11 ms·

So I've now been WFH for 2 months and honestly I hate it. Work was already flexible enough such that if you wanted to WFH you could. By convention, people would

by cletus 6y ago

So I've now been WFH for 2 months and honestly I hate it. Work was already flexible enough such that if you wanted to WFH you could. By convention, people would most often WFH on Wednesdays. I liked this timing of people doing it at the same time. But communication and collaboration is just much harder work remote and you can't change my mind. I'm sure you can work hard to make it almost as good but it's never going to be better (IMHO). I of course miss the meals and snacks. Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and it's not conducive to being productivity, particularly if you live with other people, if you can't get some form of separation. Those of you who are claiming this will be some form of revolution I think are naive. I've found that advocates of WFH are mostly motivated by that's what they want to do more than anything else. I mean that's fine but it often leads to thinly-veiled, self-serving, biased arguments and proclamations of the benefits to everyone. If you need an office anyway you don't really save anything by WFH unless you oversubscribe your work areas (eg hot-desking) and that has its own problems. All-remote might work best. I've seen this claimed but have no direct experience with it. I do know that mixed WFH and in the office is nearly always detrimental to the remote people and the team as a whole (IME). I just don't think a company with 50,000+ employees can operate this way indefinitely.

trimbo 6y ago
This is the best summary of everything I've felt about it. > I just don't think a company with 50,000+ employees can operate this way indefinitely. The other thing is that those-sized companies have made significant real estate investments in their office space. If suddenly their own workforce didn't use them, what would the value of those be? I imagine e.g. Apple Park would not be worth even close to what Apple paid for it if Apple wasn't going to use it.
PopeDotNinja 6y ago
I loved work from home until I wasn't allowed to outside for almost 2 months. Then I felt like a caged animal. Going outside is my offset to work.
- blunte 6y ago
  Not being able to go outside has nothing to do with WFH.
  - mawif 6y ago
    It has quite a lot to do with many people's first experience of prolonged WFH, though.
dehrmann 6y ago
> Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and it's not conducive to being productivity, particularly if you live with other people, if you can't get some form of separation. There's a crowd on HN saying there will be a mass exodus from urban centers. I'm not sure if it will play out quite like that, but I think there will be a premium on locations and housing with extra room for a home office, easy access to open space, and nearby amenities.
r00fus 6y ago
> Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and it's not conducive to being productivity, particularly if you live with other people, if you can't get some form of separation. Could this be the tipping point to a sustained exodus from an urban kind of lifestyle? (spoken as someone who likes/values density)
- CPLX 6y ago
  The idea that this will result in an exodus from urban areas presupposes that jobs are the reason people moved to the urban areas, rather than social, leisure, or cultural reasons. That's highly arguable. Young people like cities, that's where the girls and the parties are. That's been true for a really long time.
  - ponker 6y ago
    I lived in San Francisco solely for work. If I could work from home 3 days a week, I would have lived in Marin County and done a 2 hour commute twice a week, and maybe spend a weekend in the City from time to time.
  - wtetzner 6y ago
    It may result in a shuffling of people between big cities. Instead of living near your job, you can pick the city you like based on other criteria.
  - andreilys 6y ago
    If we’re talking about LA or NYC I would agree. In the case of SF almost every 20-something I’ve interacted with is here primarily for career and plans on relocating at some point.
    - nickv 6y ago
      Honestly, this is EXACTLY the problem with the current tech scene in SF. SF used to be a place people moved to because they wanted to live in San Francisco, they wanted the culture, the access to nature and its beauty, the arts scene that was traditionally more cutting edge (citylights, burning man), the cutting edge food and wine scene, the walkability. Nobody moves to San Francisco for that anymore. They move to San Francisco for work not life. They move to San Francisco to extract value from a job and then leave. San Francisco is too amazing a city to be relegated to becoming a company town. If there is a positive outcome from this, it will hopefully result in a recalibration and people who want to be in SF because they WANT TO BE IN SAN FRANCISCO will stay and the people who came here to just smash and grab some cash will leave.
dan_quixote 6y ago
| I've found that advocates of WFH are mostly motivated by that's what they want to do more than anything else. I've heard endless people state that WFH productivity is through the roof with absolutely no evidence. And lets not pretend that we can accurately measure productivity of software devs - we've all been down this road with agile.
