5 ms·

Yeah, I think this experiment is going to backfire. People are going to hate WFH/Remote work coming out of this it seems.

mschuster91 7y ago
> People are going to hate WFH/Remote work coming out of this it seems. The question is, what are they going to do? There are two options... demand better tooling (I'm actually surprised about Microsoft Teams!) or go back to office and put up with everything related to a multi-hour commute - infection risk in public transport, gas/insurance costs, endless traffic jams, hours lost each day that can be spent with partner/s and children instead, or simply with sleep...
- checker659 7y ago
  > or go back to office and put up with everything related to a multi-hour commute - infection risk in public transport, gas/insurance costs, endless traffic jams, hours lost each day that can be spent with partner/s and children instead, or simply with sleep This one unfortunately (because, choice inertia)
RHSeeger 7y ago
If it results in 1. Workers (that previously hadn't been remote) realizing that it has good parts and bad parts, that paying an extra 10%+ in rent/mortgage in order to get a proper home office can be the cost of working from home (and then the costs of utilities for a now non-empty home). That doesn't mean it's bad, just that it has pluses and minuses. 2. Companies realizing that people working from home _does_ have benefits, and it's _not_ just people sitting around in their PJs being unproductive. Then I think we've gained something. It's not a backfire, so much as a better understanding that everything has tradeoffs.
- MivLives 7y ago
  Your first point is the part I'd like most to change with this. I live in an apartment with three other people. It's fine when we're all coming in and out and spend all day at work. But now that 3/4 of us are at home, and confined to our rooms it's getting annoying. There's no good public space, and none of us share any interests. I live and work in a single room, and I wish so much I could move to somewhere with more space. If I were full time work from home there's no reason I'd need to live with other people. The only reason my rent is so high is because I live near a city which I have to do to work. I suspect this is true for other people as well, and if we saw a greater amount of full time remote people would spread out a little.
  - 0x202020 7y ago
    I saw this in a company I worked at previously. When I joined they had just moved their headquarters from the West Coast to the Midwest and gave employees the option to WFH or freedom to come into office still at new location. Within a year it was a pretty even split on A) staying where they were and working remote B) moving to be in the suburbs around the new location C) moving further out from the city but staying on the West Coast D) leaving the company
- closeparen 7y ago
  >paying an extra 10%+ in rent/mortgage Where a one-bedroom is $4000, a two-bedroom is going to be $6500, not $4400. Obviously a cheaper metro will have lower prices, but is the relative premium for an extra room also so dramatically lower?
  - RHSeeger 7y ago
    I was playing it safe and assuming a family adding one more room to a multi-room house. The 10% is on the low side. Where I live, it's an extra $100,000 between a 3 bedroom house and a 4 bedroom (or adding a bonus room), and then bump that up another $50,000 for the total cost after mortgage interest, utilities, etc. But nobody (that goes into an office) seems to want to believe it costs $150,000 to work from home (but then you save some on commute costs, so there's that). My manager actually made a comment about how it must be nice to save money by working from home (commute costs). I laughed.
    - klyrs 7y ago
      Add TWO rooms to that house. It sounds like you live in an area with inexpensive housing. Folks who rent face an entirely different economic reality.
      - RHSeeger 7y ago
        I live in the suburbs of a larger northeast city, so not inexpensive, but not city-apartment levels, either. Going from 3 bedroom to 4 bedroom seems to raise the asking price around 90k (from 450k to 540k). Admittedly, that includes houses of all ages/conditions/size/etc.
  - CodeCube 7y ago
    yes ... $4000 US Dollars for a one bedroom is literal crazy talk. Obviously, people are willing and able to pay those prices right now because they have to live specifically there to get those specific jobs. But if they could work remote, they could live anywhere their heart desires ... closer to family, closer to friends, closer to nature, closer to a local music scene, closer to the beach ... whatever their heart desires. Obviously many people have laid down roots in those extremely high cost of living areas at this point so just moving can be tough, but we need to spread out man, cause $4000 a month for a tin can just ain't a good life.
imtringued 7y ago
That doesn't matter since WFH isn't popular right now. If 0.01% of people work remotely and then suddenly everyone ends up doing WFH then it is unlikely that more than 99.99% of people are going to hate WFH. So lets be pessimistic and say 99% of people end up hating WFH and only 1% like it. That's still a 100 fold increase in people who will do WFH.

