It all comes down to hiring the right people. The problem with remote is many companies hire the wrong people so they end up not doing the right thing. Then all of the people who are good get punished.
Remote work used to be an earned privilege for workers who were self sufficient and didn't need any management.
Now everyone expects it, and lazy/weak managers will just make everyone come into the office vs having hard conversations with crap employees to tell them they cant work from home.
> Remote work used to be an earned privilege for workers who were self sufficient and didn't need any management.
I'm coordinating with developers in Europe, South America and East Asia. The customers are all over, but mainly North American. I'm in Europe. I've seen some of the customers once or twice in person, I see many of my European colleagues at the yearly get-together. But all the contact and all the work is over email, phone and video conferences and the usual mix of other remote collaboration tools, ticket system, git, stuff like that. When I enter our local office, only one of the 50 people working there has anything to do with that I do. My manager is 800km away. Well, there's payroll over here, but the only time I'll need to "visit" them in person is when a paycheck is late ;).
Even before COVID, the world shifted towards remote, even when you HAD to come to the local office because of reasons. COVID just showed everyone what a charade it already has been for the last decade to force people into an office just to get on phone/email/git and work remotely from the office. COVID cut out the stupid useless "going to the office" step.
In the 2000s, it wasn't like that, teams were concentrated at some offices, offshoring wasn't that much of a thing yet. And for lots of things, travelling e.g. to meet a customer was accepted and normal, far more often than it is now. A new contract was a 2-week stay at the customers'. Back then, remote work actually was a privilege. But the world had changed long before COVID, slowly, then very quickly.
Not to mention the trend that had long been going on, to make the office ever more impersonal, with increasingly more open floor plans, hot desking, having to move your stuff in and out of lockers at the start and end of the workday, etc.
WFH should be the ultimate dream of these companies, they can finally get rid of those pesky meatbags and their 'emotions' altogether.
Yes, but unfortunately sometimes no. I've also seen a rush to get along with less office space but still have all the people come in, e.g. with hot-desking and an early-morning desk lottery at the gates, huge soulless open-plan offices (but at least the shared desks are wiped down twice a week now, hurray!). Yet attendance at the office was still mandatory, even if your team got a seat 3 floors and 200m away somewhere else in the building (because they had to bring kids to school and didn't get their pick at the desk lottery).
So management wanted to have their cake and eat it, too. Everyone in an ever smaller, ever more unusable but supposedly cheaper office. Concentrate all the smaller offices in the suburbs into one huge big-city campus, making the commute a nightmare. But people have to be at their desks, or else. Remote was officially rolled back.
Unofficially, even middle management wised up and just ignored the back-to-office mandate, because they wouldn't know anyways who was in and who wasn't.
Can I ask where in Europe? I'm also looking for something remote friendly as most companies in my area have pull everyone back in the office and I hate it.
Germany, a company formerly part of (and still somewhat associated with) Siemens. But I'm not sure I can recommend it, depending on which department you land in, it is the proverbial German corporate bureaucracy. And depending on the department, they can be anything from totally-100%-homeoffice-friendly to totally-100%-opposed. And all the other big-corporate-clichees times 1000.
I kinda feel like the comparison between an on-prem vs cloud. For the longest time, big, old companies clung onto their data center spaces. No new start-up would ever dream of that though. They would be cloud first from inception. It's probably going to be the same for new companies vs old ones.
The push to cloud happens even when it makes no sense for customers at all. I'm in the mergers and acquisitions consulting space for IT and there are a lot of very mature, stable non-it companies that can save millions going colo vs cloud when we spin them off but the push is ALWAYS to cloud, regardless of the costs.
It's now a selling point when buying a company that the infrastructure is cloud based, even if it's IaaS that has been stable and unchanging for 15+ years - and they require the staff to maintain the servers regardless of where it's hosted.
Problem is that the board and investors are usually also heavily invested in commercial real estate, to the point where artificially propping it up is worth more to them than the company.
Well, culture is just so many rocks you can hold onto while swimming in the market. My regards to the inner city bubble who based a buisness on that millstone being kept afloat.
I solved the same problem by imitating my morning and evening routine. That is, I wake up, get on my bike, and ride - but not to the city, but in the opposite direction, into the forest. I relax biking and come back home. Then my daily starts and I'm full of energy. After I'm done with all my tasks, I repeat the same procedure, just explore some different paths. When I come back home, I no longer think of my tasks.
People get really defensive about remote work I guess? It wasn't just walking, there was also social isolation and being excluded that made it unbearable. And no real boundary between work and home. If you're doing an hour driving every day I can see why you'd prefer remote though.
Yeah, I'd like to come to your defense here. While I do prefer working from home, I totally get what you're saying about the routine of walking to work.
I used to bike commute about 7 miles each way up and down some intense hills; it was part of my routine, and I had to do it. Now that I'm working from home, sure, I could go out and ride 15 miles every day, but it becomes a matter of discipline.
Same with socializing. I tend to prefer solitude, so socializing, like exercising, now requires discipline – I have to make myself do it – whereas before it was baked in, and unavoidable.
