Marissa Mayer is rolling in her pile of Yahoo! money.
Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
331–340 of 1001 posts
Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
#332I work for a pretty well-known tech company, and my hypothesis is that we'll switch to a mostly at-home work week, where most people WFH 3 or 4 days a week with one day of the week being designated as a "meeting day" where everyone is in the office. I don't think this will happen because of people are worried about virus transmission, but instead because most people like working from home and we've proven we can be j…
The utility of partial WFH is much, much lower than full WFH. With partial WFH I still have to live within reasonable commuting distance from the office, while if I’m full WFH I can leverage the difference in cost of living away from the office.
I would consider a much longer commute to be acceptable once or twice a week compared to having to do it every day. You could still have the benefit of having a lower cost of living without increasing the number of hours you spend commuting per week.
Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
#333What is Twitter even doing? Like I realize they likely have an infinite number of people working for them, but are any of them doing anything important at all? This is not like the usual "I just don't see how a company needs that many people" laments: this is specific to Twitter, as they seem to have at most one engineer working on new features... it took like five years for them to implement "increase size of Tweet…
I've hung out a bunch at Twitter's offices (in both SF and NYC). It's pretty eye-opening and a good lens into why Twitter the company is so fucked up.
The vibe that comes off is more of a social hangout club than a serious tech company. You meet your friend for lunch and there's professional chefs cooking gourmet meals, you hang out in the social area while the celebrity of the day comes into the office and everyone takes pictures with them. There's breakout rooms where people are filming marketing videos. The people that are hanging out talking to celebrities all day are making $200,000+ somehow. Anyone with right of center political views is casually censored from the platform with no recourse, because it's a "cool social hangout platform" not a serious technology product with mature guidelines of what acceptable speech is and formalized appeals processes. There won't be any productivity loss from everyone going remote because nobody is doing real work anyway.
Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I could keep my current compensation and move to the low cost of living area where my family is located, I would reach financial independence 10-15 years ahead of my current trajectory with Bay Area rents/costs. I'll settle for the minor inconveniences of WFH any day in order to get a decade of my life to spend with family or to work on my own projects.
Companies don't do this. They will adjust your salary down based on your city of residence. Square is one example of this. You're not compensated for the value you provide, you're compensated for the cost of living near the office. You're also now competing against a national talent pool vs locals only
So you're considering Candidate A, who lives in SF, and B, who lives in a small town.
You decide that B has to compete with A on talent, but A doesn't have to compete with B on price.
Does that make strategic sense?
Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
#335I work for a pretty well-known tech company, and my hypothesis is that we'll switch to a mostly at-home work week, where most people WFH 3 or 4 days a week with one day of the week being designated as a "meeting day" where everyone is in the office. I don't think this will happen because of people are worried about virus transmission, but instead because most people like working from home and we've proven we can be j…
Why keep the expensive office in your case?
If it gets even mildly popular, different companies with different meeting days could time-share an office.
Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
#336It would be good if more tech companies embraced this. I bet if they need tools for themselves we’ll see a lot of progress in remote collaboration tools. To make this work I wonder how executives will adapt. In my company the higher you go up the chain, the more they want face to face communication. I guess most top executives are people persons so not seeing things like body language or using body language takes awa…
A potential compromise I am hoping for would be an increased willingness of companies to open satellite or smaller offices in secondary or tertiary real estate markets.
That would be great and healthy for the whole country if things were more spread out.
Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
#337Then why pay $200k for a software engineer in the valley when the same talent can live outside of the bay area and can do with 1/3rd of the salary? The question I have is what portion of the $200k salary is 1) due to the raw talent of the individual 2) because they live in the bay area.
It's the rate the market dictates.
The thing is, if more people are remote, the market includes people -outside- of SV.
Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will have to shamelessly try and sway you. Get a large house, a swimming pool, a home office room with all the games and gadgets you ever wanted, a nice surround 5.1 system optically connected to a gaming pc, a nice couch to rest now and then and plan your code ahead. See if you still miss your cubicle (nothing wrong with that, but just what i wrote a thought). Thats my lifestyle since i starting working remotely.…
I may not like having a tiny desk crammed in a huge team in a loud noisy space, I do still like seeing my coworkers daily and attending meetings with them and going out to lunch with them. Working from home is isolating and lonely for me.
But this is only because you are now out of a sudden in such a situation. If you knew it was like this for ever and its up to you how much human contact you still get you can team up with some friends (or collegues that you especially like) instead of those collegues you got randomly assigned to. I have this that while my contract is running out right now and I am ready to work on something new, I kind of know that I will miss my old collegues and while I will certainly get to like new ones as well, there is something to it to keep up you old team for longer.
Or to put it short: Why do I have to switch my lunch group, just because I switch the employer. Remote does not mean you have to stay alone or with family all day.
Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would people fitting this description not prefer the flexibility of working remotely? As an aside -- I prefer not to use the term "work from home", as the ideal (for me) is the ability to work from anywhere at my option. Also, for what it's worth, co-working spaces can be a workable alternative to a traditional office.
The workplace is one of the last places where you're forced to interact face-to-face with a diverse range of people multiple times, on a regular basis. If you're young, and from out of town, you get a lot from that. Certainly, there are different clubs and groups out there, but the people they attract are fairly homogenous, and monofocused on their topic of interest. There are coffee-houses and bars, but you'd be luc…
[deleted]
Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever
#340So... does this mean Twitter is going to transition to a globally dispersed workforce? Or are they still going to hire mostly Bay Area folks?
The latter would seem insane if they are going to allow teams to be 100% remote. Why pay SF rates if you're getting a WFH employee?