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

64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 50 posts

Re: 64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise

#11

Post by Leherenn »

postit wrote: post #4

Am I the only one who wants to work from home and still get the 30k-a-year raise? jokes apart, if remote culture consolidates with different compensation and benefit packages compared with those in the office, we'll likely start to see lawsuits in that matter.

Lawsuits based on what?

If employers feel employees working from home are less valuable, and employees prefer working from home, it sounds logical this will results in lower compensation for WFH employees. Not sure what laws they would be breaching here, it's just the market at work. It doesn't even matter whether they are right or wrong, the market should take care of that.

Re: 64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise

#12

Post by danmur »

Leherenn wrote: post #11
postit wrote: post #4

Am I the only one who wants to work from home and still get the 30k-a-year raise? jokes apart, if remote culture consolidates with different compensation and benefit packages compared with those in the office, we'll likely start to see lawsuits in that matter.

Lawsuits based on what? If employers feel employees working from home are less valuable, and employees prefer working from home, it sounds logical this will results in lower compensation for WFH employees. Not sure what laws they would be breaching here, it's just the market at work. It doesn't even matter whether they are right or wrong, the market should take care of that.

It would make more sense to 'rent' the office to people who want to come in. People who don't use the office pay less rent. Seems unlikely though :)

Re: 64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise

#13

Post by afandian »

postit wrote: post #4

Am I the only one who wants to work from home and still get the 30k-a-year raise? jokes apart, if remote culture consolidates with different compensation and benefit packages compared with those in the office, we'll likely start to see lawsuits in that matter.

Seriously though, working from home essentially requires permanent rental of a room on your house you might otherwise use for something else, or not need in the first place. And you foot the Internet and heating bill. Like-for-like, surely WFH should demand a higher, not lower, salary.

Of course ofice vs home is often not like-for-like and it enables people to live in different locations.

Re: 64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise

#15

Post by afandian »

danmur wrote: post #12
Leherenn wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lawsuits based on what? If employers feel employees working from home are less valuable, and employees prefer working from home, it sounds logical this will results in lower compensation for WFH employees. Not sure what laws they would be breaching here, it's just the market at work. It doesn't even matter whether they are right or wrong, the market should take care of that.

It would make more sense to 'rent' the office to people who want to come in. People who don't use the office pay less rent. Seems unlikely though :)

The assumptions are so lop sided and disproportionately benefit emloyers. Not everyone has a spare unused room at home. If they do, they are likely paying rent or mortgage. So not everyone has the option of choosing whether or not to work in an office. Your suggestion becomes less incentive more punishment of the less fortunate.

Re: 64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise

#16

Post by EliRivers »

afandian wrote: post #13
postit wrote: post #4

Am I the only one who wants to work from home and still get the 30k-a-year raise? jokes apart, if remote culture consolidates with different compensation and benefit packages compared with those in the office, we'll likely start to see lawsuits in that matter.

Seriously though, working from home essentially requires permanent rental of a room on your house you might otherwise use for something else, or not need in the first place. And you foot the Internet and heating bill. Like-for-like, surely WFH should demand a higher, not lower, salary. Of course ofice vs home is often not like-for-like and it enables people to live in different locations.

essentially requires permanent rental of a room on your house you might otherwise use for something else

Does it? When I'm working, I don't need that room during working hours for another purpose. I just work in it, tapping away and speaking into the microphone and so on, and when work is done, I use the room for sitting, reading, all that sort of thing; it's the lounge, I guess. Worked out fine so far.

Re: 64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise

#17

Post by villgax »

The author is pretty stupid to put out a weird point of view on defunding the police, he seems to think it's already done & there are less cops or something so crime is high? Is he nuts?

From wiki- " Police officers may be particularly badly suited for some community issues, such as mental health crises.[50] However, 1 in 4 people who are killed by the police have severe mental illness. Some activists argue that, if someone is experiencing a mental health crisis, and if there is no emergent threat to themselves or other people, mental health professionals may be more adept and capable responders. Furthermore, if more funds were diverted to help treat and support those with mental health issues, there could be better outcomes"

Also he's talking as if defunding(which he thinks) has already happened, what a dimwit.

Re: 64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise

#19

Post by vuldin »

I am not one of these people. I miss going into work and seeing people in person. I left my previous awesome job when I moved from Toronto because I decided I would find whatever developer job I could find in the town I was moving to rather than work remotely (that was before the pandemic). Now I'm at a job that will eventually be in the office, and also has traveling to customer sites built in, and I can't wait until that starts up.

Re: 64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise

#20

Post by tluyben2 »

neverminder wrote: post #7
xupybd wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. WFH is harder for management. I don't think it will last after the pandemic.

It's harder for the type of management who sit in their glass aquariums and mostly make sure there are butts in seats. It makes that type of management redundant.

I am not sure if that is not a very high % of managers though. Talking with colleagues, my own experiences and reading online, it seems large groups of managers need direct control and get very stressed if they do not have that. It is easier to wield your whip if people are actually there to receive the blows.
Post reply on HN