Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why lie? 3700 km / 80 kph > 50h one way You understand he spends 100h commuting every week?
This reply is 2HN4HN. Surely you don't think it was a serious?
I am serious — and don't call me Shirley.
Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
71–80 of 100 posts
Re: Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a big advocate of remote work, but my role has changed it's value significantly: * As an IC, remote is amazing. It gives me distraction free space to focus and be productive. With moderate process, I'm able to be extremely productive and unblock myself. * As a manager, remote can be challenging when trying to drive cross-team/cross-org impact - especially on ambiguous projects. It's far more challenging to drive…
This post contradicts itself. Basically, it seems to suggest that whatever benefits your role is what needs to be done. However, given that there are far more staff employees, wouldn’t it make sense to optimize for their output?
I could have done better elaborating on the conundrum.
Ultimately, companies are looking for outcomes (e.g. financial return). Outputs are an important part of outcomes, but not the goal in of itself. Outputs also need to be working towards valuable goals. Without value, outputs are worthless.
This creates a conundrum where you need to find a proper balance between the large quantity of people who need to make the outputs and the fewer number of people who need to guide the value.
Re: Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are very aggressively doing just what you describe, too. It's not an either-or type of scenario.
ok but that just re-asks the same question - if you remove the people-doing-nothing factor (by firing them) then what is the motivation for RTO?
I get the feeling that remote employees do less work in general, except for the few who really make an effort to stay connected and on top of stuff despite WFH. I've been guilty of this at times, and when I got back into gear, I noticed how slowly everyone else responded to stuff. It's not just a few people going AWOL and ruining it for everyone.
Re: Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do they though? I see the WFH movement as a threat to the existence of my job. If the entire IT department works from home, what's stopping the company from moving it to India, Bangladesh or Pakistan? If you live in North America or Europe then I feel like you should fight against WFH, since a lot of smart people in the world would gladly do your job for half the salary.
If that was true, why don't Meta and all the others simply hire people from those countries, like they offshored production? In some cases they even set up physical offices there to try to do exactly as you say. Yet they keep coming back to more expensive workers.
Because WFH didn't work for them.
My opinion as someone who's never been a megacorp exec: WFH should work, but they long ago set themselves up around some kind of over-collaboration with too many cooks in the kitchen, then with WFH they just introduced a big latency factor to it without fundamentally changing how they work (which would've been too risky).
Re: Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
To what "rights", specifically, are you referring? How were they "gained over the past 3 years"? There is a weird strain of thinking in this thread that tries to frame this as some kind of Marxian labor-capital power struggle. But that framing doesn't really fit the facts.
Maybe rights is the wrong word. 'Leverage' is what I meant.
Might makes right ;)
Re: Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why lie? 3700 km / 80 kph > 50h one way You understand he spends 100h commuting every week?
As an AI language model, I do not have the ability to determine the tone or intent behind the comment without additional context. However, based on the information presented in the comment, it is possible that it could be intended as a joke or a sarcastic remark, as traveling by hydrofoil from Hawaii to San Francisco three days a week would be a highly impractical and unlikely mode of transportation. It is also worth…
> or any other mode of transportation.
Of course not, he uses the transporter.
Re: Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
ok but that just re-asks the same question - if you remove the people-doing-nothing factor (by firing them) then what is the motivation for RTO?
I get the feeling that remote employees do less work in general, except for the few who really make an effort to stay connected and on top of stuff despite WFH. I've been guilty of this at times, and when I got back into gear, I noticed how slowly everyone else responded to stuff. It's not just a few people going AWOL and ruining it for everyone.
Is people immediately responding to you a measure of the work they do? Does it seem productive they are interrupting whatever they were working on and losing their train of thought to answer your questions?
I know my team has had the talk that Teams is an async communication method, and that we'll get back to each-other when we have spare brain cycles. The message is instant, but there's no expectation the response will be.
Re: Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
#78Meta needs its best engineers to be highly motivated in uncertain times. Otherwise innovation will be harder to come by. All the best engineers I ever worked with so far all favor remote work because it increases code quality, throughput, and happiness. Meta will be disrupted, seeing as whatever Meta tech they’re building isn’t even good enough for their own employees to dogfood for better remote work experience.
I'm a big advocate of remote work, but my role has changed it's value significantly: * As an IC, remote is amazing. It gives me distraction free space to focus and be productive. With moderate process, I'm able to be extremely productive and unblock myself. * As a manager, remote can be challenging when trying to drive cross-team/cross-org impact - especially on ambiguous projects. It's far more challenging to drive…
As a senior manager who's job is entirely cross-team/cross-org change management, I can assure you remote hasn't made things much harder. Orgs have always been geographically diverse (show me an org that doesn't have to coordinate across multiple sites and I'll show you an org that isn't big enough to have these issues in the first place) and managing change in remote parts of the org was always hard and always necessary.
Re: Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
#79Suddenly all these layoffs from the tech industry now make sense. Companies view the WFH movement and the rights which the workers have gained over the past three years as a threat to their very existence. The layoffs combined with a mandatory return to office will discourage any sort of dissent.
Do they though? I see the WFH movement as a threat to the existence of my job. If the entire IT department works from home, what's stopping the company from moving it to India, Bangladesh or Pakistan? If you live in North America or Europe then I feel like you should fight against WFH, since a lot of smart people in the world would gladly do your job for half the salary.
Have you ever tried to manage outsourced work?
Trust me: the problems with outsourcing have almost no overlap with the challenges of remote, on-shore work.
Think: timezones, talent quality, language barriers, cultural differences, just to name a few.
Re: Meta stops offering remote work in new job postings
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get the feeling that remote employees do less work in general, except for the few who really make an effort to stay connected and on top of stuff despite WFH. I've been guilty of this at times, and when I got back into gear, I noticed how slowly everyone else responded to stuff. It's not just a few people going AWOL and ruining it for everyone.
Is people immediately responding to you a measure of the work they do? Does it seem productive they are interrupting whatever they were working on and losing their train of thought to answer your questions? I know my team has had the talk that Teams is an async communication method, and that we'll get back to each-other when we have spare brain cycles. The message is instant, but there's no expectation the response w…
No, but I expect someone who has committed to a joint project to pay attention to code or design reviews and respond within a week. Which started happening less often.