8 ms·

I hope the Covid self quarantining demonstrates that WFH works. We can do more WFH and cut down on traffic, time lost in traffic and our carbon footprint. We

I hope the Covid self quarantining demonstrates that WFH works. We can do more WFH and cut down on traffic, time lost in traffic and our carbon footprint. We also might spread less of the flu around too.

andy_ppp 7y ago
Yes, there should also be offices available nearby. I like having coworkers too much to WFH full time!
- state_less 7y ago
  I'm happy to see people being proactive on the social front. Over time doing WFH, I've found that putting a little effort into getting into social situations goes a long way. My wife used to live in a coop and we now live in a marina where we play cards and have drinks with folks and that helps combat loneliness. We're in this together, we can improve it over time.
WanderPanda 7y ago
And probably get more lonely, too.
- baron_harkonnen 7y ago
  ...or build a community of people around you not centered around work? I worked remote for a very long time, at first it was lonely then I realized I needed to reach out to people locally who were interesting to chat with. I was able to grow friendships over lunches and coffees that ordinary office life would not have allowed. Covid19 makes that impossible right now, but WFH doesn't mean lonely. It's just that your default is to get all your socialization from coworkers. Socializing with people in your community based on common interests is much more rewarding than by common employer
  - aledalgrande 7y ago
    Agree. Also WFH is not literally "Work From Home". You can work from anywhere you want. A park. A cafe on the beach. I think people are just not used to the freedom they suddenly acquired and don't know how to use it (plus we can't go out right now).
    - leetcrew 7y ago
      when you can't go out to lunch, go to the gym, or hang out with friends, it feels a lot more like "Live at Work".
      - aledalgrande 7y ago
        Definitely, but that is not how WFH is normally. Also, don't a lot of people work a lot of hours, basically living at the office? There's not much difference there.
        leetcrew 7y ago
        agree with you, just saw the opportunity for a (bad) pun. I'm actually having my first real WFH experience so far and I definitely appreciate getting an hour back from the commute. I'm eating a "weekend breakfast" every day of the week. I'm mainly thinking of people who have kids and/or are accustomed to filling their post-work hours with sports, gym, or other activities. these people are viewing WFH as more of an imposition than a freedom.
        aledalgrande 7y ago
        Haha sorry I didn't get the pun, I just had coffee. My point is that you are given a lot more freedom, what you do with it, is up to you. You can go in to an office 3 days a week and stay at home the other 2. How you organize is up to you. But with the current situation that freedom is limited.
    - GordonS 7y ago
- aerhjae5rjnert 7y ago
  Loneliest place I ever worked was in-office at the borg
vikramkr 7y ago
All I'm hearing from friends is that WFH is way worse than it was hyped up to be and that it's so much worse not being able to work with your coworkers in person and to have separation of your home and work for mental health. Everyone is different and WFH is not a panacea.
- gdubs 7y ago
  For the experiment to be fair we should spend three months unable to leave our offices, and have everyone bring their kids, and be responsible for janitorial, barista, and cafe services.
  - vikramkr 7y ago
    Yeah if wfh was given a fair shake I think we'd see a lot more acceptance. But the end result of the current situation would not be so optimistic I think. I dont know if it's as good for wfh as people hope.
- theli0nheart 7y ago
  I'm surprised it needs to be said, but WFH during a pandemic is not equivalent to WFH during normal life.
  - skrebbel 7y ago
    > I'm surprised it needs to be said, Are you really, though?
  - thawaway1837 7y ago
    Well, in my case WFH during the pandemic has been far better than otherwise because now everyone is on an equal footing. Everyone is WFH so I’m not missing random side conversations or getting ignored altogether. And it’s still pretty terrible. There are advantages, but at least for me my productivity is miles higher in an office environment.
    - vikramkr 7y ago
Nux 7y ago
This is a bad exercise in wfh. Rushed, poorly planned, if at all, with kids around and no way to get some peace and quiet required for proper focused work... If anything I'm afraid this taught companies wfh sucks and should be avoided.
- vikramkr 7y ago
  I think the message a lot of people in my societal circle (I can't generalize obviously) are getting is that WFH is terrible and a sacrifice you have to make for the pandemic. It'd be like if after ww2 you introduced rationing as a smart way to manage your budget - people would go hell no. That was a sacrifice I made for the war and it sucked, not something I'd do voluntarily.
