|
> I don't really understand why WFH enthusiasts are usually so radical on this topic. WFH in general, now? Overton window. It's probably our one and only opportunity to shift it to include WFH as a standard practice in companies. Before, remote opportunities were very scarce, and were mostly tied around contracting. The pandemic briefly normalized WFH, but there's plenty of interests - powerful interests - gearing to get back to office work as soon as legally allowed. WFH enthusiasts try to counter that pressure, in a desperate attempt to make WFH stick. > you should also keep in mind that in many places of the world commuting is done within a metropolitan area, and usually with public transportation (trains, buses, subways etc) so while it still takes away time it's not that catastrophic on the environmental side Yeah, but even for the most environmentally conscious, personal time is still the most scarce commodity. Commuting by bus or bicycle is better than by car, but no commute at all is better than any of this. Public transport lets you make partial use of commute time; lack of commute gives you that time back. And then not having to commute opens up geographical flexibility - you can suddenly work for a company in a different city, or in a different country. This is a well-covered topic, but there's another flip side to it, which makes some WFH people "radical": if their company pulls the plug on WFH now, it'll severely mess up their lives. Personal example: I've been contracting remotely for a foreign company (started pre-pandemic), and due to various reasons, that contract got turned into FTE in a local company... with offices 400km from where I live. One which didn't, until pandemic, practice remote work. So I'm keenly tracking any and all discussions about work policies, because if they were to return to pre-pandemic policies, I'd have to uproot my life or change jobs. And I don't want to change my job, I really like the team and the work. So you can imagine I'm sensitive about this. |