- ARandomerDude 6y ago
  Perhaps if we measured lines of code... ;-)
  - nchelluri 6y ago
    > If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter.
- aswanson 6y ago
  Can only speak for myself. Im far more productive without an hour commute, people constantly interrupting me in my cube with trivia, interrupts to explain you can't do X in the code because the repercussions are X^10, etc followed by a long commute home. But hey, to each his/her own.
- ponker 6y ago
  Here are some numbers... I work at a FAANG and 28-day commits in my division (~5K engineers) are down ~3% from February. Not an exact science but some real data I just pulled for you.
  - Ankhers 6y ago
    This is also a fairly bad time to try and put a measurement on how effective WFH is. The fact that schools and daycares are currently closed means that parents are having to take care of their children while also working. It is also hard on people that are used to working in the office to be told that they now have to work from home suddenly. I'm sure a non-trivial amount of people did not have a space for themselves to be able to work and they are trying to figure things out as they go. Not to mention figuring out how to communicate properly while everyone is remote. There is also not a one size fits all solution. People will be more productive being where they are more comfortable. That may be at home, in a coffee shop, at a library, in the office or any other number of places. People are expected to work from home right now, so a lot of those other options are out of the question. TL;DR, don't judge work from home when everyone has to do it during a pandemic.
dominotw 6y ago
> leads to thinly-veiled, self-serving, biased arguments and proclamations of the benefits to everyone. > So I've now been WFH for 2 months and honestly I hate it. > I just don't think a company with 50,000+ employees can operate this way indefinitely. ok. Why do you consider your arguments against WFH not biased and useful. "other side is biased" ...quite funny :D
- furyofantares 6y ago
  > Why do you consider your arguments against WFH not biased and useful. The software industry is doing quite well for itself, busily collecting all the world’s money. It doesn’t mean it’s doing everything right but it does put a larger burden of proof on advocates for change.
  - detaro 6y ago
    The software industry likely is also among the industries with the highest amount of WFH already.
  - andreilys 6y ago
    Wordpress/Automatic is a fully remote company. Considering that the number of total active websites is estimated at over 1.3 billion according to a survey published by Netcraft, that means that around 455,000,000 websites are using WordPress right now, which means that around 20% of all self-hosted websites use WordPress. So I’d say they’re doing pretty well for themselves.
    - trustfundbaby 6y ago
      Also Github.
  - prostheticvamp 6y ago
    But a big part of how it’s doing that is using technologies to unbundle functions, that used to be bundled for practical reasons, to create new efficiencies and value. So...
- 6y ago
kjakm 6y ago
>> I of course miss the meals and snacks. I'm not trying to be facetious - you seriously can't provide your own meals and snacks working from home? >> Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and it's not conducive to being productivity, particularly if you live with other people, if you can't get some form of separation. Do you live in that space because it's close to your office? Ok, so now you're remote you can live anywhere. If there was no pandemic you could work from a library, or café or dozens of other places. You could move around each day. Or you could move to a cheaper location and have a nice home office.
- edanm 6y ago
  I'm a pretty big foodie and love going to restaurants and trying new things. That said, I've had catered lunches at Google when visiting friends, and that's way better than eating gum restaurants every day. The decision fatigue is real. But also, there are relatively few options that are genuinely good in the area, especially if you're trying to eat somewhat healthy. You get very bored after a while. Lunches provided by an in house chef are very good, tend to be healthier, and more interesting. I think - like I said, I mostly ate a meal here and there. (and if we're comparing to cooking at home, obviously that incurs greater time cost)
- predictmktegirl 6y ago
  I can easily eat $1000 worth of KIND bars in a year, if they're free!
