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

Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

techtarget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 411 posts

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#291

Post by Olreich »

lucidguppy wrote: post #203

I could be convinced to commute to a satellite office that's not affected by rush hour traffic. There's a lot of real estate available in the burbs. These don't really exist though, and their expense far outweighs their benefits. The problem is that companies expect employees to be mobile when they are not. It's called putting down roots for a reason. Pulling kids out of school, buying a new house is very disruptive.…

> Suffer a 10-15% degredation in communications.

If your team is split across 3 timezones and 5 cities already, you're going to damage your communications even further by making everyone go into the office again.

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#292

Post by roenxi »

sharemywin wrote: post #269
roenxi wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> point people at the stats in Scandinavia where a huge chunk of childcare costs is borne by the state, and yet the birth rates are dropping. What, the state that raises its funds by draining resources from families? The state paying for childcare can't make it cheaper to raise children; it just means everyone is living with the costs that they were already going to have to pay. On average, if the cost of raising kid…

1 billionaire can pay for a lot of kids.

A billionaire can't wave their arms in the air and make nannies sprout from the ground like mushrooms. The nannies have to come from somewhere else where they were doing something else.

If families are feeling the pinch, that "something else" is probably work that was important to setting up families and maintaining a standard of living. Forcing billionaires to put money into childcare is just making it more difficult to have children because those resource aren't going to be going towards whatever the more pressing problems are.

Billionaires make all that money by making things happen that people need done. Disrupting that and sending the resources to childcare is not likely to work either. If the problem is that childcare is too expensive, what is important is bringing down the cost, not trying to find someone else to pay the cost. There is no-one else, having children is too common an activity.

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#293

Post by ibejoeb »

tracker1 wrote: post #281
ibejoeb wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If companies start buying upside-down homes, they're probably going to start holding them until they can at least wash out. I'd hate to see a trend of employers becoming landlords.

I'm not sure that would be worse than the capital driven land-lord situation. I mean, in terms of renting out a house from a former employee until real estate improves enough to sell. Odds are it would be done via the same rental mgt companies that everyone else uses anyway. At least as long as the company isn't pushing to keep said properties longer than necessary.

It's "fine" as long as the employee isn't paying rent to the employer. There's just way to much risk of things going straight to hell.

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#294

Post by yurishimo »

selimthegrim wrote: post #151
yurishimo wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I feel very similarly, but I have an external factor as well. Last year I moved to The Netherlands from Dallas, TX, USA. My entire world has totally changed. Part of that move was a new job for a company local to my area. Before I moved, I worked remotely in the US for about 6 years. Well before the pandemic, etc etc. My favorite part of my job being a remote worker was getting together with people once or…

How do you like your living situation and the tax advantages?

> Tax advantages

Hah! I do qualify for a tax break as a highly skilled migrant for 5 years, but the salary in general is nowhere near the US. I was making well into 6 figures before and now I make about $50k~ equivalent. Maybe a little less. As a percentage, I probably pay about the same tax rate, with my discount, as I did in the US.

Except for the insane cost of energy (I could rant about that all day), most of my daily living expenses are much more predictable. My family health insurance was cut in half, for superior coverage. Car insurance is about the same, but I have a much smaller car so for me it's cheaper, even with no driving record in this country. If I had the 12 years of history, it would be half the cost again. Luckily, energy prices are coming down and my bill is being cut in half next month.

Overall, I'm very happy! The quality of life I would say is much better. I walk a lot more. I eat better (because eating out in general is $$$) and cook at home 90% of the time. I have 4 weeks of paid vacation and the government requires employers to provide vacation pay equivalent to 1 months salary for salary workers. My company encourages people to take advantage of their vacation time. At 5pm the office is empty despite most people not arriving until 9am or later.

If you're looking to move, I would say now is a decent time to look into it. Decide on a couple of countries you would be interested in and then start contacting companies with open positions. Mine specifically was not advertising for migrants, but they had permission from the government already because of some remote employees in the Philippines. Many European tech companies are hurting for workers and there is a large shortage for most midsize companies. Sure, the pay is a lot less, but if you're open to staying long term, you will receive a pension and becoming a citizen entitles you to retirement benefits as well.

Happy to answer more questions. I think I have contact info in my HN profile if anyone else is intersted!

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#295

Post by tracker1 »

deepGem wrote: post #181
tarsinge wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My meandering point is that: everyone has different life situations Yes, so it's not about preferences, it's not about the pros and cons, it's about not forcing people for needless suffering. Forcing people who want or need (professionally or personally) to work with other people at home is absurd, and forcing people who provide better work at home (for jobs were it makes no difference to be in office) to commute a…

The consistent response I have gotten from managers is that more or less - people fake work sitting in their homes or work multiple jobs, and we collaborate better when we are sitting in an office. They use this as a force function to pull employees back into the office. I call BS on all of these. Employees faking work - your hiring problem. Employees working multiple jobs - again your problem, keep them occupied wit…

In terms of not working or splitting to multiple jobs. Then that's a performance issue. If you're getting expected work done, it's not a problem... If you aren't, then you're a problem either way. This is not me condoning the practice, only pointing out that it shouldn't be the crux of the problem.