- take_a_breath 7y ago
  Won’t controlling for all those variables in distributed locations (wfh) always be harder than a centralized location (office)?
lm28469 7y ago
> that WFH works It only works when you can do your job from home (aka not most jobs). It also only works if you don't have kids, a partner or have a big enough home to isolate, which isn't the case for most people. The current situation will make people hate wfh.
- vikramkr 7y ago
  And it removes the healthy separation of home and work. It doesn't matter whether or not this is doing WFH "right" or if this WFH is similar to WFH in a non-pandemic situation - this is now what people think of when they think of WFH. A wartime sacrifice they made to fight coronavirus. Not something you'd voluntarily do.
- GordonS 7y ago
  > It only works when you can do your job from home (aka not most jobs) I don't think that really needs to be said. > It also only works if you don't have kids, a partner or have a big enough home I've been mostly working from home for several years now (maybe ~10), and I'm just as productive at home as in the office - definitely moreso during periods when there have been particularly loud and obnoxious employees working in the office. I totally agree that you need to be able to isolate yourself from others in the home - you need a home office, where you can close the door and be in "work mode". As long as you have a home office, it's actually a bonus if you have young kids and/or a spouse in the house, as you get to have lunch with them every day. Not having to commute is a huge bonus, especially if you live far from the office. You save money, time, and even carbon emissions. You get extra time in bed, if you want it. Even your employer potentially benefits, by not having to pay for office space (or at least reduced office space if they have hot desks). But not everyone has space for even a small home office, and even then not everyone has the self-discipline to be in "work mode" while at home. And of course, some people are just really sociable, and enjoy that aspect of an office environment. So it's definitely not for everyone, but it would be wonderful if more people were given the choice.
vegetablepotpie 7y ago
Although work from home reduces traveling to the office, transportation only accounts for about 15% of greenhouse gas emissions. A bigger contributor of global green house gas emissions is power generation, which we’re still doing plenty of. Every bit helps, but if we want to have serious reductions in greenhouse gas emissions we’ll have to make significant infrastructure changes. Behavioral and policy changes alone will not sufficiently address climate change. https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greenhouse_Gas_by_Sector.png https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greenhouse_Gas_by_...
- _ph_ 7y ago
  Even if it doesn't cut down emissions so much (and electric cars are very good at that too), it does make a lot of difference for the daily traffic jams. If we could reduce those, it would be of great benefit.
- epistasis 7y ago
  What region is that graph describing? In the US, transportation is 29% of emissions: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis... In California, it is something like 40% of emissions. These percentages are going to increase quickly, as renewable generation is now cheaper than other types of electricity generation in most markets, and prices are plummeting like a rock. The same can't be said for electric car prices, nor EV adoption rates. I think land use changes that permit transit are by far the most important infrastructure changes to reduce emissions. However even in California efforts to change this over the past three years (SB827, SB50) have met a brick wall of resistance, despite widespread acceptance climate action and desire for better transit. Transportation GHG emission rates are going to be far far harder to change than power generation emissions.
  - vegetablepotpie 7y ago
    The pie chart I posted is a global chart. US GHG emissions are significant, but they are not the majority source. Regardless, individual action and decisions of minor institutions (such as businesses changing policies to allow work from home) are necessary, but are not sufficient to make significant reductions in GHG emissions. Land use changes are a good example of the types of changes needed.
HeyLaughingBoy 7y ago
...for some types of work, for some types of personalities, and under some circumstances. Right now all we have is a bunch of people thrown into an unfamiliar situation and being told to make the best of it.
abyssin 7y ago
I hope it reminds people it's possible to live a life without traveling hundreds of kilometers every week, and that what matters it spending time with your loved ones, having food, shelter, and access to healthcare. We can change our lifestyles towards something less harmful to our environment, and still live happy lives. Nobody is entitled to a lifestyle that destroys the environment.

