7 ms·

Twitter – “we are strongly encouraging all employees globally to work from home”

210 points by reimertz 7y ago

pickdenis 7y ago
I remember someone quipping on HN about how the Coronavirus outbreak would effectively result in a global WFH experiment. I wonder what lessons, if any, will be learned and if this will have a lasting impact on how much software engineers (and people in similar positions) are expected to physically come to work 5 days a week.
- axaxs 7y ago
  If I had to guess, not as many as there should be. For WFH to work, you have to have an environment conducive to it. You can't just tell people to stay home and magically solve the problem without a huge productivity hit. Unfortunately(in this context), I don't think it'll last long enough for those changes to happen.
  - Polylactic_acid 7y ago
    It might have a negative effect when everyone tries to work from home without making any adjustments and finds it to be sub optimal.
- freepor 7y ago
  I hope that doesn’t make a bunch of people think that WFH is a failure because it didn’t work when they threw people suddenly into it without the appropriate tools or norms.
- FooHentai 7y ago
  A few years back we had an earthquake that forced many organizations to stay away from their offices (just days for some but years/permanently for others) because the buildings were declared unsafe (structural issues, disturbed asbestos, and such). Long-term, one outcomes of that has been a matured approach to flexible working - The tech (if not already present) was rapidly deployed. The biggest change has been a cultural one. Everyone being forced to work remotely for a period of time killed off those little snarky comments about 'shirking from home' that previously were being made about any employee that dared work remotely. Some organisations used the situation as a springboard to push 'flexible working', made easier at the time by the prospect of moving into new offices and planning fit-outs to support it. Working from home presents a similar trade-off for organizations as having open-plan offices. You save on office space, but you risk reducing productivity. A watershed event can take you over the cultural hump - Afterwards there's no longer a question of whether you can support flexible working, because you were forced to work through any barriers to it under urgency. tl;dr strong external driver for something that would otherwise require an unlikely internal drive to accomplish
7952 7y ago
In my company a staff member in a different office has tested positive. The ceo seems to be very careful to follow government advice. It's like they don't want to be seen to under-react or over-react. This seems misguided when there are positive things you can do like encouraging people to work from home. If the cost is minimal then why not? It's like telling people to wash their hands or use a tissue.
- antonzabirko 7y ago
  Because that's how this society unfolded. Overreactions are seen as poor leadership and leaders are held by the public instead of the public wellbeing.
- Spooky23 7y ago
  The public health people know what they are talking about. For most people, frequently washing your hands is the only action required.
- zdragnar 7y ago
  Your CEO probably isn't a health care professional and doesn't want to promote or advise specific behavior that isn't in line with official recommendations. It is also worth pointing out that not everyone can work from home. I know someone who would love to, but two autistic children under school age at home makes that essentially impossible.
  - Polylactic_acid 7y ago
    Work from home doesn't have to literally mean home. You can set up a laptop in the library and work there. Fairly often they have tables and decent chairs with a power point available and you aren't expected to spend any money or get out of the way like in a cafe. Although I now realize this suggestion is entirely useless for avoiding sickness. Still useful if you want to work away from the office in normal conditions.
  - pbourke 7y ago
    > It is also worth pointing out that not everyone can work from home A WFH-if-able policy would benefit them as well, because fewer people would be at the office, reducing their risk of coming in contact with the disease.
idnefju 7y ago
That isn't the full sentence though, the sentence continues "if they’re able." It further states > Working from home will be mandatory for employees based in our Hong Kong, Japan, and South Korea offices due in part to government restrictions.
- fbelzile 7y ago
  Twitter should look into on how working from home affects productivity. I'm sure it'll decrease in the short term. Although, if this goes on long enough, it would be neat to see if people re-establish strong lines of communication and if there are any productivity gains from certain teams. Obviously, I'm not hoping that the virus affects peoples lives longer, but they might as well get some data while there are government restrictions.
  - frandroid 7y ago
    The lost productivity from WFH will probably be less than the potential lost productivity from infected and dead employees...
    - i_am_nomad 7y ago
      Eh, you should meet some of my coworkers.
    - TaylorAlexander 7y ago
      I believe that’s not the point of the comment. The point is that working from home is something employees desire in general, and this is a good opportunity to see if large scale work from home can still function well for a large organization like Twitter. It would be encouraging if they can make it work.
  - bcrosby95 7y ago
    It requires different management styles and tools. I doubt anyone is going to try particularly hard to make it work well.
- 7y ago
claudeganon 7y ago
I urge everyone to listen to what this frontline ER doctor in NYC said this morning: https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/03/02/coronavirus-testing-emergency-room-doctor-cdc-department-health-squawk-box.html https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/03/02/coronavirus-testing-em... Testing is being stonewalled, false assurances are being made, and he anticipates serious disruption once the full extent of community transmission becomes clear and rears its head.
- adamiscool8 7y ago
  I don't understand the need or upside to mass testing? We know the spread is inevitable. It doesn't change the course of treatment right now, or the recommended precautionary measures.
  - claudeganon 7y ago
    Mass testing is the only way to gauge the appropriate response for things like level of quarantine and directing additional resources where case clusters will overwhelm healthcare infrastructure.
  - BryantD 7y ago
    It's still beneficial to slow the spread. It will be easier for a health care system to handle X cases over the course of six months than X cases over the course of three months. Mass testing has the potential to get infected individuals out of the population more quickly, and thus create a slower spread.
    - edmundsauto 7y ago
      How sensitive is the test? You might end up flooding ERs with false positives, or people from not-at-risk populations.
      - claudeganon 7y ago
        In the Korean and Chinese tests, there was no evidence of false positives, only false negatives, and they still ratcheted up testing because it’s still better to catch all the cases one can.
vzidex 7y ago
The big (Fortune 500) company I work at already has an environment that is conducive to WFH - most people on my team do it ~1/week on average. I'm very curious to see if/when we all get instructed to WFH though, because although WFH is allowed I doubt most people are as productive at home as at the office given how collaborative our work is. We regularly get updates on the virus from corporate so I expect it's only a matter of time.
- dharmab 7y ago
  I work for another Fortune 500 that's currently on the front page. Honestly, my team already WFH several days a month anyway, and we could start WFH tomorrow and be 100% as effective.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- joezydeco 7y ago
  I'm in a F500 company that's a little late to the party but they're catching up. They just put some network restrictions in place to save bandwidth and people are getting antsy. From looking at Slack apparently losing Spotify was the biggest blow. It wouldn't surprise me if that blacklist stays in place forever. I can't imagine how much bandwidth is lost to streaming audio and video during a work day.
  - ITWarrior 7y ago
    What do network restrictions have to do with WFH/COVID-19? Am I missing something or was this comment meant for a different chain?
    - joezydeco 7y ago
      The company realized they don't have enough bandwidth at the VPN portals to support hundreds of simultaneous Skype and Teams video chats for the entire length of the work day when everyone starts working from home. So the short-term fix (and probably long-term as well) is to restrict bandwidth-hogging apps from company computers.
scurvy 7y ago
Square is doing the same.
analog31 7y ago
One thing that occurs to me is that even if my own job is hard to do from home, I would still benefit from a significant number of my colleagues staying home. One possible emergency measure that could be taken by a decisive government would be to mandate paid sick leave for everybody.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
corpMaverick 7y ago
Everyone who can do it, should work from home. Also avoid big gatherings and pretty much reduce (but not completely avoid contact). The coronavirus is inevitable at this moment it will stay with us. But slowing it out makes a BIG difference so hospitals can keep up and we can develop and distribute a vaccine which may take 2 years.
outside1234 7y ago
This is the only responsible thing to do.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

