Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ButlerianJihad 33 days ago
All of my jobs until the last one were in-person, in-office, and toward the end of my schooling, some college courses were 100% remote/online, so I've developed a lot of thoughts.

At this point I would oppose remote jobs and opt for the in-person ones. Though my remote job was fantastic in terms of flexibility and the comfort of my own home, much was lacking.

It is far, far easier to collaborate with humans and rally around supervisors and leadership who are visible and tangible, and interact as humans not mediated. It was fine, in my silo, doing my solitary worker-bee work, and turning out productive results every day, but honestly it stopped feeling like "a job" or "work" but just one of those things I was doing online that happened to increase my bank balance. It wasn't functionally different from Wikipedia editing!

I think that in-person work fosters loyalty, it forms us in the corporate culture, and we grow fond of a good employer inside their walls and using their resources, rather than cleaning our own damn bathroom and the "break room" is our personal fridge, where we pay the electric bill. It is not wrong for subordinates to experience emotional attachment and devotion to our managers, supervisors, and executives, and within the bounds of corporate professionalism, there is nothing wrong with those emotional ties. Even if I must lament the demise of same-sex exclusive spaces and the increase in gender-based tensions or imbalances among office workers.

Nevermind the practical and financial WFH disadvantages but I don't call leaders "narcissistic" just because they enjoy being human and socialized.

3 comments

> there is nothing wrong with those emotional ties

This is a US centric viewpoint, and also a non-leadership viewpoint.

It may not be wrong to experience emotional attachment to an employer, but it's unwise in my opinion if it can all be gone instantly.

Because companies exist to make money, and they will let you go if they can't afford you, want to avoid serious trouble, or think they'll make more money doing something else, with little or no notice. They'll lay off thousands at the drop of an email. You might get some severance, and that takes care of you for a while, but it's better if you take it into your own hands and jump ship every few years. Ultimately you have to be responsible for yourself and your own well-being.

> but honestly it stopped feeling like "a job" or "work" but just one of those things I was doing online that happened to increase my bank balance

This sentence right here makes me think you don't need to work for survival, and that's not the position the majority of people on the planet are in. I'd love to look at my job as something that merely increases my bank balance and not something essential to keep me insured, housed and fed.

Since I live in a nation that offers a tapestry of entitlements and safety nets for the indigent, and I've tapped into those resources, finding them available in my time of greatest need, I worry far less now about losing all my income, because if it drops near-enough to zero, then that clears the way for assistance for my basic needs, especially food, medical care, shelter, and utilities.

You may hear tell of the "donut hole" or "welfare trap" or similar terms. Being among the working poor is a zero-sum game. I get gov't assistance for vocational rehab and supported employment. I secure employment, I earn money in legitimate paychecks, it's siphoned away for taxes and living expenses, I can't build a savings; my job ends, and I'm "back on the dole". The cycle repeats.

At this point its not even about practical and financial "disadvantages" for me but literal affordability. I'd gladly go to the office every day, if they weren't all hell bent on setting up downtown while having to live >1h15 out of town on a good day to be able to think about affording anything.
Financial wfh disadvantages?