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

Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 250 posts

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#31

Post by sokoloff »

chadash wrote: post #20

While I do think that attitudes towards remote work have fundamentally changed, it'll be interesting to see how things shake out over the next 5-10 years. I suspect that as people start to go into the office more, there will be pressure to do so for your career to advance, in many fields. If your boss's boss works in the office, who is more likely to get a promotion, the person that works from home or the person who…

In some cases, those lunches will lead to doing better work. Partly from having better, more full picture of the pressures your grand-boss is facing, from having direct opportunities to ask questions or get guidance, and partly (a minor part probably) from a willingness to give a little bit extra at a critical moment to someone that you have a more personal relationship with.

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#32

Post by sokoloff »

krageon wrote: post #29
chadash wrote: post #20

While I do think that attitudes towards remote work have fundamentally changed, it'll be interesting to see how things shake out over the next 5-10 years. I suspect that as people start to go into the office more, there will be pressure to do so for your career to advance, in many fields. If your boss's boss works in the office, who is more likely to get a promotion, the person that works from home or the person who…

You can have lunch with someone once a week and still work from home. These kinds of issues are not related, it just requires a different attitude and approach to networking within your own company. No matter what, if you are more social you will make more money. It is not required to be in the office to be perceived well by your peers.

You’re totally right, of course, but there’s a massive power in changing from one default to another. With remote working, the overwhelming default is not “I’ll have a casual lunch with my boss’ boss a couple times a month.” where a 50-person company with everyone on-site, you’re likely to eat with your boss’ boss a couple times a week in the cafe.

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#33

Post by Dyac »

bko wrote: post #25
mabbo wrote: post #5

Like all industries that can move to remote, I suspect we will soon see a split. Some companies will embrace it, some won't. And that's not to detract from either side of that choice. It's just a choice that has to be made. What's going to be more interesting is what this does to the market rate for labor compensation between these two pools. Simply put: if you want me to be in the city from 9-6 every day, while your…

> while your competitor says I can live anywhere and remote in I think most companies still consider your location when determining your pay. Facebook does for instance, even going as far as tracking your IP to make sure you're being honest. If you choose to move to a lower cost city, they'll adjust your wage. Not sure about the other way around. That'll probably eventually change, but it could be a useful indicator.…

Any Facebook employee that wished to would surely find it trivial to use a VPS or something to mask their true location.

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#34

Post by jollybean »

krageon wrote: post #27
jollybean wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"you'd better be paying me extra to cover my increased rent" I have some sorry news for Americans thinking this way on this one: you just outsourced yourselves. There are people 2x as smart and who will work 2x as hard for 1/2 the salary among remaining 7 Billion people on this planet and if the bank can hire them instead of you, eventually they will. In some aspects, relationships do matter, so those have face-to-fa…

You responded to something the author did not write using a quote taken entirely out of context. While the text of your message is fair and probably true (although outsourcing comes with chunky quality issues that frankly have not been solved yet), it is not at all topical.

I disagree that it was out of context either of the comment, or in the issue at large.

It doesn't matter that in this comment, the particular context was ostensibly 'move to the city to work in the office then get paid more'.

It's irrelevant - excessive demands in whatever form will be acquiesced by hiring better talent, elsewhere.

American workers making any kinds of special demands are going to get outsourced.

The tone of the article (and others is): "American Workers Leverage Over Big Corps" just like in this article: "Wall Street Grudgingly etc.". We saw the same with Apple yesterday.

In reality, the articles should be: "American Corps. looking overseas to diversity talent". Because that's what's about to happen. Anyone who thinks that these companies have any loyalty to their local nations, founding staff or culture, (and this applies broadly to the modern world) is mistaken.

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#35

Post by acdha »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #2

>She often woke up at 4:30 a.m. to drive from her home in New Jersey, catch a bus into Manhattan, hop on the subway, squeeze in a workout and get to Jefferies’ trading floor by 7:30 a.m. Work dinners ran late into the night, and redeye flights to London were common. >For Ms. Batchelor, Jefferies’s new policy means coming in to the office three days a week. Although she plans to travel to meetings when necessary, Ms.…

I don't think that's a fair summation: it's really common for people go with what's familiar without critically examining it and both economics and psychology are rife with studies showing how people make decisions less than purely rationally. Some of the most famous examples are related to that quote above: people buy larger houses thinking about the times they'll use extra amenities while ignoring how infrequently they do so or how much time they're spending every day commuting to where they could afford that wish list, or downplaying how much time they spend commuting because they want to think they have a 45 minute commute rather than an hour and are thus “running late” almost every day, etc.