210 points by reimertz 7y ago

I remember someone quipping on HN about how the Coronavirus outbreak would effectively result in a global WFH experiment. I wonder what lessons, if any, will be learned and if this will have a lasting impact on how much software engineers (and people in similar positions) are expected to physically come to work 5 days a week.

axaxs 7y ago
If I had to guess, not as many as there should be. For WFH to work, you have to have an environment conducive to it. You can't just tell people to stay home and magically solve the problem without a huge productivity hit. Unfortunately(in this context), I don't think it'll last long enough for those changes to happen.
- Polylactic_acid 7y ago
  It might have a negative effect when everyone tries to work from home without making any adjustments and finds it to be sub optimal.
freepor 7y ago
I hope that doesn’t make a bunch of people think that WFH is a failure because it didn’t work when they threw people suddenly into it without the appropriate tools or norms.
FooHentai 7y ago
A few years back we had an earthquake that forced many organizations to stay away from their offices (just days for some but years/permanently for others) because the buildings were declared unsafe (structural issues, disturbed asbestos, and such). Long-term, one outcomes of that has been a matured approach to flexible working - The tech (if not already present) was rapidly deployed. The biggest change has been a cultural one. Everyone being forced to work remotely for a period of time killed off those little snarky comments about 'shirking from home' that previously were being made about any employee that dared work remotely. Some organisations used the situation as a springboard to push 'flexible working', made easier at the time by the prospect of moving into new offices and planning fit-outs to support it. Working from home presents a similar trade-off for organizations as having open-plan offices. You save on office space, but you risk reducing productivity. A watershed event can take you over the cultural hump - Afterwards there's no longer a question of whether you can support flexible working, because you were forced to work through any barriers to it under urgency. tl;dr strong external driver for something that would otherwise require an unlikely internal drive to accomplish

7952 7y ago

In my company a staff member in a different office has tested positive. The ceo seems to be very careful to follow government advice. It's like they don't want to be seen to under-react or over-react. This seems misguided when there are positive things you can do like encouraging people to work from home. If the cost is minimal then why not? It's like telling people to wash their hands or use a tissue.

