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

Tragedy of return to hostile offices

benjiweber.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 306 posts

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#191

Post by schnable »

conductr wrote: post #95
chasd00 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The RTO is being entirely driven from the top by institutional investors wanting to avoid losses on property investments and from the bottom by those who have yet to grapple with the fact they dont have friends or hobbies and need you in the office so that they dont feel like such embarrassing losers. I know i'm supposed to "contribute to the conversation" but it's important to recognize that the above point is exa…

IDK, I don’t think real estate part is entirely true. It’s often quoted but most companies have very little RE as a percentage of revenue or whatever metric you think makes most sense. Many more are just leasing RE and could easily have exited that position by now. Even a one time write off could be spun as a positive thing. These properties can be repurposed and have continued value without their corporate tenants.…

Another factor is that large employers in city centers are getting some political pressure to bring people back into town. Commuting is a major prop to city economies and tax bases.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#192

Post by [deleted] »

rossdavidh wrote: post #13

So, I have often worked remotely, think it's fine, and makes sense in some cases. But, honestly, this is a professional-class issue, and every article about it seems written from a viewpoint that has forgotten about most of the population. The waitress and cook never had the option of working remotely, nor did the factory worker, the construction worker, the taxicab driver, the truck driver, etc. etc. Most of the pop…

[deleted]

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#193

Post by dboreham »

tristor wrote: post #10

One of the primary reasons that remote work improves productivity is that it allows employees to tailor their environment to their needs, rather than be forced into a hostile office space that requires kafkaesque bureaucratic bullshit to make even minor changes. I once had a former employer force me to take an espresso machine home that I had brought to work because it created a situation where a different shift was…

I've been remote working since 2000 but as an EE I agree with your employer: they have a duty to remove unauthorized electrical appliances from their premises since they present a fire risk. In addition an espresso machine obviously presents a risk of injury and associated lawsuits from numbskulls who don't know how to use it.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#195

Post by conductr »

vincnetas wrote: post #133
conductr wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IDK, I don’t think real estate part is entirely true. It’s often quoted but most companies have very little RE as a percentage of revenue or whatever metric you think makes most sense. Many more are just leasing RE and could easily have exited that position by now. Even a one time write off could be spun as a positive thing. These properties can be repurposed and have continued value without their corporate tenants.…

Not necessary the company directly, but could be parent company, stockholders. What value would office buildings retain if there were no one leasing office spaces? They would be burning money by maintaining the buildings.

Where I live there’s a big movement of office->residential. It’s not free. Should it be? Was it a risk free investment? I’d argue no and no, and mention they’ll likely be better off financially as we have a shortage of housing and an excess of commercial in my market

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#196

Post by paulcole »

> Every successful company needs to have the most talented people. The most talented people no longer live in, or want to live in the same place

Completely false. There are more successful companies than there are most talented people.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#197

Post by voisin »

Devasta wrote: post #19

I work in Cork, Ireland. My boss is in Dublin, his boss Singapore, my staff in Nova Scotia, Devs in Manila, clients in London and New York. I'm always working remotely, no matter where I am, as is anyone who works in any multi office company. The RTO is being entirely driven from the top by institutional investors wanting to avoid losses on property investments and from the bottom by those who have yet to grapple wit…

> The RTO is being entirely driven from the top by institutional investors wanting to avoid losses on property investments and from the bottom by those who have yet to grapple with the fact they dont have friends or hobbies and need you in the office so that they dont feel like such embarrassing losers.

This is argument keeps getting parroted without evidence or skepticism. Where's the evidence? Just because many people don't like RTO doesn't mean that RTO is driven by evil forces up to no good. There's nuance - on both sides of the debate! - and it does no one a service to reduce the arguments to bumper stickers.

No, employees wanting to work from home don't universally want to loaf off. No, employees that want to work from an office aren't universally middle managers trying to justify their existence. Some people work better at home, others work better at the office. Some companies have found WFH to improve productivity overall and are flexible, and other companies have found RTO to improve productivity overall. If you work better from home, go work for the former. If you work better from the office, go work for the latter. Let the market decide. If WFH is overall more productive, eventually the RTO companies' performance will suffer, and vice versa. No need to blame things on the boogeyman behind the curtain!

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#198

Post by paulcole »

mk89 wrote: post #173

I see this tragedy every day I wake up and from my living room window I see hundreds of cars waiting at the traffic light(s). This wasn't the case during covid, of course, and also during the beginning of post-covid. It seems all is behind us. Not sure what the value of all this is, except for some people telling others how they have to live life.

> except for some people telling others how they have to live life

Don't act like this is a one-way street.

If you're working remotely then your employer is also telling its employees how they have to live life. It's just that in this case you happen to agree with them so it's A-OK!

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#199

Post by mcmcdtx »

wbobeirne wrote: post #77
Devasta wrote: post #19

I work in Cork, Ireland. My boss is in Dublin, his boss Singapore, my staff in Nova Scotia, Devs in Manila, clients in London and New York. I'm always working remotely, no matter where I am, as is anyone who works in any multi office company. The RTO is being entirely driven from the top by institutional investors wanting to avoid losses on property investments and from the bottom by those who have yet to grapple wit…

> and from the bottom by those who have yet to grapple with the fact they dont have friends or hobbies and need you in the office so that they dont feel like such embarrassing losers. I can see why office culture doesn't appeal to you, you sound like a grump who doesn't enjoy the comraderie you can form with people that you spend 40 hours a week with. If you can enjoy the cognitive dissonance of socializing with blac…

Some of us just don't enjoy socializing with whoever happens to be around more than we would enjoy just not socializing. I have had some good relationships with some of my co workers but I haven't made any real friends at my current job of ten years. And the people that talk the most tend to be the ones I find the most difficult to relate to, whether it's because they only want to talk about one thing (football or hunting generally) or all of their jokes assume everyone else is racist too. The specifics here have to do with my location but it seems like a wide enough issue that most of my real friends experience similar issues at their jobs as well.

Re: Tragedy of return to hostile offices

#200

Post by voisin »

schnable wrote: post #191
conductr wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IDK, I don’t think real estate part is entirely true. It’s often quoted but most companies have very little RE as a percentage of revenue or whatever metric you think makes most sense. Many more are just leasing RE and could easily have exited that position by now. Even a one time write off could be spun as a positive thing. These properties can be repurposed and have continued value without their corporate tenants.…

Another factor is that large employers in city centers are getting some political pressure to bring people back into town. Commuting is a major prop to city economies and tax bases.

What does this pressure look like, in practice? Sternly written letters? Phone calls? What power does a city have over a private employer when it comes to employment decisions like this? If remote is everything people say it is, the cities should have no power to overcome improved performance and lower (in the long run) costs (due to lower or nonexistent rent)
Post reply on HN