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

Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 241 posts

Re: Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

#81

Post by izacus »

beckman466 wrote: post #60

"I believe this narrative is being funded by the commercial real spectate industry. They are absolutely fucked. Like Wile E Coyote running over a cliff, they are desperate to not look down. In December 2019, I asked some guys in wealth management, what’s a hot tip, and they were all about Commercial Real Estate, it never goes down! I laughed, but then wondered, what would make it go down? Anyway, that question is now…

So who's funding this ArsTechnica WFH narrative then? Who's the evil overlord trying to benefit driving this "war" narrative when there's so many open WFH positions?

Re: Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

#82

Post by Ericson2314 »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #32
todd3834 wrote: post #10

I’ve been part of a lot of these conversations and it is important to note that there is a significant percentage of employees that want to go back to the office. The trick is how to please everyone. It is easy to say, let those who want to come back come and those who don’t stay home. However those that want to go back say it is because they want to be surrounded by their coworkers. Having gone back to the office vo…

If an employer wants their workers to work in the office, they should work in the office. Workers who want to work remote can find employers who are ok with remote work. It isn't like there is a shortage of companies that allow remote work.

With employers being much fewer, the no-poach stuff, etc. this is a bad solution. Employers have always been more organized and holding more market power than employees.

Re: Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

#83

Post by khyryk »

zepto wrote: post #54
h4waii wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well said, I do want to point out that some of those who want to go back "to be surrounded by their coworkers" might be missing the fact that those who don't want to back might be because they don't want to be surrounded by their coworkers; they want to be surrounded by people they choose to have relationships with, not ones foisted upon them.

I’m a generally introverted person who prefers to work from home and performs better either at home or with a private office. That said, I have worked for many different companies, and rarely felt like working relationships were ‘foisted’ upon me. I generally enjoyed interacting with colleagues because we were working towards a common goal - i.e. we had something meaningful which we cared about in common. The one com…

How many companies would you estimate have cultures with such problems? If they're quite numerous, then it seems to me that remote work removes a high risk of landing into an unsatisfying role while paying the price for having to still go to the office -- this lack of satisfaction is much easier to deal with at home where one doesn't have to pretend to be engaged so long as work gets done.

Re: Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

#84

Post by llamataboot »

I'd love to work in an office most days a week. I enjoy the people, I think it helps with work/life boundaries and distractions. Especially if it was flexible.

But it would have to be an actual office. Like with a door. And room for a photo of my wife or two. Maybe a silly LED project.

If my choice is having to be somewhere at a certain time with absolutely no privacy, sometimes not even the ability to set stuff up and leave it, or WFH, it's WFH every time.

Maybe now that those of us that don't want to be in an office at all will be at home, those of that want to go in can take over the empty space and get actual personal space again instead of cafeteria tables with a row of monitors on them....

Re: Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

#86

Post by MattGaiser »

lanstin wrote: post #78
MattGaiser wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> with everything setup how you want is just a no-brainer. I had an earlier comment on how those against WFH might change their mind if they had a good chair. It might work in reverse too. The office might be far less annoying to people if they had a budget for equipment or at least got high quality equipment.

And a window where you can see hummingbirds and crows and toddlers. And get some fresh air.

I kept hearing birds during the remote period. So much chirping that I never really realized existed.

Re: Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

#87

Post by ekster »

sugarpile wrote: post #36
todd3834 wrote: post #10

I’ve been part of a lot of these conversations and it is important to note that there is a significant percentage of employees that want to go back to the office. The trick is how to please everyone. It is easy to say, let those who want to come back come and those who don’t stay home. However those that want to go back say it is because they want to be surrounded by their coworkers. Having gone back to the office vo…

While I truly do appreciate the cooperative tone, as someone who never intends to set foot in an office again except by choice (outside of onboarding), I think this is a rare event that has reduced the power asymmetry and should be taken advantage of. How do we make execs more comfortable? Simple, we make it so they have no choice to be uncomfortable with. Allow full remote or lose a significant portion of your workf…

I left a C level position over going back into the office even 2 days a week. There were plenty of options to go to an all remote company - I had three offers before choosing where I would go. There are just a ton of permanently remote jobs out there at the moment.

Re: Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

#88

Post by ekster »

nwatson wrote: post #31
treis wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could but Apple will look pretty dumb spending 5 billion on the spaceship only to sell it a few years later for (presumably) a lot less.

A cult with huge pockets would love the Apple spaceship. Perhaps one could timeshare to multiple cults.

You could convert it into weird housing and make a mint. Rich people would line up to own a condo there.

Re: Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

#89

Post by sgift »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #49
TigeriusKirk wrote: post #38

If a company isn't allowing remote work, they're voluntarily cutting themselves off from a large portion of the available labor pool. That's their choice, but they can never again complain about a shortage of talent. Which should affect their ability to participate in work visa programs, for example.

This cuts both ways: people from wealthy countries with high cost of living can never complain about competition from people who will be happy to take 1/4 of their salary to do the same job.

It's not like companies tried that before with outsourcing. It didn't work quite as well as hiring someone who lives in another city in the same country.

Re: Big tech companies are at war with employees over remote work

#90

Post by sgift »

InvaderFizz wrote: post #80
New_California wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions are cancer on private companies and should be abolished.

While I emphasize with your feeling on unions, having seen first hand how they operate, your tact is not convincing anyone and is just virtue signaling. The thing that I never see addressed with unions is what they are and what they do. The easiest way to look at unions is thus: Unions exist for the explicit purpose of enriching their members(not necessarily all equally), at the expense of all others. I have two issu…

> even if they can be reasonably certain that union employees that used violence against property and person during the strike

These things are crimes, so I don't see how they have to hire back someone who is in prison. Or do you mean "people who I think did these things but cannot proof"?

Post reply on HN