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

Post by leetcrew » Mon, May 25, 2020, 4:56 PM UTC

skohan wrote: post #164

thetopher wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a non-remote employee, I had to find housing near my office. Now, as a remote employee, my only real requirements are a power source and internet connection. Sure, I have to live somewhere, but that need isn’t a result of my employment. It seems that non-remote employees have more specific and expensive housing requirements and costs.

Since I've been working at home, and so has my partner, we have had a lot more issues in the apartment. We're both on the phone all day, so there's very little chance of having a quiet space in the apartment during the week. We're also forced to split the work-related resources, like we have to organize an equitable time-share on the desk which is better for working, vs the kitchen table which is not as comfortable.…

Post by ornornor » Mon, May 25, 2020, 5:03 PM UTC

CaptainZapp wrote: post #130

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. That's not that easy. While Switzerland doesn't do rent control per se and there can be regional differences depending on scarcity of real estate for rent a landlord is rather restricted in raising rent once a contract is signed. The only reasons why a rent can be raised are: - Additional investments into an apartment, but t…

Post by Phylter » Mon, May 25, 2020, 5:04 PM UTC

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…

Post by leetcrew » Mon, May 25, 2020, 5:07 PM UTC

skohan wrote: post #202

leetcrew wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

aren't you saving a good amount of money too though. I don't know if you and your partner drive to work, but I'm saving about $120/month just on gas, and I'd probably end up saving another $100-200/month on vehicle depreciation and insurance if this went on indefinitely. an extra $300/month makes a big difference in the rental market where I live.

I normally commute by bike so this isn't a factor for me. I'm also using more electricity, and I'm drinking the coffee I bought rather than the office coffee.

Post by wool_gather » Mon, May 25, 2020, 5:10 PM UTC

txcwpalpha wrote: post #196

dahfizz wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what costs are pushed on me when I WFH. I already need a place to live and an internet connection. What else is there?

Many people, if they know they are going to be WFH regularly, will want larger homes so that they can have a dedicated office space instead of having to set up a desk in their bedroom. This is especially true if you live with someone who also WFH and you can’t really work from the same room due to constant conference calls. Instead of a 1BR apartment, you might want a 2BR + a study, which obviously costs more. Even i…