Depending on the job, you won't be on all the time. I have about 2-3 days a week where I'm on and pretty hyper productive and 1-2 where I'm kind of coasting or spending more thinking/learning/reading time.

I do find, I prefer office culture to working remotely... it's much more productive and team cohesion is often much, much better. International work is much harder still to coordinate. Right now I'm working on an East coast team, living in AZ... I'm about to have to start getting up yet another hour earlier next week, and so not a morning person. That said, given the market shifts really remind me of around 2001, and I'm holding on where I am for as long as I can and generally like the people I work with.

Mandatory office presence cuts both ways, you're less likely to gain top talent and even then, you're going to pay above relative market rates for it if you do. I've seen companies try to pay relative to cost of living for developers in different locations, and to me that just doesn't work either. Splitting the difference between top locations and local relative cost of living seems to be the trend, and I'm frankly happy to see it.

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#296

Post by jen20 »

lucidguppy wrote: post #203

I could be convinced to commute to a satellite office that's not affected by rush hour traffic. There's a lot of real estate available in the burbs. These don't really exist though, and their expense far outweighs their benefits. The problem is that companies expect employees to be mobile when they are not. It's called putting down roots for a reason. Pulling kids out of school, buying a new house is very disruptive.…

I very much feel the opposite way. If my company had offices downtown (where I live, because I like being able to walk to get a beer), I would go every day.

But they don’t - they’re in a suburban sprawl, at minimum a 30 minute drive - more like an hour during rush hour. I would quit on the spot if there were ever an attempt to make me go to the office on a fixed schedule.

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#297

Post by vanilla_nut »

lucidguppy wrote: post #203

I could be convinced to commute to a satellite office that's not affected by rush hour traffic. There's a lot of real estate available in the burbs. These don't really exist though, and their expense far outweighs their benefits. The problem is that companies expect employees to be mobile when they are not. It's called putting down roots for a reason. Pulling kids out of school, buying a new house is very disruptive.…

> I could be convinced to commute to a satellite office that's not affected by rush hour traffic. There's a lot of real estate available in the burbs.

Funny that you say this. I could only be convinced to come to an office if my employer satisfied the following conditions:

- accessible in - no or minimal video meetings in the office; I'm not taking the time to come in to sit on the same video calls I could take at home.

- either a lunch subsidy or reasonable in-house lunch prep options (more than just a refrigerator and a dirty shared microwave)

It definitely feels like housing affordability is a huge wrench in these gears. Up until this year, I lived in major US cities, and rent prices still shock me when I look back in my old neighborhoods. Even the suburbs have spiked to the prices I used to pay for walkable neighborhoods. I'm pretty sure my first criteria can't be satisfied unless the US has some kind of massive market-wide housing price collapse.

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#298

Post by tedivm »

Tangurena2 wrote: post #228
lucidguppy wrote: post #203

I could be convinced to commute to a satellite office that's not affected by rush hour traffic. There's a lot of real estate available in the burbs. These don't really exist though, and their expense far outweighs their benefits. The problem is that companies expect employees to be mobile when they are not. It's called putting down roots for a reason. Pulling kids out of school, buying a new house is very disruptive.…

My father was a chemical engineer. Back in the 60s & 70s, the company would pay to relocate our family to wherever they needed him (this included purchasing the house if we didn't sell it before the moving trucks showed up). That included several foreign countries. In my family's experience, that included England, Iran, Ireland & Saudi Arabia. During the 80s, his industry stopped relocating engineers. This correspond…

>Great, that's now a "voluntary quit"

That's actually a constructive dismissal, which counts as an involuntary resignation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#299

Post by mancerayder »

lucidguppy wrote: post #203

I could be convinced to commute to a satellite office that's not affected by rush hour traffic. There's a lot of real estate available in the burbs. These don't really exist though, and their expense far outweighs their benefits. The problem is that companies expect employees to be mobile when they are not. It's called putting down roots for a reason. Pulling kids out of school, buying a new house is very disruptive.…

>Make housing affordable

Make? Who is the subject doing the making here in this scenario?

Re: Nearly 40% of software engineers will only work remotely

#300

Post by albatross13 »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #265
akudha wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work for a non profit. After two years or letting everyone at home, this month they're forcing people to come to office at least twice a week. Not only that, anyone going to work has to book a desk in advance, otherwise they'll be sitting on the floor with their computer on their laps. This makes no difference to me personally, as I am a thousand miles away in another state, so I lucked out. I am still working from…

> otherwise they'll be sitting on the floor with their computer on their laps. Why bother showing up at that point.

Probably the same reason the people who still work at twitter show up, it's either some weird sense of loyalty or perhaps it helps them feel like part of the "those who grind" clique.

I dunno man, people are weird.

Post reply on HN