People recommending a dog aren't wrong. I do have a dog now, and walk at least 5 miles a day. My dog is an idiot so I can't really do the dog-park thing, but if you have a non-idiotic dog, there's some socialization to be gained there, too. BUT: it's a big commitment, and will have an impact on big life decisions later on like what apartment you can rent, whether you live in a city or a suburb, how easy it is to take a vacation or travel abroad, etc., so it's not like it's a no-brainer or an easy solution.
Only if you live in a country with decent public transportation. The rest of the world still have to deal with traffic jam and polluted air while commuting (cars are difficult to get in many countries).
Not if you count rural areas. In Japan for example, commuting every day in many areas still requires a car or long train rides. And the sardine-packed trains at rush hours in the cities are literally soul-sucking.
Only Japan would remotely apply unless you're cheating the system by checking only hotspot cities and trying to claim they are the entirety of their country. Suffice to say, most people don't live near Amsterdam, let alone able to afford it.
>> Think of how much time is stolen from you in a daily commute
> Not that much.
OK, let's assume it's not 90 minutes but only 20 minutes a day. That compounds, and it's a lot of time I could spend on what really matters to me, not work. Why should I do it, if I have a choice? Time is the most precious thing we have. I will never come back to the office, period.
It’s 20 minutes where I catch up on the news get a bit of walking in from the home to the train station and generally wake up to arrive at the office ready to go.
ha 20 minutes. Some days I waited for the bus longer than that. I waited because in Sydney the bus is on-time about 15% of the time. If you miss it, you wait an extra hour.
Not sure where you live, that's got a 20 min commute, but most people either live in a concrete prison to reduce the commute, or spend 2 hours a day on a bus/train.
I do know this.. if you worked from home, you could get all that you've outlined, and likely spend a pile less on rent/mortgage. Others who work with you would also get to see their kids before bed.
Sydney sucks. I’m in Melbourne and the train leaves every 5 minutes, takes me about 20 minutes to get to the cbd about 7km away. Rent is pretty affordable too.
Stolen? You were paid for and took the job you knew was a certain distance and commute away from your home.
I believe employees have to start to get used to being paid less when working remote. People who work in an office or factory have to be rewarded for this commute. Some jobs cannot be made remote.
I assume a lot of people working remote also like the fact that they can do the laundry, clean the house, do some errands etc during the working day. This flexibility should also allow the salary for remote workers to be lower than for people working in an office.
I wasn't necessarily comparing a programmer working remote with a programmer working in the office.
I mainly tried to say that if we want to have people working in factories, working as nurses or doing office work that requires working as a team in person or meeting clients or what ever it might be then we have to start to pay them more compared to people who work from home.
>People who work in an office or factory have to be rewarded for this commute.
Last I checked, no one paid me" for my commute time or comp'd the wear on my vehicle. If those hours* spent in traffic should have been counted on the clock, then golly gee, I have invoices yo get written!
Seriously, I get it. There should be something for it, but there never will be. Wage theft. Management will do anything possible to get unpaid time out of you.
Well, most people took the job as a being-in-the-office job (before the work from home took off). Which means you took the job + commute for that salary. If you then suddenly don't have to go to the office it's not such a stretch to think you could/should be paid less.
As it's probably easier to hire someone to work remote than hire someone who has to go to the office, the salaries will probably over time be less for work from home jobs anyway (for the same type of job).
It's funny how people feel so entitled to their salaries and that management is there to rip people off. I get it for warehouse people, but for tech workers, come on.
>Well, most people took the job as a being-in-the-office job (before the work from home took off). Which means you took the job + commute for that salary. If you then suddenly don't have to go to the office it's not such a stretch to think you could/should be paid less.
That does not follow. I quote you a salary sufficient to warrant me to work for you. You don't get to come back and demand that you should be able to pay me less when I no longer commute when I'm still working for you. Unless the physical presence in the office is absolutely essential (which it isn't for knowledge workers in the way it is for a stocker or laborer), and the tech exists where working remote is a reasonable accommodation (which it does), then you wanting me in the office to get the job done is now something on the table for me (the employee) to charge you, the employer extra for. In no way are you, (the employer) entitled to an extra discount because I'm not driving in. Nevermind that I don't offer one of those. Though I may to have to ruminate on it.
>It's funny how people feel so entitled to their salaries and that management is there to rip people off.
It's funny how companies feel entitled to their profits and that employees are there to rip them off.
A) People are free to set the price of their time.
B) Management is explicitly there to get the absolute most out of workers with the least input. Even if that means playing dirty, (hopefully not, but I've seen a lot of it). You can say their purpose is leadership, but I've been privy to what high level management types think leadership is, and unfortunately, it ain't leadership. I know leadership. Come from a family with a lot of military background. Civillian business management theory abandoned most facets of leadership in order to cut corners, and maximize value generation. Just look at the C-Suite-to-everyone else pay disparity to see the fruits of that.
The firm didnt give 2 bits about your commute.
They pay you to be in on time. Not your commute. I know people who travel 6 hours a day. They get paid the same.
Why would any firm increase salaries, for services you were already providing?
You get maybe 12 waking hours a day, 8 working +2 commuting. Getting 2 hours back is a 16% raise.
You don't get it do you? The person took the job knowing that they have to commute. Be it 5 minutes or 5 hours. the took it based on a certain salary.
If they then all of a sudden don't have to commute (let's say 5 hours), then why could they then not be okay with a slightly lower salary (as they save 5 hours a day).