Working from home is powering productivity

Post by azemetre » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 11:08 PM UTC

ozim wrote: post #57

criddell wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think framing the WFH argument in terms of productivity is a bad idea. It’s difficult to win that argument and it might not even be true. Instead, call it a benefit, like paid vacation or health insurance. Nobody argues that employers contributing to an employees 401(k) plan is good for productivity. They do it to attract and retain talent.

Benefit for the employee can be cut off any time. Benefit for the company will go on forever. I will stay on the ground where WFH is benefit for the company. That is what I believe and I want everyone to believe and I do not care what any kind of research will say. Just if employees will force it in that way it will be.

Post by schwartzworld » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 11:11 PM UTC

hu3 wrote: post #35

I love working from home and I plan to keep doing it. But I can't deny that when a coworker needs help, rolling my chair next to theirs in office allows for a much larger bandwidth of knowledge sharing. On the other hand my production skyrockets at home.

Post by wsintra2022 » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 11:13 PM UTC

sjsisibdjcj wrote: post #83

l33tbro wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely agree. And it is funny how we put so much emphasis on developing our skills and abilities, when really our actual value is always determined by the market. I'm personally at peace with that, and would have a pretty hard time arguing against the logic of off-shoring my job. However, it's also rational to want to hold onto a favourable environmental niche for as long as possible!

How has western society completely forgotten the point of a country? It is not the to create the most efficient economical configuration for routing wealth from the masses to the capital holders. Your value is not determined by the market, and those who tell you it is are only looking to exploit you. There are people out there who haven’t succumbed to the nihilistic poison of modern liberalism, though the people in p…

Post by azemetre » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 11:17 PM UTC

kvmet wrote: post #44

JoshTriplett wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Globally much of the pro-office camp's public position is driven by personal leanings of CEOs who genuinely seem to have made the decisions without evidence In some cases, the pressure is also coming from external to the company, from cities and VCs and similar who care about the commercial real-estate value of now-abandoned offices.

Is this actually happening? I have seen this idea thrown out a lot online but it always feels like a conspiracy theory to me (akin to "fine art is a tax write-off")

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 11:22 PM UTC

oxidant wrote: post #98

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really isn't. For me, hybrid is genuinely the worst of both worlds. My internal sleep rhythm is screwed each week, just because someone had a bright idea that today will be everyone in office day ( and unsurprisingly almost never is. I get what the companies are doing. Hell, blind monkey can see what they are doing. Scale back full WFH and claim compromise and flexibility by, but also slowly putting in more requir…

"gay" in that sense is a pejorative against homosexual people. You could almost make it work with the original definition though. From Wikipedia - > Gay is a term that primarily refers to a homosexual person or the trait of being homosexual. The term originally meant 'carefree', 'cheerful', or 'bright and showy'.