andy_ppp 7y ago

Yes, there should also be offices available nearby. I like having coworkers too much to WFH full time!

state_less 7y ago
I'm happy to see people being proactive on the social front. Over time doing WFH, I've found that putting a little effort into getting into social situations goes a long way. My wife used to live in a coop and we now live in a marina where we play cards and have drinks with folks and that helps combat loneliness. We're in this together, we can improve it over time.

WanderPanda 7y ago

And probably get more lonely, too.

baron_harkonnen 7y ago
...or build a community of people around you not centered around work? I worked remote for a very long time, at first it was lonely then I realized I needed to reach out to people locally who were interesting to chat with. I was able to grow friendships over lunches and coffees that ordinary office life would not have allowed. Covid19 makes that impossible right now, but WFH doesn't mean lonely. It's just that your default is to get all your socialization from coworkers. Socializing with people in your community based on common interests is much more rewarding than by common employer
- aledalgrande 7y ago
  Agree. Also WFH is not literally "Work From Home". You can work from anywhere you want. A park. A cafe on the beach. I think people are just not used to the freedom they suddenly acquired and don't know how to use it (plus we can't go out right now).
  - leetcrew 7y ago
    when you can't go out to lunch, go to the gym, or hang out with friends, it feels a lot more like "Live at Work".
    - aledalgrande 7y ago
      Definitely, but that is not how WFH is normally. Also, don't a lot of people work a lot of hours, basically living at the office? There's not much difference there.
      - leetcrew 7y ago
        agree with you, just saw the opportunity for a (bad) pun. I'm actually having my first real WFH experience so far and I definitely appreciate getting an hour back from the commute. I'm eating a "weekend breakfast" every day of the week. I'm mainly thinking of people who have kids and/or are accustomed to filling their post-work hours with sports, gym, or other activities. these people are viewing WFH as more of an imposition than a freedom.
        aledalgrande 7y ago
        Haha sorry I didn't get the pun, I just had coffee. My point is that you are given a lot more freedom, what you do with it, is up to you. You can go in to an office 3 days a week and stay at home the other 2. How you organize is up to you. But with the current situation that freedom is limited.
  - GordonS 7y ago
aerhjae5rjnert 7y ago
Loneliest place I ever worked was in-office at the borg

vikramkr 7y ago

All I'm hearing from friends is that WFH is way worse than it was hyped up to be and that it's so much worse not being able to work with your coworkers in person and to have separation of your home and work for mental health. Everyone is different and WFH is not a panacea.

gdubs 7y ago
For the experiment to be fair we should spend three months unable to leave our offices, and have everyone bring their kids, and be responsible for janitorial, barista, and cafe services.
- vikramkr 7y ago
  Yeah if wfh was given a fair shake I think we'd see a lot more acceptance. But the end result of the current situation would not be so optimistic I think. I dont know if it's as good for wfh as people hope.
theli0nheart 7y ago
I'm surprised it needs to be said, but WFH during a pandemic is not equivalent to WFH during normal life.
- skrebbel 7y ago
  > I'm surprised it needs to be said, Are you really, though?
- thawaway1837 7y ago
  Well, in my case WFH during the pandemic has been far better than otherwise because now everyone is on an equal footing. Everyone is WFH so I’m not missing random side conversations or getting ignored altogether. And it’s still pretty terrible. There are advantages, but at least for me my productivity is miles higher in an office environment.
  - vikramkr 7y ago

Nux 7y ago

This is a bad exercise in wfh. Rushed, poorly planned, if at all, with kids around and no way to get some peace and quiet required for proper focused work... If anything I'm afraid this taught companies wfh sucks and should be avoided.