mschuster91 7y ago

> People are going to hate WFH/Remote work coming out of this it seems. The question is, what are they going to do? There are two options... demand better tooling (I'm actually surprised about Microsoft Teams!) or go back to office and put up with everything related to a multi-hour commute - infection risk in public transport, gas/insurance costs, endless traffic jams, hours lost each day that can be spent with partner/s and children instead, or simply with sleep...

checker659 7y ago
> or go back to office and put up with everything related to a multi-hour commute - infection risk in public transport, gas/insurance costs, endless traffic jams, hours lost each day that can be spent with partner/s and children instead, or simply with sleep This one unfortunately (because, choice inertia)

RHSeeger 7y ago

If it results in 1. Workers (that previously hadn't been remote) realizing that it has good parts and bad parts, that paying an extra 10%+ in rent/mortgage in order to get a proper home office can be the cost of working from home (and then the costs of utilities for a now non-empty home). That doesn't mean it's bad, just that it has pluses and minuses. 2. Companies realizing that people working from home _does_ have benefits, and it's _not_ just people sitting around in their PJs being unproductive. Then I think we've gained something. It's not a backfire, so much as a better understanding that everything has tradeoffs.

MivLives 7y ago
Your first point is the part I'd like most to change with this. I live in an apartment with three other people. It's fine when we're all coming in and out and spend all day at work. But now that 3/4 of us are at home, and confined to our rooms it's getting annoying. There's no good public space, and none of us share any interests. I live and work in a single room, and I wish so much I could move to somewhere with more space. If I were full time work from home there's no reason I'd need to live with other people. The only reason my rent is so high is because I live near a city which I have to do to work. I suspect this is true for other people as well, and if we saw a greater amount of full time remote people would spread out a little.
- 0x202020 7y ago
  I saw this in a company I worked at previously. When I joined they had just moved their headquarters from the West Coast to the Midwest and gave employees the option to WFH or freedom to come into office still at new location. Within a year it was a pretty even split on A) staying where they were and working remote B) moving to be in the suburbs around the new location C) moving further out from the city but staying on the West Coast D) leaving the company
closeparen 7y ago
>paying an extra 10%+ in rent/mortgage Where a one-bedroom is $4000, a two-bedroom is going to be $6500, not $4400. Obviously a cheaper metro will have lower prices, but is the relative premium for an extra room also so dramatically lower?
- RHSeeger 7y ago
  I was playing it safe and assuming a family adding one more room to a multi-room house. The 10% is on the low side. Where I live, it's an extra $100,000 between a 3 bedroom house and a 4 bedroom (or adding a bonus room), and then bump that up another $50,000 for the total cost after mortgage interest, utilities, etc. But nobody (that goes into an office) seems to want to believe it costs $150,000 to work from home (but then you save some on commute costs, so there's that). My manager actually made a comment about how it must be nice to save money by working from home (commute costs). I laughed.
  - klyrs 7y ago
    Add TWO rooms to that house. It sounds like you live in an area with inexpensive housing. Folks who rent face an entirely different economic reality.
    - RHSeeger 7y ago
      I live in the suburbs of a larger northeast city, so not inexpensive, but not city-apartment levels, either. Going from 3 bedroom to 4 bedroom seems to raise the asking price around 90k (from 450k to 540k). Admittedly, that includes houses of all ages/conditions/size/etc.
- CodeCube 7y ago
  yes ... $4000 US Dollars for a one bedroom is literal crazy talk. Obviously, people are willing and able to pay those prices right now because they have to live specifically there to get those specific jobs. But if they could work remote, they could live anywhere their heart desires ... closer to family, closer to friends, closer to nature, closer to a local music scene, closer to the beach ... whatever their heart desires. Obviously many people have laid down roots in those extremely high cost of living areas at this point so just moving can be tough, but we need to spread out man, cause $4000 a month for a tin can just ain't a good life.

imtringued 7y ago

That doesn't matter since WFH isn't popular right now. If 0.01% of people work remotely and then suddenly everyone ends up doing WFH then it is unlikely that more than 99.99% of people are going to hate WFH. So lets be pessimistic and say 99% of people end up hating WFH and only 1% like it. That's still a 100 fold increase in people who will do WFH.