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

Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 409 posts

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#121

Post by jrockway »

heelix wrote: post #116
jrockway wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably not the norm. I have a friend that works in a call center, and they've been working remotely during the pandemic. Her company won't pay for anything; she uses her personal laptop, personal consumer-grade Internet connection, etc. The consumer ISP doesn't provide their stated upload and download ever, and the ISP charged her $100 to come out and investigate the issue without fixing it. (You run a spee…

Commercial internet does not cost a lot of money. I do a cable modem and while my speeds are a bit slower than the residential option (for the same money) I don't have bandwidth caps or 'talk to the hand' when an issue happens. Night and day between the two experiences. Worth looking into.

I agree. The problem is cost (higher, not being paid for by the company), and rewarding the ISP for their poor service by paying them more.

My philosophy is that you just have to accept that we messed up by letting one company monopolize the space, and pay them more for their better service... but not many people agree with me.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#122

Post by downerending »

Loughla wrote: post #5

Meanwhile, my employer has said zero remote work once the state transitions into the next phase. They want to be "fair" to everyone, including those who have positions that cannot be performed remotely. So, you have a co-morbidity? Nope. You have no childcare suddenly? Nope. It's startling how stuck in the 1980's some people are. Just absolutely astonishing.

What they want is everyone's butts back in their chairs, in the office. The rest sounds like pretext.

It remains to be seen how that will play out at my job, but I am very seriously considering a "100% remote" policy myself (as in, no office, no travel at all), even if I have to switch jobs.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#123

Post by spyspy »

OldFatCactus wrote: post #3

A friend that works there told me that they have been polling their employees for strong feelings around going permanently remote

The Times has actually been very progressive about WFH policies. Partially because they've been consolidating the number of floors they occupy at 620 8th Ave, so there's legitimately less room for everyone. But every team was designed to be remote friendly and there was very little expectation to be in the office. Some people lived in NYC and still refused to bother to come in for months at a time.

Source: worked at NYT through 2019.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#124

Post by adjkant »

ryanSrich wrote: post #120
adjkant wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I addressed the privilege in my post. It's in bad faith to bring it up as if I didn't, also gaslighting. You addressed it in respect to the ability to quit. I'm talking in terms of the standard you are setting and projecting onto all companies. I don't see how that's in bad faith or gaslighting. I don't think you know what that term means based on your use. > For jobs that can be done remote This might be the key i…

> I don't think you know what that term means based on your use. You made me second guess if I did in fact address the issue. I did. > it sounds like you are massively undervaluing aspects of non-remote work that are beneficial to both workers and companies. You're right. I am undervaluing it. Being in person has no inherent benefits over being remote. Maybe 20 years ago, but the internet has fixed those issues. Low-…

> Being in person has no inherent benefits over being remote.

Socializing. Clearer communication with better nonverbal interpretations. The ability to more easily drop by someone's desk, to whiteboard in a room, etc. For some, productivity. Separation of home and work life. Even an excuse to get out and about.

Yes, there are ways to get some remote analogs for some of these, but they don't magically work the same for everyone.

> Low-fidelity remote work is a cultural issue.

That doesn't make it any less of an issue to implement. If anything, that's harder than a technology issue. Why would you trust these bad companies to implement any sort of sane work culture in a remote setting than they do in an office? If anything, remote only offers more abuse vectors.

> Companies refuse to do remote work correctly so they can continue archaic co-located work.

I think you're far too pessimistic here. Laziness and resistance to change is far more likely than malice in regards to not going remote.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#125

Post by _jal »

jes5199 wrote: post #12
Loughla wrote: post #5

Meanwhile, my employer has said zero remote work once the state transitions into the next phase. They want to be "fair" to everyone, including those who have positions that cannot be performed remotely. So, you have a co-morbidity? Nope. You have no childcare suddenly? Nope. It's startling how stuck in the 1980's some people are. Just absolutely astonishing.

companies who ask their employees to take risks with their health, without a compelling reason, are destroying any sense of goodwill or morale. In the short term, that change might be invisible, but over the long-term it destroys businesses

I know one startup learning this. They're ~80 people, and I thought they had a decent chance of making it until this.

They lost their 'backbone' over the return-to-work plan. She was the one who kept everything nontechnical running. She felt the risk of bringing it home was too great, and $CEO pressured when he should have compromised. Now they're losing other key staff and it looks likely to become a stampede.

I'm sure there are many possible takeaways from this, and one would be to beware of soft-power/moral-authority rivals. I think a far smarter one might be about empathy.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#126

Post by Loughla »

cheez wrote: post #98
Loughla wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>As an institution of higher education, I believe that we should be evaluating all of our options and enacting what is equitable for our employees. Please note that 'equitable' does not mean everyone is treated the same. Some individuals have life circumstances out of their control during COVID. We are already working remotely, we know that it does work. Further, it gives those of us that need it the most the flexibi…

You work for higher ed. COVID is about to decimate them. I'm not surprised they are taking this tack. It's survival mode now.

I agree with you, 100%. But we're a commuter campus that doesn't rely on room/board to cover our bills. I assumed we would see more flexibility.

I guess that's what I get for assuming.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#127

Post by ThePadawan »

gruez wrote: post #73
jmalicki wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So unlike a modern tech company, they sit farther apart and at least have barriers between their desks?

agree on the bigger desks bit, but what difference does a 12" tall barrier make?

At the last open office I worked at, you could hear people have conversations 8 desks down. I would have quite liked 7 barriers between me and them.

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#128

Post by yingw787 »

momokoko wrote: post #109

Get ready for a wave of outsourcing of everything from tech to bpo like the US labor market has never seen in the coming 6 months. Once employers go through the initial pain of setting up remote work, the more than 50%(and sometimes as much as 80%) cost savings will be irresistible. If you are not in government, healthcare, or other industry that does not have legal requirements to maintain a US presence and you work…

For a contrary opinion, see this famous Hacker News post:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18451311

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18442941 (parent)

(or at least it's famous to me)

Re: Most employees of NYT won’t be required back in physical offices until 2021

#130

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

nicoburns wrote: post #49
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody should be you, if possible. Having enough savings to be able not to worry about the nearest future is not just a perfect option, it's a necessity.

Unfortunately it's not a realistic option for most people. If we're talking about "shoulds", then we should have a welfare state that covers these scenarios rather than putting the burden on individuals, many of whom will not have the means to implement it even if they wanted to.

It's not "should" in the sense of some moral obligation, but rather your main aim in life: once it's realized, you can move on to realizing other aims.

Of sourse many people really can't do it. But there are many who can but choose short-term gratification instead. I'm telling them: you're making a big mistake.

Post reply on HN