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

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

#41

Post by ergocoder » Sat, May 22, 2021, 8:34 PM UTC

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.

Lawsuit is so yesterday.

Here is how we can do it in 2021:

1. Poor people cannot afford to live close to the office (probably true)

2. Certain minority groups are poor (probably true)

3. Minority is likely to commute for longer time and distance

4. Commute kills people with road accidents

5. Accuse execs of racism and killing minority.

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

#42

Post by treeman79 » Sat, May 22, 2021, 9:12 PM UTC

nutshell89 wrote: post #26

Arguably $30k isn't a meaningful wage increase to the people surveyed on Blind — especially if the users are heavily weighted towards the FAANG / SV / SF crowd with high housing / cost of living expenses.

Been offered 50-100k higher wage if I moved to San Francisco. Always laugh each time.

Equivalent family house and lifestyle would need way more then that to live there.

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

#43

Post by Zababa » Sat, May 22, 2021, 9:34 PM UTC

Viliam1234 wrote: post #39

carlmr wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily this is highly illegal in the developed world.

As far as I know our company does not have such surveillance software. But we all use Microsoft Teams, which changes the color of your icon from green to yellow if you leave your computer for a minute (or stop using keyboard and mouse). So I guess the only difference is whether someone looks at the icons.

If you have some control over your computer, you can easily create a small AutoIT script that runs every 30 seconds and move the mouse a bit.

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

#44

Post by PurpleFoxy » Sat, May 22, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

Viliam1234 wrote: post #39

carlmr wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily this is highly illegal in the developed world.

As far as I know our company does not have such surveillance software. But we all use Microsoft Teams, which changes the color of your icon from green to yellow if you leave your computer for a minute (or stop using keyboard and mouse). So I guess the only difference is whether someone looks at the icons.

I noticed that when running MS teams in a flatpak on wayland, it no longer has access to the mouse and keyboard input so it just shows me as online always.

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

#45

Post by sharken » Sun, May 23, 2021, 2:58 AM UTC

jonny_eh wrote: post #21

murgindrag wrote: post #9

I can't stand fishbowl jobs. Cubicle farms make me depressed. I don't like being on display when I work. Humans are animals. We stretch. We burp. We fart. We scratch ourselves. We eat. We drink. We dance. We might want to randomly punch something. We nap. We naturally do all sorts of things which are "unprofessional." When we get tired, we need a break to recoup and come back supercharged. None of those interfere wit…

We also socialize and travel. I personally miss going to the office and interacting with coworkers.

Same here, sure there are downsides as mentioned above, but the interaction creates a strong human connection that is just not there when working remotely.

In a team where one member might only be present in the office 1 or 2 days a week, i tend to talk to the other team members instead.

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

#46

Post by perl4ever » Sun, May 23, 2021, 4:20 AM UTC

afandian wrote: post #32

EliRivers wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Many people have dependents or families.

That goes without saying.

But I think some people do not really envision a person in the tech industry with a family living in, like, a tiny studio apartment.

Where I live, that would suggest a household income of Are we talking about the SF bay area?

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

#47

Post by kwhitefoot » Sun, May 23, 2021, 12:02 PM UTC

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #25

murgindrag wrote: post #9

I can't stand fishbowl jobs. Cubicle farms make me depressed. I don't like being on display when I work. Humans are animals. We stretch. We burp. We fart. We scratch ourselves. We eat. We drink. We dance. We might want to randomly punch something. We nap. We naturally do all sorts of things which are "unprofessional." When we get tired, we need a break to recoup and come back supercharged. None of those interfere wit…

When some cubicle-farm jobs go remote, they go remote with the employer requiring you to run surveillance software (webcam observing you, tracking of continual mouse and keyboard activity) to ensure that you are present at your computer all working hours, except authorized breaks. So, even when liberated from the office those workers don’t get all the freedoms that you might hope for.

Probably illegal in Norway. And other civilized countries.

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

#48

Post by deepserket » Sun, May 23, 2021, 12:23 PM UTC

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #31

carlmr wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily this is highly illegal in the developed world.

Is it? Platforms like Upwork advertise this software to businesses wanting to hire freelancers as a major advantage of choosing to go through them, and I hear that trucking companies in the US regularly install cameras within their trucks to watch the drivers at all times.

uh... why? the job of a trucker is to go from A to B as far as i know, isn't gps enough? why would you need to install cameras?

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

#49

Post by Mediterraneo10 » Sun, May 23, 2021, 1:43 PM UTC

deepserket wrote: post #48

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? Platforms like Upwork advertise this software to businesses wanting to hire freelancers as a major advantage of choosing to go through them, and I hear that trucking companies in the US regularly install cameras within their trucks to watch the drivers at all times.

uh... why? the job of a trucker is to go from A to B as far as i know, isn't gps enough? why would you need to install cameras?

Various reasons. One is to check that the driver is not looking at his phone or watching videos while driving (because they have so much downtime, truckers often have a tablet or laptop to watch movies on), i.e. the same reason there are cameras watching the drivers of trains. Truckers occasionally try to bring their spouses along, which is against the company’s rules, or they make use of prostitutes on the road, and a camera lets the company ensure that no one is ever inside their truck but the driver.

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

#50

Post by EliRivers » Tue, May 25, 2021, 12:32 PM UTC

afandian wrote: post #32

EliRivers wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Many people have dependents or families.

Indeed they do. Many of those families and dependents have individual bedrooms. During the day, when they're not sleeping in it, those rooms have sat empty because the person has been at school or the office.

Same argument as before, I guess. I could sit in there working away quite happily. No extra room needed.

Sure, it's not the case for everyone, and some people share bedrooms, but the blanket statement that "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" is a massive generalisation that doesn't apply to many households in which people have bedrooms and in which there is a lounge.

Sure, add a desk, change the furniture layout. I'm saving 25% of my rent by not having to commute. It's a two-bed flat; between us, we have 50% of the rent to spend again each month on furniture, rearranging things, or just renting a place with two extra rooms. Not that we need them, with three rooms available to work in during the day (two bedrooms and a lounge). My experience is not uncommon and in no way do we essentially need more rooms to work in.