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

The workers have spoken: They're staying home

computerworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 263 posts

Re: The workers have spoken: They're staying home

#221

Post by machomaster »

moffkalast wrote: post #182
htrp wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And bring a change of clothes and find a shower at the office for when you show up all sweaty.

People seriously overestimate how sweaty you get if you use a tiny bit of antiperspirant and don't drive like a maniac.

You are seriously underestimating the amount of sweating a normal, healthy man does if he trained consistently for some time and his body learned to quickly adapt to minimal physical stress (heck, I sweat profusely even if I merely slowly walk). Let alone if there are any kinds of hills.

Re: The workers have spoken: They're staying home

#222

Post by angmarsbane »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #139
ghaff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much relates to commute. I'd probably meander in for a halfway decent office arrangement if it were less than a 30 minute walk and there were actually people I worked with there. But that hasn't been the case so I don't.

But commute can change. For example, if you lived in Mountain View in walking distance of Google, would you turn down an offer from Facebook because your home in Mountain View is no longer walking distance to Facebook HQ? Also, life situations. If your partner has a job at a school or hospital that requires physical presence whose commute do you prioritize? Making jobs that can be remote, remote gives workers massive…

I read a theory that this is part of the reason why people are migrating to metro areas. Metro areas are more likely to have industries for both spouses careers as opposed to just one. Enabling fully remote for remote eligible roles makes it possible for couples to migrate to areas that only support one of their in-person careers.

Re: The workers have spoken: They're staying home

#223

Post by johnnyanmac »

Justsignedup wrote: post #102
throwaway387232 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I clicked in to this topic to make these exact same points, but you did a better job of it than I would have. My employer mandated a minimum number of days in-office per week and then implemented the flex desk system with all of the drawbacks that you outlined. In my company's case it's a little worse: There are, in fact, often no available open desks in my workgroup. Furthermore there's no enforcement or discipline…

Mixed bag for me. My office is pretty decent but we have a bigger office than we currently need. My last job, at the office it was so loud (no dedicated conference rooms) that I was better off being at home, but unfortunately they also had zero respect for calendars, so getting in touch with people was... pretty much horrible no matter what way. In-office was less bad. I had offices with desks so small and shitty I j…

>I once had a boss that saw my desk and started complaining to HR that it was too big, and if we can split this desk into 2 to save on office space.

ooh, I know the perfect way to save on office space...

as is the theme of 2023/4, Companies want to pretend they want X, but then make X as miserable as possible because the real reason is Y (anywhere from taxes, to sunk cost fallacy, to lack of trust in workers, etc).

Re: The workers have spoken: They're staying home

#224

Post by Fire-Dragon-DoL »

Aurornis wrote: post #124
buildbot wrote: post #5

Companies get so much more out of people working from home - Microsoft has realized this and still broadly supports remote work.

> Companies get so much more out of people working from home We actually saw a very bimodal split: One group of employees had virtually no measurable change (neither improvement or decline) in any metric, subjective or otherwise. The other group's productivity plummeted by nearly all metrics (again, from subjective performance reviews to any objective measures we looked at). The angry internet comment section solutio…

Then why forcing group 1 in office is acceptable, but forcing group 2 remote unacceptable?

Re: The workers have spoken: They're staying home

#225

Post by Fire-Dragon-DoL »

SoftTalker wrote: post #120
com2kid wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is your office is 20 miles from your workplace. 20 miles is more than the entire length of Seattle. Heck it is more than the entire width of the Seattle Metro area (western most tip of Seattle heading straight east until it turns into farmland). There should be sufficient housing stock such that people don't need to drive 20 miles to work!

Some people prefer not to live in a dense urban environment. It's cool when you're young and single. It sucks when you have a family.

It doesn't, it's specific per person

Re: The workers have spoken: They're staying home

#226

Post by johnnyanmac »

LiquidSky wrote: post #27
bunderbunder wrote: post #10

I think that companies might have more success getting people back to the office if they had not also spent the past decade or two systematically updating offices to be beautiful to look at in CAD renderings but awful to actually occupy and try to work in. This move toward not giving permanent desk assignments to people who are required to be in the office also makes it worse. Open plan offices are a bit of a product…

>A couple years ago, I was eager for a return to office. There's your first mistake. You're right that recent trends have been bad, but offices have always been like this. There's a reason "this meeting could have been an email" has been a cliche for decades now and even before that the office was generally depicted as a place where you either pretend to work or desperately struggle to get work done in the face of en…

as always it varies. First job was very 00's style cubicle arrangement. You may have to move depending on what project/team you were on but you could count on a dedicated desk at any given time.

2nd was a WeWork building. open office room, but the arrangement had plenty of private booths (sharing the floor with like, one other startup) or lounges depending on your needs.

then 3 was mid pandemic and the return was a lot more of that "reserve your desk" style. It was a "true hybrid" workplace, though (0-5 days a week in office. Your choice, zero pressure), so it was only during certain big deadlines where it'd cause difficulties.

Re: The workers have spoken: They're staying home

#227

Post by johnnyanmac »

Aurornis wrote: post #124
buildbot wrote: post #5

Companies get so much more out of people working from home - Microsoft has realized this and still broadly supports remote work.

> Companies get so much more out of people working from home We actually saw a very bimodal split: One group of employees had virtually no measurable change (neither improvement or decline) in any metric, subjective or otherwise. The other group's productivity plummeted by nearly all metrics (again, from subjective performance reviews to any objective measures we looked at). The angry internet comment section solutio…

> the problem isn't as simple as you read about on internet comment sections. In my experience, it's good to have some remote employees but the WFH dynamic collapses when you try to let everyone do it. It's not appropriate for everyone.

We talk about this, but also never particularly talk about how many an office space isn't for everyone. Especially as Gen Z, who grew up with smart tech and instant, HD remote communication, starts to enter the workforce.

I'd say you simply have to choose one or the other per team. If it doesn't work for some, move teams or fire them. It's not like management doesn't make unoptimal, undesirable moves all the time so this situation isn't special.

Re: The workers have spoken: They're staying home

#229

Post by johnnyanmac »

com2kid wrote: post #117
bluebit wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cute that you think a person can just move house when they get a new job.

Historically that is what people did. When tenure at a job was 20+ years, and a house could be paid off in 10 years, it made a ton of sense. The fact that such an idea is absurd now is not because the idea itself is absurd, but because how we have structured our economy is absurd. People shouldn't be wasting their lives commuting. In older books they have kids and the dad coming back home to eat lunch together! Heck…

indeed. But in the short term, we gotta do what we gotta do. Despite the RTO mandates, no one in power seems interested in making walkable communities to make the commute easier, nor anything else involving semi-efficient public transportation. I am already fortunate enough to live in a house, I'm not multiplying my rent by 2x+ and reducing my QoL by 3x+ just to satisfy some real estate owners (not that I have an in-office job right now).

Re: The workers have spoken: They're staying home

#230

Post by johnnyanmac »

JBorrow wrote: post #31
whatever1 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buses also are useless. Thry routinely waste you hours due to their slowness and inconsistency. The choices really are two: subway (or any dedicated rail thing) or car.

Buses are only slow and inconsistent because of cars.

beyond lack of dedicated lanes, the schedules in L.A. are just terrible. Most run hourly and don't really run late.
Post reply on HN