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

Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

swissinfo.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 264 posts

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#41

Post by mehrdadn »

cryptonym wrote: post #30
mehrdadn wrote: post #10

I'm confused, what is the additional expense that employees are incurring by being home? Don't they pay the same rent either way?

Coming to mind: Electricity, AC, Heating, internet (more bandwidth & data cap), desk & chair, you may need an extra room if you are always working from home...

My confusion was that those aren't "rent" that the employee is paying. But I may have misinterpreted what they're referring to as "rent" here. They might have meant the company paying rent to the employee rather than the company reimbursing the employee's rent to the landlord.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#42

Post by nojito »

dannykwells wrote: post #2

In the US of course, we deduct our home office from our taxes, meaning that our fellow citizens, or debt, support working from home. Thos seems like a saner solution.

Not if you are an employee of a business.

The tax code just changed this year.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#43

Post by nojito »

the42thdoctor wrote: post #39
dependenttypes wrote: post #8

I don't get it. Why should someone working from home make more money than someone who does not?

I mean, since I started working from home my eletric bill is up by 20%. So is only fair to assume that they should pay me more, to cover that cost.

Do you pay your employer for the utilities at work?

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#44

Post by clarry »

dependenttypes wrote: post #8

I don't get it. Why should someone working from home make more money than someone who does not?

So if you don't work from home, you bring your own office and computer and desk and chair to work? In my part of the world, employer tends to provide those. And it makes sense that they still provide for what I need to do my job even if I don't do it on premises.

But yeah, I think people who work from home should make more money. Consider it a reward for not contributing to traffic congestion and pollution. :P If you really insist on working onsite, fine, maybe we can allow that but it's not a free perk!

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#45

Post by enriquto »

dependenttypes wrote: post #8

I don't get it. Why should someone working from home make more money than someone who does not?

> Why should someone working from home make more money than someone who does not?

If I have to work from home I need a larger apartment with an extra room, and it will be more expensive. During lockdown I'm using the room of my son, but it is not really a feasible arrangement in the long run.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#46

Post by sdfx »

antr wrote: post #20

Thought: - Companies that now realised that remote schemes works for them, will push for that scheme to remain, with the aim of reducing their fixed costs (office rent, utilities, insurance, etc). - This eliminates a big chunk of fixed costs... as most are shifted to the employees. - If authorities/employees start demanding that part of those costs are covered by the company, companies will push to get avoid work-fro…

A trend that started already in a lot of companies a couple of years ago and will only be accelerated by Covid. Many places do overbook desks in offices right now and have flex-tables without fixed assigned workers. Seems fair to think about compensating employees for the costs that are being pushed to their side.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#47

Post by Pfhreak »

dependenttypes wrote: post #37
buro9 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what this is. This is: Your employer should provide the means for you to do the work they ask of you.

Should I be forced by the courts to pay for the tools of my plumber in addition to the agreed wage? Anyway, it would make more sense to pay for a percentage of the transportation/time spent travelling of the workers rather than for housing costs - not only it would incentivise companies to enforce work from home but it would also be more fair to the employees. After all the employees would have a home regardless but…

Your plumber is not an employee. Your plumber should be paying for the tools of their employees, yes.

If you are an independent contractor, a company should pay your rate. If you are an employee the company should pay for the equipment needed for the job.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#48

Post by paulryanrogers »

andrewljohnson wrote: post #28

It’s advantageous for companies to pay for anything that can be construed as a business expense for employees, since that means they can transfer money to the employee tax free. Businesses in the US do this for health insurance, and remote companies can do it for a few more expenses. It makes sense to pay for whatever expenses the company can, as long as the administrative costs don’t outweigh the tax advantage.

Some employers though won't even reimburse for improved internet service during a pandemic lockdown. My guess is those who prefer butts in chairs would rather expand offices to comply with distancing guidelines, even in high CoL areas. Could be their are also more sufficient tax write-offs for office buildings.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#49

Post by gbear605 »

mehrdadn wrote: post #21
ceejayoz wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equipping and maintaining a home office? Space that can no longer be used for other stuff, and costs of things like chairs and office supplies a company would normally cover?

Oh wait, is this "rent" in the sense of the company essentially renting part of the worker's home? I read it as as paying the worker's share of the rent to the landlord! If that's the case then that would make a lot more sense.

What’s the financial difference between those two?

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#50

Post by [deleted] »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #35
antr wrote: post #20

Thought: - Companies that now realised that remote schemes works for them, will push for that scheme to remain, with the aim of reducing their fixed costs (office rent, utilities, insurance, etc). - This eliminates a big chunk of fixed costs... as most are shifted to the employees. - If authorities/employees start demanding that part of those costs are covered by the company, companies will push to get avoid work-fro…

> I'm sure that there are other unintended consequences, such as higher rents, but who knows. For Amazon's reputation for internal cost-cutting (such as displaying the pricing on computer peripherals in vending-machines in their SLU offices), Amazon makes me scratch my head for building-up their HQ in one of the most expensive cities to buy land in the world - ditto Facebook in Menlo Park. Why didn't Amazon choose Ke…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN