71–80 of 290 posts
CTO at Markforged here. If you can't work it out with your employer hit us up. We're hiring remote software engineers. We'll ship you a printer so you can dev from home. Good luck! Like a lot of other commenters have posted - you have options.
A printer?
My 5k+ person tech employer has basically said anyone who wants to work remote will be able to. The argument seems to be that it won't be possible to competitively hire/retain if remote is not an option.
This is the key. Companies that don't understand this soon will understand it later.
Don't negotiate. Dictate. I'm not joking either. I tried negotiating this (pre-covid), only to get a "final offer" of a measly couple of remote days etc. Being on the spectrum, I took their word at face value, found another job that does 100% remote, and put in my resignation. Surprisingly that "absolutely final" position wasn't that final anymore, and they'd've rather had me remote than not at all. Had the new job n…
Key to a negotiation is understanding what the other party wants (and what you want, of course). WHY do they want you to work on premise? Wanting your presence is just a means to an end. There could be many reasons, like: * They think it's easier to control how much somebody works if it's on premise * it might be easier to manage * it might be inertia * they think it's more efficient * somebody is trying to exert con…
I think this is a significant part of the problem that has prompted the question. It would be really helpful to have some insight into what is driving the move back to the office from people on HN.
I've posted about one of the reasons that some employers are itching to get their employers back in the office here[1].
Key to a negotiation is understanding what the other party wants (and what you want, of course). WHY do they want you to work on premise? Wanting your presence is just a means to an end. There could be many reasons, like: * They think it's easier to control how much somebody works if it's on premise * it might be easier to manage * it might be inertia * they think it's more efficient * somebody is trying to exert con…
Here's another viewpoint: sure, the company may be "giving something up" letting you WFH. But, there are also positives for you and them in terms of productivity, health, etc. Clarify that it's a change, but change happens, and that the positives will outweigh the negatives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A 10 mil life insurance policy would require underwriting and, assuming you are healthy, will run between $60k and $120k a year. As a faceless corporate board member, why not just let you flounder while instructing management to find an engineer that is not as expensive? I think inflation is gonna bite a lotta people in the near future
> A 10 mil life insurance policy would require underwriting and, assuming you are healthy, will run between $60k and $120k a year. That's bonkers - a £10 million policy was quoted to me at £4.5k a year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To play devil's advocate to your devil's advocate: why haven't you been doing this already for the past 5 years?
Presumably because they feel it’s not worth the downsides of working remotely. Put another way: if they won’t do a remote workforce for a 66% discount, why would they go for it at a smaller discount?
I've worked remotely for several employers and clients, and they all seem to hire domestically. A few had stories about their experiences with hiring foreign remote workers, and they came to to the conclusions that doing so isn't always worth the labor discounts versus just hiring domestically.
I don't think remote work is the issue here for workers in the US, because the same employers have no problem underpaying visa workers who live in the US that can't complain because getting fired means being deported.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A 10 mil life insurance policy would require underwriting and, assuming you are healthy, will run between $60k and $120k a year. That's bonkers - a £10 million policy was quoted to me at £4.5k a year.
No, that sounds about right - maybe you are looking at a different kind of life insurance. Just take the SSA yearly chance of dying (the real chance of dying is likely less if you are healthy, but on average this should be the price) from [0] and multiply by 10 million. Only 16k for a 25 year old but around 160k for an average 65 year old. [0] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
I mean you can just go on a price comparison site right now for yourself and see that this isn't even remotely the price quoted for multiple providers and a wide range of levels of cover - nothing is even remotely close to even 16k.
If you’re working for a company where remote work is a negotiation, I say it’s a good sign that you should seek greener pastures.