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

251–260 of 296 posts

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

#251

Post by jatins »

asib wrote: post #177

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…

> the WFH stans argue in terms defined by the employers

that just naturally follows from the employer-employee relationship and the fact is WFO has been the default for decades. So, somewhere the onus is falling onto employees if they want to go against what the default has been

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

#252

Post by leksak »

azangru wrote: post #16
shadowgovt wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having been there: it's not that. It's that, unfortunately, they have enough hard numbers to know most people do their best work with a boss physically breathing down their neck. I knew some folks at Google who worked 100% remote and only came into the office for critical meetings about once a month. They had proven they could operate that way with a more-or-less stellar track record.

> It's that, unfortunately, they have enough hard numbers to know most people do their best work with a boss physically breathing down their neck. While the conclusion — that most people do their best work when in the office — may be correct, why do you think that the cause of that is the boss breathing down people's necks rather than, say, more efficient collaboration among team members? My personal observations of…

Not to mention how body language helps resolve so much surrounding tone when saying something in person. Telling someone to do a thing face-to-face can easily be neutrally charged. The same sentiment expressed in text can carry more weight - feel like an order and appear as if it is more urgent leading to stress

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

#253

Post by chii »

deanCommie wrote: post #193
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…

You're making it sound as if working from home was something that everyone did eternally, and not something that started in 2020 out of necessity. Going through your routine: 1) Noone forced these workers to live 1 hour from the office. In fact in the beforeCOVID times, people made an effort to live closer to where they work. Sure many can't afford to, but we're not talking about baristas here, right? But highly paid…

> Noone forced these workers to live 1 hour from the office

> made an effort to live closer to where they work

sacrificed a lot to live closer, out of necessity, pre-covid. Then, it turned out that WFH can be made to work, with little to zero loss in productivity (if not gained productivity).

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

#254

Post by Rinzler89 »

ktosobcy wrote: post #249
Foobar8568 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am at 2h30 total commute, and will be soon at 3h-3h30, in Switzerland. At least, I can work remotely 2days+what ever I need depending of the day.

Uhm... that's like almost getting from one side of Switzerland to another (Zurich-Basel is like 1h by train?)

Maybe he lives and works somewhere that's not point to point connected by a direct train connection as the crow flies.

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

#255

Post by kentbrew »

sbrother wrote: post #25
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…

I think the worst part is 9) at night, do more work that requires focus time while no one is bothering you, since expectations got calibrated to when everyone had a private office and more control over their own time.

Don't forget 10) get your ass in bed by 10pm so you can haul it out at 5 to get to work again on time tomorrow.

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

#256

Post by epolanski »

azemetre wrote: post #215
epolanski wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We snatched a great talent from Amazon. And we didn't even need to throw crazy money, just full remote and 16 weeks of vacations per year. It's amazing what amazing talent you can get paying with time rather than money they don't need.

Wow 4 months is pretty awesome. Are you based in that USA? I worked at companies that had unlimited PTO and no one ever took that much time off.

Europe/Italy.

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

#257

Post by whstl »

dijksterhuis wrote: post #142
whstl wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are _some_ roles which may require in-person IME when working in a Product role, it worked better from the office. Doesn't have to be every day, but being able to talk directly to people is much better than having to schedule meetings. Tech positions don't even need daily video calls IMO. My team experimented with a few days of written status updates and it was fine. But they chose to have a 10-mins stand-up…

> being able to talk directly to people is much better than having to schedule meetings i do not understand what people are talking about when they say things like this personA: hey @personB you got 20 mins to talk about XYZ? personB: yeah gimme 10 mins personA: k, i’ll grab a coffee personA: /zoom start that’s ^ not scheduling a meeting. that’s having the same direct conversation but with like one extra step (joinin…

Well, that's already 30 minutes instead of 30 seconds.

And that's without taking what sibling poster said: sometimes people take 1h, 2h, 1 day to reply you on Slack.

With face to face communication you convey more than "the message".

This comes from personal experience: dealing with tech people with Slack-only communication is fine. Dealing with non-tech people is much different.

For example, I just RIGHT NOW have to ask a Salesperson about whether a feature is ready to go into prod. I can just walk 10 meters to their desk and get an answer in 5 secs. OR I can write to them in Slack on email and get an answer Monday, because they have 20 unread Slack messages and 500 unread e-mails.

You might call this "a bother" to them. To this Salesperson, which happens to be my buddy: this is how they prefers to work.

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

#258

Post by lbreakjai »

deciplex wrote: post #154
BeetleB wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if you're required to RTO, you should insist on not having Zoom/Teams/Webex on while in the office. "Come to my cube if you need me". Way before the pandemic, I almost never had those tools running on my work laptop - unless it was for a (rare at the time) cross-geo meeting. A coworker once sent me a screenshot of how I appeared in the IM tool - Last seen 120 days ago . Sadly, that went away once we hired our…

If you're required to RTO and doing it you probably aren't in a position to "insist" on jack shit.

You have to fully lean into it. Or at least pretend to. My company implemented RTO, citing the usual collaboration and culture, and I've suddenly turned into the biggest in-person sycophant every time they try to organise workshops online "because it's much easier".

We have offices on both sides of the Channel. It means travelling, which is expensive, hard to align, and really disruptive, but since the RTO mandate I suddenly realised _how valuable_ those in person interactions were, and how much more creative we were thanks to those watercooler chats.

I'm interviewing elsewhere, so I'm having a bit of fun seeing how far I can push the malicious compliance.

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

#259

Post by asib »

jatins wrote: post #251
asib wrote: post #177

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…

> the WFH stans argue in terms defined by the employers that just naturally follows from the employer-employee relationship and the fact is WFO has been the default for decades. So, somewhere the onus is falling onto employees if they want to go against what the default has been

I totally agree the onus is on workers - employers spontaneously giving workers more rights is rare. I just think the onus is not on proving that WFH is good for everyone, and instead on bargaining collectively. Especially since these RTO orders seem to be veiled, free layoffs - arguments about productivity are totally hopeless.

If Amazon engineers unionised, this RTO mandate could be fought without appeals to employers' business motivations. Workers shouldn't have to grovel for rights, we hold as much power as employers, and refusal to wield it is what hamstrings rights efforts.

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

#260

Post by _proofs »

skzv wrote: post #18

I go to the office almost everyday by choice. Free food, snacks, and coffee, gym, and medical clinics on campus. And it's just nice to get dressed and leave the house. But it's really nice to have the flexibility to WFH when I need to, especially just mornings to skip traffic.

this sounds like the modern, more privileged version of the coal mine's "company shop", and all the dependencies that industry created as "nice gestures" to their employees just to keep them around and on-site as much as possible.
Post reply on HN