5 ms·

This continues to be a discussion point around remote work. This is displaced. You're talking about poor hiring standards. It has literally nothing to do with r

• landryraccoon 10y ago
  In a discussion about education it is very relevant. What about the 99% of the population that are not qualified and will never be qualified to work at Google, Apple or Amazon? Do we as a society just leave them behind? Society has to accommodate for workers that bomb interviews and that you would never hire on your team even if your particular company has the luxury of pretending they don't exist.
• preordained 10y ago
  I wouldn't say nothing. If there are some people who are poor as remote workers, but improve significantly in collocation, then the remoteness can indeed mean something in itself. Anecdotally, if the work environment is healthy (i.e., not open office trash), I think everyone benefits. I personally think remote is a good option if collocation is not possible--but not preferred.
• losteric 10y ago
  What does any of this have to do with hiring standards? Companies like Google can hire for passion, but most just want competent employees that can consistently fulfill their responsibilities in a happy team while providing positive ROI to the company. Most people aren't inherently motivated by their jobs, and I'd say this applies even more in office settings. Work is work, "work / life balance" exists because work is the obligation that pays for life. If this is indicative of how America as a whole feels, then this has everything to do with remote work.