[tdeck]

Realized I have a typo from relying too heavily on auto-correct. Sorry about that.

I worked at Google for four years. I've seen many people I know basically "play it safe" by making conservative decisions in order to minimize the likelihood of hurting one's promo chances. Despite all the talk about this, nobody really knows for sure what will affect their promo. For example, people will stay on a team they hate rather than risk "resetting the promo clock". There is also a general understanding that being outside the Bay Area hurts your career growth.

Given these tendencies and the fact that people who work remotely often find themselves more isolated than their in-office colleagues, I fully expect that people will hesitate to adopt remote work if they're not in the majority.

[solipsism]

* There is also a general understanding *

Got it. So when it was asked, "how many know they're on the chopping block if they work remotely" and it was redefined to ask "how many know their chances for promotion might be affected by working remotely?"... The answer is "almost everyone".

Many people will happily choose to work remotely, even if it makes promotion harder, because that's a good trade-off for them. Exactly like people will happily work from other offices.

So what's the problem?

[tdeck]

Do you realize I am not the person who wrote the original "chopping block" comment? I'm just adding context here based on my experience. I don't understand why your tone in this thread is so hostile.

[solipsism]

It's kind of strange to wander into a conversation, and then balk at the fact that people expect your contributions to be relevant to the conversation.