Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#301

Post by bmitc » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:06 PM UTC

RC_ITR wrote: post #178

bmitc wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the percentages? Apple built Apple Park to not house the majority of employees?

Would it surprise you to hear that, despite taking the mantle as the new HQ (because it’s the most impressive building) it’s just an incremental office build and people still work at one infinite loop?

Yes, it does actually surprise me that a company would spend $5 billion for and tout the design as the second coming of office Jesus as an "incremental office build".

I indeed did not realize that Apple Park wasn't the primary office building in that area, especially because of some of the articles that came out at the time. It's why I asked the honest question I did.

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#302

Post by lolsal » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:07 PM UTC

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #281

lolsal wrote: post #213

Can anyone honestly and sincerely tell me that online whiteboards are exactly equivalent to in-person whiteboard sessions? There is no value in having lunches together with your colleagues? There is no value in body-language when communicating? I'm all for fully WFH policies, but I think it's a bit naive or dishonest to say that it's exactly the same work experience. I've been working remote for over a decade and wil…

"There is no value in body-language when communicating?" Not for me, no. I'm neurodiverse, and that shit is just lost on me. You might as well complain that you are missing out on being able to tell racist jokes with your same-race buddies, because you're missing out on the benefits of social bonding. Sure. single-cis-straight-white-neurotypical-abletypical-male can be super optimized, or the equivalent in what ever…

> Not for me, no. I'm neurodiverse, and that shit is just lost on me.

I hear you and understand. Lots of people are neuro-normative though, and that stuff is valuable. Let's not assert that remote-only is the Best® though, because for a lot of folks, there is a loss of fidelity in communication going fully remote only.

> You might as well complain that you are missing out on being able to tell racist jokes with your same-race buddies, because you're missing out on the benefits of social bonding.

Believe it or not, some people bond over things they have in common that don't have anything to do with racism. You probably have some prejudices or biases leaking through your comment that you might want to explore privately.

> Sure. single-cis-straight-white-male can be super optimized, or the equivalent in what ever is the dominant race (looking at salarymen in Japan).

When I go to lunch and talk to my colleague about her favorite places to snorkel, my sexuality, gender, relationship status or race never come up in the conversation. Have you tried having conversations with folks without making it about you?

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#303

Post by nerpderp82 » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:07 PM UTC

crypot wrote: post #259

I don't see how there can be any debate around WFH. The S&P 500 had record profitability during this completely unplanned WFH experience. If WFH was so terrible for business there should be ample proof, but so far it has only be shown to be a success.

Because it is about status and control. They want to see all the busy-bee activity in their expensive buildings. Workers have been asking for WFH for years, the pandemic proved it could work even for the sudden and untrained.

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#304

Post by 21723 » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:08 PM UTC

fullshark wrote: post #283

lolsal wrote: post #213

Can anyone honestly and sincerely tell me that online whiteboards are exactly equivalent to in-person whiteboard sessions? There is no value in having lunches together with your colleagues? There is no value in body-language when communicating? I'm all for fully WFH policies, but I think it's a bit naive or dishonest to say that it's exactly the same work experience. I've been working remote for over a decade and wil…

Yeah the discussion is so dishonest on both ends at this point. The complaint that returning to the office will lead to a "younger, whiter, more male-dominated, more neuro-normative, more able-bodied" workforce is maybe the most absurd attempt yet to destroy RTO plans. At the end of the day employers want to see what their employees are doing and employees want to avoid insane commutes / high COL rents / not feel lik…

> The complaint that returning to the office will lead to a "younger, whiter, more male-dominated, more neuro-normative, more able-bodied" workforce is maybe the most absurd attempt yet to destroy RTO plans.

It isn't. If you are disabled, black, female, or older, an open-plan office is not a comfortable place. It's a halfway house for frat boys, but people for whom being unfairly evaluated and unjustly terminated is the kind of thing that happens at least once in a career do not, in general, do well in it.

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#305

Post by mehphp » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:08 PM UTC

lolsal wrote: post #213

Can anyone honestly and sincerely tell me that online whiteboards are exactly equivalent to in-person whiteboard sessions? There is no value in having lunches together with your colleagues? There is no value in body-language when communicating? I'm all for fully WFH policies, but I think it's a bit naive or dishonest to say that it's exactly the same work experience. I've been working remote for over a decade and wil…

There is value in working in-office… just not enough for me to give up remote work.

I, personally, get just as much work done working from home. While I do miss the social aspect of the office, it’s just not worth giving up the hours of commute time or dealing with a lot of the in-person bs that work entails.

I realize this is a very privileged position but I’ll keep doing it as long as it’s an option.