vikramkr 7y ago
I think the message a lot of people in my societal circle (I can't generalize obviously) are getting is that WFH is terrible and a sacrifice you have to make for the pandemic. It'd be like if after ww2 you introduced rationing as a smart way to manage your budget - people would go hell no. That was a sacrifice I made for the war and it sucked, not something I'd do voluntarily.
take_a_breath 7y ago
Won’t controlling for all those variables in distributed locations (wfh) always be harder than a centralized location (office)?

lm28469 7y ago

> that WFH works It only works when you can do your job from home (aka not most jobs). It also only works if you don't have kids, a partner or have a big enough home to isolate, which isn't the case for most people. The current situation will make people hate wfh.

vikramkr 7y ago
And it removes the healthy separation of home and work. It doesn't matter whether or not this is doing WFH "right" or if this WFH is similar to WFH in a non-pandemic situation - this is now what people think of when they think of WFH. A wartime sacrifice they made to fight coronavirus. Not something you'd voluntarily do.
GordonS 7y ago
> It only works when you can do your job from home (aka not most jobs) I don't think that really needs to be said. > It also only works if you don't have kids, a partner or have a big enough home I've been mostly working from home for several years now (maybe ~10), and I'm just as productive at home as in the office - definitely moreso during periods when there have been particularly loud and obnoxious employees working in the office. I totally agree that you need to be able to isolate yourself from others in the home - you need a home office, where you can close the door and be in "work mode". As long as you have a home office, it's actually a bonus if you have young kids and/or a spouse in the house, as you get to have lunch with them every day. Not having to commute is a huge bonus, especially if you live far from the office. You save money, time, and even carbon emissions. You get extra time in bed, if you want it. Even your employer potentially benefits, by not having to pay for office space (or at least reduced office space if they have hot desks). But not everyone has space for even a small home office, and even then not everyone has the self-discipline to be in "work mode" while at home. And of course, some people are just really sociable, and enjoy that aspect of an office environment. So it's definitely not for everyone, but it would be wonderful if more people were given the choice.

vegetablepotpie 7y ago

Although work from home reduces traveling to the office, transportation only accounts for about 15% of greenhouse gas emissions. A bigger contributor of global green house gas emissions is power generation, which we’re still doing plenty of. Every bit helps, but if we want to have serious reductions in greenhouse gas emissions we’ll have to make significant infrastructure changes. Behavioral and policy changes alone will not sufficiently address climate change. https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greenhouse_Gas_by_Sector.png https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greenhouse_Gas_by_...

_ph_ 7y ago
Even if it doesn't cut down emissions so much (and electric cars are very good at that too), it does make a lot of difference for the daily traffic jams. If we could reduce those, it would be of great benefit.
epistasis 7y ago
What region is that graph describing? In the US, transportation is 29% of emissions: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis... In California, it is something like 40% of emissions. These percentages are going to increase quickly, as renewable generation is now cheaper than other types of electricity generation in most markets, and prices are plummeting like a rock. The same can't be said for electric car prices, nor EV adoption rates. I think land use changes that permit transit are by far the most important infrastructure changes to reduce emissions. However even in California efforts to change this over the past three years (SB827, SB50) have met a brick wall of resistance, despite widespread acceptance climate action and desire for better transit. Transportation GHG emission rates are going to be far far harder to change than power generation emissions.
- vegetablepotpie 7y ago
  The pie chart I posted is a global chart. US GHG emissions are significant, but they are not the majority source. Regardless, individual action and decisions of minor institutions (such as businesses changing policies to allow work from home) are necessary, but are not sufficient to make significant reductions in GHG emissions. Land use changes are a good example of the types of changes needed.

HeyLaughingBoy 7y ago

...for some types of work, for some types of personalities, and under some circumstances. Right now all we have is a bunch of people thrown into an unfamiliar situation and being told to make the best of it.

abyssin 7y ago

I hope it reminds people it's possible to live a life without traveling hundreds of kilometers every week, and that what matters it spending time with your loved ones, having food, shelter, and access to healthcare. We can change our lifestyles towards something less harmful to our environment, and still live happy lives. Nobody is entitled to a lifestyle that destroys the environment.