- zuppy 6y ago
  > I'm not trying to be facetious - you seriously can't provide your own meals and snacks working from home? for me, at least, it's about the contact with other people and the talk during the lunch break. face to face human contact. i honestly can not comprehend how can people wish to be isolated... but maybe it's something different with me.
  - tmh88j 6y ago
    > it's about the contact with other people and the talk during the lunch break. face to face human contact. i honestly can not comprehend how can people wish to be isolated... but maybe it's something different with me. Between meetings and misc. things that come up I had human contact all day. Lunch was the one time I could have to myself.
furyofantares 6y ago
I could see the whole team meeting in person 1-2 days per week and the whole team working from home the rest of the time. I find lots of teamwork to be way more effective in person, but tons of heads-down work to be way more effective in private.
skwb 6y ago
I think the optimum is 3 days of WFH, with the remainder being spent in person. For most people, you're going to have work you can do on your own. You probably only need a little bit of help here and there. The office specific days, you spend on meetings, working more directly with people. I think this would also significantly reduce stress on employees. You could live in more affordable areas, and take commuter transit for the days you have in office. It wouldn't bother me too much to take a 90 min transit if I knew it was only a couple of times week. It's the day after day that really kills ones soul.
- whateveracct 6y ago
  That defeats a lot of the benefit of remote work though. My output in 3 days of work is gonna be a week's worth in my experience. Padding it with face time is mostly me eating a loss. 2 days/week working synchronously with people? Of meetings? I can't remember a time when a project I've worked on needed that to succeed.
  - mrich 6y ago
    It certainly depends on seniority and experience, the more you have the easier it is to work on your own. You don't need much guidance anymore and you know what communication and planning is needed in advance, so you can do it in batches.
    - skwb 6y ago
      I completely agree - this certainly isn't a configuration I would think works well for management. Meeting in person certainly are highly valued for even the most junior managers. But for a lot of white collar professionals at an associate to mid senior level, there's plenty of work that you should be able to do independently.
    - jacobr 6y ago
      Until you’re senior enough that most of your job is communication, then remote becomes difficult again. WFH now and maintaining Work/Life balance is really difficult when most of your time is spent sending emails, reviewing code and proposals and answering questions in a global company. Writing code at night happened occasionally before, but it required leaving my family and pulling out my laptop so it had to be for good reason. Helping an overseas team out over Slack with something at 11 pm can be done from my phone, “it’ll just take 5 minutes”.
goldenchrome 6y ago
I think it depends on your work style. I have a friend at FANG who hates WFH because his work style involves a lot of face to face conversations & relationship building. Whereas my wife and I (also FANG) just like doing our work and clocking out ASAP and we both absolutely love WFH. Video chat is more than good enough to make stuff happen with other people, and without a commute I can save hours of my life every single day. Everyone can't work this way, but it works great for a portion of people. I don't see why we can't let people individually decide. My only concern is that the WFH people will be such a minority that they'll be ignored in large meetings, but as long as ~20% of people are remote then I think it can work for everyone.
PaulRobinson 6y ago
Linux (and almost all OSS ), was built from people WFH. Follow the same processes: be as asynchronous as possible,reduce meetings to a few times a year, rely on tools and build new ones if you need them. If you are permanently WFH, why are you in a small pad in the city? Look at what you can afford out in the country, or even another country entirely. Yes, it should be a choice and not forced onto everybody, but after a couple of years of being remote, I get worried about needing to ever go into an open plan office ever again. There are positives to all this, but you may need to adapt to make it work for you.
- palijer 6y ago
  I live in a city, because I like living in a city. I love commuting through it, looking at all the people and businesses, the architecture and smells of the city. I love taking public transit and thinking of background stories for all the folks on the tram. When I am stuck WFH for this quarantine, it doesn't even feel like I live in the city anymore. Moving out of the city would just make that permanent.
  - spideymans 6y ago
    For a lot of people, especially in this industry, the bulk of the social interaction they get is through coworkers. Wouldn't be surprised if permeant working from home exacerbates feelings of loneliness and other mental health issues.
