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

Why do so many people want us back in the office?

paulitaylor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 624 posts

Re: Why do so many people want us back in the office?

#541

Post by eecc »

sriku wrote: post #447
mancerayder wrote: post #392

This is a complicated problem with different perspectives that no doubt will get muddled at some point. I'm confident at least the following is true: Some people have long commutes and wfh is great Others have small, expensive apartments they paid for shorter commutes and it's suffocating 40-50 hours a week Some people live in palaces and offices are a step down in comfort Some people are happy with the online intera…

Most of these are what one might call "first order effects" - i.e. factors immediately associatable with work location. For prolonged situation, higher order effects are going to become more important. Here are some candidates - 1. Improvement in city air quality due to reduced commute - road and flight. 2. Erosion of "social credits" over time due to lower bandwidth interactions when remote. 3. Cumulative impact of…

Also, office buildings are rented from realtor investors and this big fat chunk of real estate is looking extremely superfluous and vulnerable right now

Re: Why do so many people want us back in the office?

#543

Post by dukeyukey »

greggman3 wrote: post #387
lotsofpulp wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I love being able to walk/bike to work, but that’s not life for 95%+ of people in the US (nor England from what I know). Walking/biking gives you agency that public transit/cars don’t. It feels much freer.

Biking in Tokyo is less freeing than public transportation because of the added time finding a place to lock up the bike. I bought a bike thinking I'd use it but it turns out it's actually much less free since if I take it I'm stuck with it the entire day where as without it I can easily visit the other side of the city on a whim via public transportation. The same would be true in Singapore, Hong Kong, Paris, Berlin…

You should look at getting a folding bike. I got a Brompton recently, using a company cycle-to-work scheme and it's been brilliant. I can cycle 3-4 miles in 20 mins to my favourite coffee shop, fold up my bike in 20 seconds and stash it under my table.

Re: Why do so many people want us back in the office?

#544

Post by dukeyukey »

SergeAx wrote: post #221

1. WFH is not for everyone. There are people with kids and no dedicated workplace at home. There are people with low motivation and self-control, and office routine just helps them to keep up. 2. You can't mix WFH with work in office. It's either one or the other. If you have a single employee working remotely - you should transform all the processes to WFH-style. 3. WFH shifts most of the burden onto management. Man…

> I never saw a single manager who likes WFH.

You never saw them because they were WFH :D

But seriously, I've had managers who were happy to WFH a few times a week, though that team was pretty much self-managing on a day-to-day basis with the manager mostly there to make organisational decisions and to provide cover from above.

Re: Why do so many people want us back in the office?

#546

Post by xenocratus »

greggman3 wrote: post #381
ghaff wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really, there are only 2 costs that matter. On the one side you have the commute--both in time and money. On the other side is whether the place you'd be living in otherwise is suitable for long-term WFH or if you have to spend more money for another bedroom or whatever. So, if you already have a dedicated office in an exurban house (as I do), not commuting--which I rarely did anyway--is a cost savings. As someone wh…

To me the mental cost matters. For me, I'm mentally better off when I hang out with people physically than when I sit at home isolated chatting on slack. For you that might be different. So I'd happily pay the commute cost if I have to for my mental well being. If you don't need that that's fine. You can stay home. I have a gut feeling (so no data) that for many projects a core group of physically together people wil…

> For me, I'm mentally better off when I hang out with people physically than when I sit at home isolated chatting on slack. For you that might be different.

But in a way, this is not a balanced relationship. Sure, you'd want to interact with people like you who are excited about being together, so that's the preferred state anyway, but if most of your colleagues are of the 2nd sort, then you put the effort of going in the office to no reward. You could connect with people outside your immediate sphere, but team cohesion isn't helped by that and you might start disliking working there. So in a way you get some bubbles forming - those who prefer virtual interaction and those who prefer face-to-face.

This will probably be a big factor for career progression - is your manager leaning towards WFH or office-work? If you're on the other side, you might get left behind. Not that there aren't plenty of such possible discrepancies already out there

Re: Why do so many people want us back in the office?

#547

Post by soc14lism00 »

mancerayder wrote: post #392

This is a complicated problem with different perspectives that no doubt will get muddled at some point. I'm confident at least the following is true: Some people have long commutes and wfh is great Others have small, expensive apartments they paid for shorter commutes and it's suffocating 40-50 hours a week Some people live in palaces and offices are a step down in comfort Some people are happy with the online intera…

Why not present them in black and white ways?

Greyness comes with crafting a collage of black and white?

Why must my personal position take into account a composite greyness if it means being put into an office setting I am not productive in?

Why bend myself to an arbitrary greyness?

Our social laws should acknowledge the greyness and avoid empowering a uni-culture that leans towards one choice? Efficiency != resiliency.

Rather than commit to the one size fits all dragged in the direction of currency holders. Complete lack of acceptance a nations currency is propped up by the greyness in opinions

I don’t care who has memorized what facts. The fact remains they’re not a god

Re: Why do so many people want us back in the office?

#548

Post by rocklee93 »

I've often found people praising WFH during CoVid times by viewing it as an opportunity to pursue their pass-times, I love the great outdoors/traveling and have found the CoVid restrictions stifling my pass times. I'm at a point where I don't hate WFH but I hate WFH during the CoVid time. I see a lot of articles extrapolating the WFH during CoVid time to WFH in general, I think these are two different things.

Re: Why do so many people want us back in the office?

#549

Post by egsmi »

alister wrote: post #463
Cd00d wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the current WFH and restrictions are especially hard on the sales teams. No more client dinners, golf, or travel for a demo, and it's much harder to make the relationship over phone or zoom. Plus, the handshake is missing.

Doesn't this put everyone on an equal footing? You can't take your client for golf or shake hands, but neither can your competitor. Though I can imagine a scenario where it's equally bad for everyone. For example, if the client needs an in-person demo to understand how the widget works or to be convinced that it's useful, but no seller is offering an in-person demo, then the client may decide to not buy it from anybo…

My guess is sales people who’ve already established relationships pre WFH get all the sales and upstarts are unable to make inroads with new clients.

Re: Why do so many people want us back in the office?

#550

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

eganist wrote: post #531
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> whats happening with climate change I'm not aware of any particular evidence that "second order effects" are driving climate change or causing feedback cycles. But I suppose it depends how you define it. What do you have in mind here?

Not the OP, but I've got a pretty concrete example of how these effects can potentially slow down human-driven climate change, which is what they were likely referring to. An immediate first-order effect is a lack of air travel. A resulting second-order effect will be the eventual shift in aircraft buying trends, pricing, scheduling, etc. to adjust to diminished air travel, something that cements more concretely the…

So, to me,the dominant effect here is less demand for air travel->fewer flights. Fewer flights means less carbon emitted. Any knock-on effects seem to pale in comparison because air travel is so carbon intensive.

If fewer flights is a "second order" effect here, I'd struggle to name anything that is a first order effect. I don't really think this is what the person I was responding to was talking about when they mentioned second order effects. But if it was then I question the usefulness of the terminology.

Post reply on HN