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

Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

entrepreneur.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 296 posts

Re: Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

#171

Post by longnt80 »

10xalphadev wrote: post #156
epolanski wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it absurd how Americans can't give up on their suburbs and car centric development dystopia and then spend so much time in their cars.

I live within an European city - not downtown, but relatively close. My commute by car over ~10km is 18-20 mins, same distance by public transport takes 40-50 mins, depending on train reliability and workers not striking. So change my mind?

I don't intent to change your mind because it's often that people are stuck to their opinions.

Just want to say that sitting in public transports I can do other things such as doing some work or reading a book. While sitting in a car feels terrible to me. 30 minutes of driving a car is a lot worse than sitting in public transport. Also, if I have to commute by walk/bike, I also feel much better.

Re: Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

#172

Post by badlibrarian »

Aeolun wrote: post #167
itsoktocry wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I find it absurd how Americans can't give up on their suburbs and car centric development dystopia and then spend so much time in their cars I agree that kind of commute is insane, but maybe we don't all want to raise our families in shoe boxes (often surrounded by filth and crime) in the city centre (as if everyone in France lives in downtown Paris). You may find that thrilling, but I don't. None of it.

There is zero relation between filth and crime, and living in the city centre. At least inherently. There may be a correlation where you live.

"In 2005, Harvard University and Suffolk University researchers worked with local police to identify 34 "crime hot spots" in Lowell, Massachusetts. In half of the spots, authorities cleared trash, fixed streetlights, enforced building codes, discouraged loiterers, made more misdemeanor arrests, and expanded mental health services and aid for the homeless. In the other half of the identified locations, there was no change to routine police service.

The areas that received additional attention experienced a 20% reduction in calls to the police. The study concluded that cleaning up the physical environment was more effective than misdemeanor arrests."

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

Re: Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

#173

Post by longnt80 »

tesch1 wrote: post #149
epolanski wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it absurd how Americans can't give up on their suburbs and car centric development dystopia and then spend so much time in their cars.

Because door-to-door transport is faster than public transportation. Average American commute time is 26 minutes, what is it where you live? https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter8/urban-trans... .

They didn't necessary talk about time in commute. Maybe they thought spending time inside cars was useless. Sure your commute is shorter but most Americans also have to drive everywhere in their cars. To be honest, it's shit.

Edit: also, the chart is too simple to know how they conducted and came up with the data.

Re: Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

#174

Post by abeyer »

worstspotgain wrote: post #160
RobRivera wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, we Americans love our cars, oil, wars, wwf, and guns.

Well at least we still donate to preserve endangered species. 1 out of 5 ain't bad!

But only because we're confused and think we're still paying for pro wrestling. :D

Re: Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

#175

Post by worstspotgain »

angmarsbane wrote: post #150
worstspotgain wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People would go for condos if there were cheap large ones nearby. Alas, the supply restrictionists blocked all vertical development decades ago in order to inflate prices 10x and capture tech wages. That left SFHs and townhomes in far away places.

+1 for family sized (3 bedroom condos) if they existed close to work we could have families and jobs - imagine!

Now that's crazy talk.

You have to sign over most of your future earnings to the guy who's selling you the property, in exchange for (hopefully) getting the next guy to fork over most of theirs. The game is so hardcore that the pyramid scheme is as strong as ever.

Re: Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

#176

Post by spacemadness »

commandar wrote: post #93
barsonme wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s insane. 13 hours of work + commute. After 7 hours of sleep you only have 4 hours left in your day for literally everything else.

The push for the 8 hour work day over a century ago was often accompanied with slogans to the effect of "8 hours work, 8 hours rest, 8 hours for what we will." 5 hours round trip commuting a day is giving up over half of your prerogative time to simply shuffling from one place to another. The Bay Area is lucrative monetarily and all, but there's just no world where that's worth it for me.

I’ve worked in tech in the Bay for over a decade and met a handful of people with that insane of a commute. It’s not normal.

Re: Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

#177

Post by asib »

What I've found quite surprising in seeing these WFH vs RTO debates play out over the past couple of years is that even the WFH stans argue in terms defined by the employers.

The most obvious example of this is citing evidence that WFH makes people more productive, but there are various other arguments that try to position WFH as beneficial for both employers and employees.

I have opinions on many of the points made by both sides, but honestly it strikes me as the wrong argument to be having. The reason I want to be able to WFH is because I prefer it. I don't care if it's better for my employer or not, the same as I don't care whether working on Saturday and Sunday is better or not - I simply won't do it.

I know I'm in a privileged position to be able to say "I won't work in an office" and others have obligations that undermine their ability to show RTO employers the finger.

I guess I'm just surprised that people demanding WFH, simply because they want it, seem to be in the minority, judging by HN comments (fraught, I know). Perhaps this is a culture clash? I'm British, and this might be a US-centric thing.

Re: Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

#179

Post by redserk »

epolanski wrote: post #136
redserk wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately a new job, even 5-8 miles away, may turn a then-5 minute commute into a 45m-1hr commute in many metropolitan areas. I think more management needs to realize that forcing in-person isn't inherently beneficial. There can be value in meeting up if it's appropriately planned, though. My current management has been very accommodating with remote/hybrid. If there's a meeting where face-time is beneficial, peo…

With good public transport and metros such low distanced would never take that long. But Americans just can't give up the freedom of being stressed in their cars.

I'm a big supporter of public transit but this absolutism isn't grounded in reality.

A 5-10mi change in destination in almost every system that I'm aware of can add a tremendous amount of time to a commute.

Re: Google won't be mandating a strict return-to-office plan

#180

Post by slashdave »

xyst wrote: post #12

They say this now. But in 12 months (or the next layoff period), they will move from hybrid to full RTO. Still a shitty move to mandate RTO. Most people (IT folks) have spoke with do this routine: 0) daily routine to prepare for day 1) 1 hr commute to shitty office 2) login to computer, do calls with cross regional (and international) teams over Zoom/Teams/Webex or whatever conferencing system 3) teleconferencing wit…

> But those were mostly sales folks.

So, are there really so few biotech / hardware people here? Hard to do lab work from home.

Post reply on HN