Even very smart people do this kind of thing — I'm thinking of someone I knew who has a math Ph.D. but chronically misjudged their bank account — because they aren't approaching it as a rigorous analytical problem but are just running along on habit, what their peers are doing, and often the stories they tell about how it'll get better once they're further along in their career. If you've been telling yourself that the long hours will get better once you have experience, then that promotion, then at the next job, … it's not hard to just keep doing what you've been doing, especially if you're well paid enough to say it's worth it because you'll retire early.

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#36

Post by ericmay »

greiskul wrote: post #18
syshum wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the bigger effect is this will create I believe a new round of Off Shoring for a set of jobs that used to be considered immune or at least resistant to off shoring. I could be wrong but your statement of "if you want me to be in the city from 9-6 every day, while your competitor says I can live anywhere and remote in, you'd better be paying me extra to cover my increased rent" will hold true for for the globa…

> many companies have already told their employees that if you choose to go remote to a Lower cost of living state your salary will be adjusted to reflect that. But at the same time, that makes the company vulnerable to the employee seek another company that will allow the remote work with a better compensation. Unless the ceos get together and conspire to suppress wages like they have done in the past, it is really…

It's also going to give rise to a class of services to undermine this. You can just have your official address be wherever and so long as the tax benefits make sense financially you'll make more money with a fake address in a state with no income tax while mostly living somewhere else.

I think this leads to stronger evidence for property tax as the primary form of taxation. If you're paid in crypto and not paying property tax on that PO box that like 18 other people use for separate companies (address as a service or AAAS lol) the company won't know, the state government won't know either. Even if you're paid in cash it's hard to really track down.

So we will continue to wind up with different types of tax havens throughout the world. The long-term ramifications IMO are that nice places to live are going to charge very high property taxes and very high costs for obtaining citizenship, and you'll pay that for safety and security and for things that you enjoy (maybe it's walkable, maybe there are lots of parks, maybe the security is strong, maybe everybody looks like you or something).

I'm not arguing the ethics of this or anything, I'm not sure where I stand or what makes sense - just an observation.

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#37

Post by selectodude »

Dyac wrote: post #33
bko wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> while your competitor says I can live anywhere and remote in I think most companies still consider your location when determining your pay. Facebook does for instance, even going as far as tracking your IP to make sure you're being honest. If you choose to move to a lower cost city, they'll adjust your wage. Not sure about the other way around. That'll probably eventually change, but it could be a useful indicator.…

Any Facebook employee that wished to would surely find it trivial to use a VPS or something to mask their true location.

Playing games with your employer probably isn't the best idea if you're looking for a long term relationship with them.

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#38

Post by wbsss4412 »

syshum wrote: post #11
mabbo wrote: post #5

Like all industries that can move to remote, I suspect we will soon see a split. Some companies will embrace it, some won't. And that's not to detract from either side of that choice. It's just a choice that has to be made. What's going to be more interesting is what this does to the market rate for labor compensation between these two pools. Simply put: if you want me to be in the city from 9-6 every day, while your…

I think the bigger effect is this will create I believe a new round of Off Shoring for a set of jobs that used to be considered immune or at least resistant to off shoring. I could be wrong but your statement of "if you want me to be in the city from 9-6 every day, while your competitor says I can live anywhere and remote in, you'd better be paying me extra to cover my increased rent" will hold true for for the globa…

I think on the whole you make a very good point, but don’t underestimate the impact of time zones & differences in language & culture.

Communication may not be geographically limited anymore, but there are still barriers to overcome.

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#39

Post by numpad0 »

Dyac wrote: post #33
bko wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> while your competitor says I can live anywhere and remote in I think most companies still consider your location when determining your pay. Facebook does for instance, even going as far as tracking your IP to make sure you're being honest. If you choose to move to a lower cost city, they'll adjust your wage. Not sure about the other way around. That'll probably eventually change, but it could be a useful indicator.…

Any Facebook employee that wished to would surely find it trivial to use a VPS or something to mask their true location.

I wouldn’t be so confident as to think Facebook won’t catch me lying for years.

Re: Wall Street grudgingly allows remote work as bankers dig in

#40

Post by credit_guy »

Dyac wrote: post #33
bko wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> while your competitor says I can live anywhere and remote in I think most companies still consider your location when determining your pay. Facebook does for instance, even going as far as tracking your IP to make sure you're being honest. If you choose to move to a lower cost city, they'll adjust your wage. Not sure about the other way around. That'll probably eventually change, but it could be a useful indicator.…

Any Facebook employee that wished to would surely find it trivial to use a VPS or something to mask their true location.

Technology is not always the solution. If your employer asks you to affirm something, and you do that, and then cheat (because, let's say, cheating is technologically trivial), then you take a huge risk. A lot of people will not take that risk. It's enough to make example of 1 or 2 people who are caught, and the rest will fall in line in no time.
Post reply on HN