    - noirbot 6y ago
      I'd argue that's unhealthy behavior though. As someone who has less need for daily social contact, having my coworkers leaning on me for their "daily recommended dose" of social interactions isn't healthy for me. I came in to the office because I didn't have a choice not to and avoiding social contact with my coworkers at work isn't really something I can effect without obviously hiding away. It's not to say that it won't be a problem, but introverted folks have been forced into being in offices even when it stressed them out and caused them mental health issues for years. If the extroverts are getting the other end of it now, there's plenty of room to find clubs, meetups, gyms, and other hobbies. Just because I work with you doesn't mean I'm now obligated to be your social support network.
tomashertus 6y ago
I feel genuinely sorry for all the freshmen who enter a job market at this time. I can't imagine having my first full-time job remote only.
- giancarlostoro 6y ago
  Depends on the freshmen, some of us were coding on open source projects of sorts fully remote long before we decided to study CS in college.
- pm90 6y ago
  Well maybe they are better off not knowing. Or that they see it as the new normal. Could go either way.
- spideymans 6y ago
  Thinking about my first job, and how I constantly needed to lean on my coworkers for help for the first month or two. In a work from home setting, where I'd need to instant message them, constantly requesting a video chat or whatever, I'd definitely feel like a burden (compared to just walking over to their desk and starting a conversation). This feeling of being a burden doesn't make a whole lot of sense logically... but human psychology does what it does.
guptaneil 6y ago
Those are all perfectly valid points. However, I don't think WFH advocates are claiming that working from home is definitively better. Both options have different trade-offs. You're right that collaboration is much easier in person, even with the latest remote work technology. But could we offset that with companies that have monthly/quarterly offsites instead? What if they invest their office budget into helping people build better home offices? Ship snacks directly to employees or let them expense meals/snacks? The worst thing a lot of companies will do is jump into fully remote without rethinking how their culture works. This is not just a way to save money by getting rid of your office. That money has to be allocated differently to make up for the differences. I 100% agree that mixed in-perform/WFH is the worst of both worlds. Finally, I would note the last 2 months have been very abnormal for everyone, and it's been nothing like WFH under normal situations. I would wait to when things "return to normal" before making a decision on how you feel about WFH.
- wolco 6y ago
  No offsites please. I'd rather go in then fly around the world at this point.
  - reidjs 6y ago
    How would you feel about local offsites?
- ithkuil 6y ago
  Indeed, it wasn't even normal WFH for people who already worked from home for ages and had all things sorted out. I work in a shed, 20m from my main house; with a red/green sign on it that my small kids learned to obey, good noise cancelling headphones etc. But as schools over here are closed now for about 3 months now, no amount of red/green signs or noise cancellation are going to save me from the fact my help is needed in several occasions during the day, or that (especially at the beginning of the lockdown) I have to block out 4 hours just to buy weekly groceries, or 1h to buy something in the local pharmacy. This thing disrupted everybody. I can only imagine how is it for people who live with kids in apartments with no gardens and no dedicated rooms.
andreilys 6y ago
“ Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and it's not conducive to being productivity, particularly if you live with other people, if you can't get some form of separation” If you have a remote first company, it means your employees can actually move somewhere that they can settle down and own a house. And yes if it’s mixed WFH and on-site then of course the remote workers will lose out. But both Shopify and twitter are doing perm remote for all employees, creating an even playing field.
- ABeeSea 6y ago
  > If you have a remote first company, it means your employees can actually move somewhere that they can settle down and own a house. People don’t live in cities just for jobs. I live in the city to go to museums, art galleries, the symphony, plays, comedy shows, concerts, restaurants, happy hours etc. I have no interest in living outside the city and I especially have no interest in maintaining a house. I really want to go back to my nice office for work.
  - rhodysurf 6y ago
    All of those things you mentioned exist outside of major cities.
    - ABeeSea 6y ago
      Right but it requires planning and a “night out in the city.” Meanwhile, I buy symphony tickets an hour before show on a lark because they are cheap on stubhub.