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#306

Post by thrower123 » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:08 PM UTC

lolsal wrote: post #244

thrower123 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Working remotely is better than all of those things, iff you commit to doing things correctly and writing things down. Doing things correctly would help if you were in the office too, but you can paper over the inefficiencies of doing things incorrectly by wasting more time on the backchannel communication face-to-face.

This sounds a bit like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman Having lunch with colleagues has nothing to do with 'backchannel communication'. Sometimes it's nice to hear about where we like to go camping, or what cities are nice to visit in their home countries, or ... nothing to do with work or shipping products. No matter how 'correctly' you think you're doing things, you still haven't convinced me after…

Nothing in all the years I worked offline in offices convinced me that whiteboards were particularly useful.

At least we eventually had high-resolution cameras in our smartphones so we could photograph them when people insisted on doing planning on whiteboards - more than once I've seen software architects lose days of work because the janitors were overzealous with their dusting.

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#307

Post by ensignavenger » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:08 PM UTC

lolsal wrote: post #213

Can anyone honestly and sincerely tell me that online whiteboards are exactly equivalent to in-person whiteboard sessions? There is no value in having lunches together with your colleagues? There is no value in body-language when communicating? I'm all for fully WFH policies, but I think it's a bit naive or dishonest to say that it's exactly the same work experience. I've been working remote for over a decade and wil…

Is anyone trying to argue it is "exactly the same experience"? Most of the arguments I have heard in favor of remote work is that it is superior experience, on the whole.

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#308

Post by bckr » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:10 PM UTC

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #281

lolsal wrote: post #213

Can anyone honestly and sincerely tell me that online whiteboards are exactly equivalent to in-person whiteboard sessions? There is no value in having lunches together with your colleagues? There is no value in body-language when communicating? I'm all for fully WFH policies, but I think it's a bit naive or dishonest to say that it's exactly the same work experience. I've been working remote for over a decade and wil…

"There is no value in body-language when communicating?" Not for me, no. I'm neurodiverse, and that shit is just lost on me. You might as well complain that you are missing out on being able to tell racist jokes with your same-race buddies, because you're missing out on the benefits of social bonding. Sure. single-cis-straight-white-neurotypical-abletypical-male can be super optimized, or the equivalent in what ever…

> You might as well complain that you are missing out on being able to tell racist jokes with your same-race buddies,

I sympathize with your point, but object strongly to this analogy on the grounds that being racist is a choice, while benefiting from body language is not a choice. It's also very offensive, but that is a secondary issue.

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#309

Post by thebean11 » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:11 PM UTC

Octoth0rpe wrote: post #253

thebean11 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People in wheelchairs leave their homes all the time. Apple has buses and offices that I'm sure are wheelchair accessible. Apple probably offers pretty good insurance to get a motorized wheelchair if needed. If someone really can't make it to the office physically, I'm sure the policies are somewhat more nuanced. I understand it may be more difficult for certain people, but I guess to me it's a non sequitur. Doing di…

> I understand it may be more difficult for certain people If you can understand that, then you should understand that certain people will make rational decisions to minimize their difficulty. Remote work positions are more available now, and such people will likely naturally gravitate towards them. Consequently, non-remote positions will be disproportionally more able-bodied, which is exactly the point of the Apple…

Yeah maybe. I'd be curious to know how big of a factor it actually is. Would an extraverted person using a wheelchair prefer to work from home, or go in? I'd be hesitant to assume something like that is necessarily the biggest factor for somebody.

It could certainly trend that way though. I don't see that as super problematic.

Re: Apple employees criticize work-from-home policy in open letter

#310

Post by 21723 » Tue, May 03, 2022, 5:11 PM UTC

lolsal wrote: post #213

Can anyone honestly and sincerely tell me that online whiteboards are exactly equivalent to in-person whiteboard sessions? There is no value in having lunches together with your colleagues? There is no value in body-language when communicating? I'm all for fully WFH policies, but I think it's a bit naive or dishonest to say that it's exactly the same work experience. I've been working remote for over a decade and wil…

> Can anyone honestly and sincerely tell me that online whiteboards are exactly equivalent to in-person whiteboard sessions?

Of course not. They're an ersatz replacement for the in-person thing. They do the job about 90% as well. Is that a problem? In the corporate world, most things are ersatz, if you're not an executive. Mediocre supplies, mediocre management, mediocre training, mediocre pay... why should we force people to shlep just to pretend their jobs aren't mediocre? A standard-issue corporate job can be done from anywhere.

> There is no value in having lunches together with your colleagues?

Again, of course not; but if a company is going to expect or require people to do it, it should foot the bill for the inconveniences caused.