antonzabirko 7y ago
Because that's how this society unfolded. Overreactions are seen as poor leadership and leaders are held by the public instead of the public wellbeing.
Spooky23 7y ago
The public health people know what they are talking about. For most people, frequently washing your hands is the only action required.
zdragnar 7y ago
Your CEO probably isn't a health care professional and doesn't want to promote or advise specific behavior that isn't in line with official recommendations. It is also worth pointing out that not everyone can work from home. I know someone who would love to, but two autistic children under school age at home makes that essentially impossible.
- Polylactic_acid 7y ago
  Work from home doesn't have to literally mean home. You can set up a laptop in the library and work there. Fairly often they have tables and decent chairs with a power point available and you aren't expected to spend any money or get out of the way like in a cafe. Although I now realize this suggestion is entirely useless for avoiding sickness. Still useful if you want to work away from the office in normal conditions.
- pbourke 7y ago
  > It is also worth pointing out that not everyone can work from home A WFH-if-able policy would benefit them as well, because fewer people would be at the office, reducing their risk of coming in contact with the disease.

idnefju 7y ago

That isn't the full sentence though, the sentence continues "if they’re able." It further states > Working from home will be mandatory for employees based in our Hong Kong, Japan, and South Korea offices due in part to government restrictions.

fbelzile 7y ago
Twitter should look into on how working from home affects productivity. I'm sure it'll decrease in the short term. Although, if this goes on long enough, it would be neat to see if people re-establish strong lines of communication and if there are any productivity gains from certain teams. Obviously, I'm not hoping that the virus affects peoples lives longer, but they might as well get some data while there are government restrictions.
- frandroid 7y ago
  The lost productivity from WFH will probably be less than the potential lost productivity from infected and dead employees...
  - i_am_nomad 7y ago
    Eh, you should meet some of my coworkers.
  - TaylorAlexander 7y ago
    I believe that’s not the point of the comment. The point is that working from home is something employees desire in general, and this is a good opportunity to see if large scale work from home can still function well for a large organization like Twitter. It would be encouraging if they can make it work.
- bcrosby95 7y ago
  It requires different management styles and tools. I doubt anyone is going to try particularly hard to make it work well.
7y ago

claudeganon 7y ago

I urge everyone to listen to what this frontline ER doctor in NYC said this morning: https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/03/02/coronavirus-testing-emergency-room-doctor-cdc-department-health-squawk-box.html https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/03/02/coronavirus-testing-em... Testing is being stonewalled, false assurances are being made, and he anticipates serious disruption once the full extent of community transmission becomes clear and rears its head.

adamiscool8 7y ago
I don't understand the need or upside to mass testing? We know the spread is inevitable. It doesn't change the course of treatment right now, or the recommended precautionary measures.
- claudeganon 7y ago
  Mass testing is the only way to gauge the appropriate response for things like level of quarantine and directing additional resources where case clusters will overwhelm healthcare infrastructure.
- BryantD 7y ago
  It's still beneficial to slow the spread. It will be easier for a health care system to handle X cases over the course of six months than X cases over the course of three months. Mass testing has the potential to get infected individuals out of the population more quickly, and thus create a slower spread.
  - edmundsauto 7y ago
    How sensitive is the test? You might end up flooding ERs with false positives, or people from not-at-risk populations.
    - claudeganon 7y ago
      In the Korean and Chinese tests, there was no evidence of false positives, only false negatives, and they still ratcheted up testing because it’s still better to catch all the cases one can.

vzidex 7y ago

The big (Fortune 500) company I work at already has an environment that is conducive to WFH - most people on my team do it ~1/week on average. I'm very curious to see if/when we all get instructed to WFH though, because although WFH is allowed I doubt most people are as productive at home as at the office given how collaborative our work is. We regularly get updates on the virus from corporate so I expect it's only a matter of time.

dharmab 7y ago
I work for another Fortune 500 that's currently on the front page. Honestly, my team already WFH several days a month anyway, and we could start WFH tomorrow and be 100% as effective.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
joezydeco 7y ago
I'm in a F500 company that's a little late to the party but they're catching up. They just put some network restrictions in place to save bandwidth and people are getting antsy. From looking at Slack apparently losing Spotify was the biggest blow. It wouldn't surprise me if that blacklist stays in place forever. I can't imagine how much bandwidth is lost to streaming audio and video during a work day.
- ITWarrior 7y ago
  What do network restrictions have to do with WFH/COVID-19? Am I missing something or was this comment meant for a different chain?
  - joezydeco 7y ago
    The company realized they don't have enough bandwidth at the VPN portals to support hundreds of simultaneous Skype and Teams video chats for the entire length of the work day when everyone starts working from home. So the short-term fix (and probably long-term as well) is to restrict bandwidth-hogging apps from company computers.

scurvy 7y ago

Square is doing the same.

analog31 7y ago

One thing that occurs to me is that even if my own job is hard to do from home, I would still benefit from a significant number of my colleagues staying home. One possible emergency measure that could be taken by a decisive government would be to mandate paid sick leave for everybody.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

corpMaverick 7y ago

Everyone who can do it, should work from home. Also avoid big gatherings and pretty much reduce (but not completely avoid contact). The coronavirus is inevitable at this moment it will stay with us. But slowing it out makes a BIG difference so hospitals can keep up and we can develop and distribute a vaccine which may take 2 years.

outside1234 7y ago

This is the only responsible thing to do.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]