personal preference. For instance, I may prefer to WFH because it makes my life more convenient, but I can also accept that WFO produces better outcomes for the company.

Personally, I haven't seen many good arguments that WFH produces superior work outcomes. Companies are collaborative human endeavors. Most WFH arguments I hear are related to personal fulfillment: more time with kids, less time commuting, more time for hobbies, etc. Those are all great things, but have little to do with productivity. The closest work-related argument I've heard is that some people work better when they're free of distractions at the office. That takes us back to companies being collaborative human endeavors. One may feel they work better in isolation, but part of ones job is to interact with others, even if that's not fun.

I don't want this to sound judgemental. There is no requirement that people organize their life around what's best for the company they work for. It's totally fine to enjoy working from home. But I don't see the argument that WFH is better than WFO for most companies, even if it's often better for the individual employees at those companies.

I think we'll get more conclusive data when WFH is and is not appropriate.

Re: Ask HN: Why don't I see gold at the end of the remote working rainbow?

#239

Post by ravenstine »

> But shouldn't we rather work on fixing those things instead of making them bearable by just turning off a camera in a Zoom meeting?

Yeah. Is it going to happen? Doubtful, because it's not necessarily good for business. Most people don't go to a job because they enjoy it, but because their salary outweighs the level of suck at that job. To make things more conventionally pleasant at a job may actually make a person's job suck more overall if it means shifting focus from getting work done to appearing social.

There is definitely something to be missed from the social opportunities at working in a physical office, but the movie Office Space is a classic for a reason. If a sequel was made taking place at a remote company, somehow I don't think it would be nearly as funny. COVID may have pushed remote work along, but said remote work is still a response to even more problematic corporate culture.

> All in all, there is a gnawing feeling in me that Covid made a significant dent on the once fun (Berlin Startup) tech working culture for good. And worse, I suspect there is gonna be more consequences down the road for the tech job market at large that few people seem to see.

I've seen the same thing happen to the Los Angeles tech scene. Absolutely dead. Sure, there's a teeny tiny bit, but trust me, there used to be more going on. This will have consequences because it's much harder to network with random people than it once was.

Post reply on HN