Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

news.ycombinator.com

281–290 of 508 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obfuscating costs and increasing the complexity makes no sense. Variable rate tolling on roads to disincentivize unnecessary travel by individual car makes more sense.

Then the companies will just tell you to suck it up and pay the tax yourself, or they'll find someone else.

And that someone else will also have to pay the tolls.

Therefore both employer and employee will be incentivized to locate in places with higher density housing to reduce costs.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New York has one of the worst commute situations in the country, with an average of 36 minutes each way. The US average is 27 minutes. People commuting two hours a day are extreme outliers. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/realestate/commuting-best...

... Maybe? This might be a case where an average doesn't tell the whole story. 45-minute to hour-long commutes each way have been the norm for me pretty much the entirety of my 20-odd year career in Silicon Valley. For me the outliers were the folk who opted to live 2+hrs away to afford a single family home, and were still commuting in - some did it daily; some did it weekly, and couch surfed during the week. (The ot…

I think discussions about remote work and commuting bring out people with unusually bad commutes. And probably people with unusually bad commutes are in social bubbles where they think it’s normal, otherwise they wouldn’t sign up for it. But statistically, they are unusual!

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#283

There is nothing more illogical in modern society than commuting to an office every day. Employees waste 2 of their 16 available waking hours in the non-productive commute while incurring significant financial costs (lease/insurance/fuel/energy) in order to support this patently absurd activity. Employers waste time and energy negotiating leases, re-arranging offices, purchasing AV equipment for meeting rooms, etc.,…

We just ran a giant 2 year WFH experiment. It didn't hurt productivity.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very true. And I did some rough estimations on why my employer wants us in the office. They make $115k a month of employees buying coffee. That is only coffee, and that was a very conservative estimate of only 40% of employees buying only a coffee on an average of $2. This doesn't take into account parking we have to pay for, or lunch, or snacks.

> They make $115k a month of employees buying coffee ... parking we have to pay for, or lunch, or snacks Lol what? Why are they making you pay for these things?

It's a profit center.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Important to note that wealth doesn't improve your character; it simply amplifies who you already are.

Power corrupts.

The interesting point a nearby comment made was it corrupts those around you. That gets lost in that aphorism.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#286
The only downside to all of this remoteness is the non-programmer workforce going remote. I do think people that pick up the phone pre-pandemic should be picking up the phone post-pandemic. Whether that's from their home or not, I don't care.

What we get instead though, is ringing, ringing ringing. Can't get my power ordered. I can't get roofing ordered. Can't get call backs.

Things were more expedient pre-pandemic. I often do wonder too, is part of the reason company X is OUT of something isn't because the ship is late - or is it because the ordering person no longer sits in front of a giant pile of insulation and goes - oh crap, that is getting really low. I should order more. (And guess what happens if he calls to order more - ringing ringing ringing)

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#287

For my case, it was worse. When normalized to dollars, I spent nearly 2x more in HVAC expenses compared to driving's fuel costs, and that's with a modest commute (20 miles). Its much less energy intensive to air condition one large medium-density building than many smaller low-density buildings.

That sounds like you're either running your HVAC at extreme temps or have very poor insulation.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't intend to de-rail the convo, but this is an important one. > improve inter-family relationships It could , maybe, but it can also be a significant source of strife. It's tough spending all day, every day with someone. Because of that, you find that people are either looking for larger homes in order to have private work spaces or renting office space. Both of those shift the cost burden from the company to th…

This. FFS who wants to stay home to live and work!?!? I don’t understand WFH. the right way is to have better public transport and cheaper housing, not secluded lives.

Me?

Because "home", for me, while I've been working remotely since 1994, has been Indiana, to Puerto Rico, to Budapest. I go when I want, do a little schedule juggling maybe. And now I live in the tropics in the jungle on a mountain coffee farm - the best place to spend a global pandemic - and I still have an income.

I'll take my seclusion, thanks.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#289

There is nothing more illogical in modern society than commuting to an office every day. Employees waste 2 of their 16 available waking hours in the non-productive commute while incurring significant financial costs (lease/insurance/fuel/energy) in order to support this patently absurd activity. Employers waste time and energy negotiating leases, re-arranging offices, purchasing AV equipment for meeting rooms, etc.,…

Very true. And I did some rough estimations on why my employer wants us in the office. They make $115k a month of employees buying coffee. That is only coffee, and that was a very conservative estimate of only 40% of employees buying only a coffee on an average of $2. This doesn't take into account parking we have to pay for, or lunch, or snacks.

If your employer makes you pay for coffee, you need a new employer. I know companies with terrible reputations on HN that nevertheless have free coffee and tea.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't remote work advertised as a pro environment initiative?

#290

There is nothing more illogical in modern society than commuting to an office every day. Employees waste 2 of their 16 available waking hours in the non-productive commute while incurring significant financial costs (lease/insurance/fuel/energy) in order to support this patently absurd activity. Employers waste time and energy negotiating leases, re-arranging offices, purchasing AV equipment for meeting rooms, etc.,…

>Surely, all of this could only be justified if physical presence had a dramatic impact on productivity. Yet, we cannot tell one way or the other if it actually improves outcomes.

You can flip that around too - If remote work was so great for productivity, all companies would switch to it? There really isn't any point arguing over it, because it doesn't change the current state of affairs.

My belief is that for remote work to gain mainstream adoption, you'll need a few trailblazer companies who establish a model of remote work where you can get everything done remotely - team building, motivating people, etc, etc.

Post reply on HN