  - steverb 6y ago
    I also live in the city to go to museums, art galleries, the symphony, plays, comedy shows, concerts, restaurants, happy hours etc. I have no interest in living outside the city and I especially have no interest in maintaining a house. And there is no way I am going back to going to an office to work. YMMV
  - 6y ago
trianglem 6y ago
It’s different strokes. I have never been as productive ever in 5 years of in office work. I find picking up a phone and calling people is just so much quicker than walking over to someone’s desk. Couple that with the fact that I don’t enjoy the office environment means that I hate you cletus for typing out this drivel I clearly don’t agree with and care about.
- mingabunga 6y ago
  We've been WFH for about 3 years now, and aside from meeting up each Friday for lunch, if you're finding it hard to get the point across on Slack/email or it's taking too long, the best option is to pick up the phone and talk it through. Saves so much time, and of course it's nice to hear the voice of the other person.
cmrdporcupine 6y ago
Somewhat agree with you, but I think right now is not representative of what WFH can be. I miss face to face for sure. Am having a hard time being motivated. And projects don't really seem functionally well managed right now. But I also think this is an artifact of how the WFH transition has happened. I think it's likely in the long run it will get sorted out. Also after this lockdown period I suspect there will be a longer period of low% office usage. So we will still be face to face meetings and the like, but less frequently. And that I think will help smooth things out. I've been wanting a lifestyle change for a while, this might be the gateway for that. I already live rural, but the commute has been unpleasant for me to where I work. I am enjoying not driving. If this scenario continues, I could see our family moving closer to what we like -- skiing, outdoor recreation, etc. -- and having lower cost of living in the process.
mifeng 6y ago
Don't work for a company with 50k employees. Don't live in a big city.
shoulder-track 6y ago
50k+ employee companies already work remote. They got dozens of offices all over the world, and bunch of projects I did for these large companies involved me coming in to an office so I can be on the call with people in different offices - which is pretty idiotic and can be just as effectively done from home. And catered meals/snacks are not the norm there either - instead, you smelling microwaved fish Bob brought for lunch, plus Karen is babbling away about how her kid didn't get into the honors program. You don't have an office, you're sitting next to bunch of other people who keep talking, walking, watching funny Youtube videos. The best option is to come in late and work late so you have a somewhat distraction-free workplace to yourself - which again is pretty idiotic. And the communication is not really that much harder, it's actually gets much easier and streamlined the more you WFH. You learn to focus on what matters, you learn to present your thoughts coherently and in an engaging manner as people need to understand you and listen to you even though they don't see you and no one even knows whether they are listening to you or not.
wh-uws 6y ago
If you work and FAANGM+ and you have an awesome cafeteria where they feed you every day and your commute isnt long I see how you would feel that way. However if not and especially if you have a commute WFH is great. I agree with other comments in that fully remote isn't always ideal though. I've done both (ex-LinkedIn) and I currently run a tech consulting firm. I think the right mix is a choice. I prefer 2 or 3 days in the office and the rest of the week from home.
aczerepinski 6y ago
Zoom calls definitely aren't as good as real sitting in the same room meetings, but I aim to be in meetings less than an hour a day anyway. I find that it's plenty good enough for 2-3 person calls, and for one person presenting to a large group of muted listeners. A bit more challenging for 5-10 person collaborative sessions. I've been working remotely for a couple years, and at some point started auto-deleting recruiter emails for jobs in the city. Commuting 2-3 hours per day is just a non-starter for me at this point. The extra sleep and exercise I get remotely is probably going to extend my life expectancy.
chpmrc 6y ago
> and you can't change my mind. Welp, why bother commenting then? Also half remote half in office doesn't work. I've been working for all remote companies for the past 4 years and (asynchronous) communication has always been great. It's "just" a mindset shift. You say we're naive for thinking this is a revolution. I'd say naive is the one evaluating the viability of remote work by looking at an incredibly noisy dataset (or a single data point in your case) during a pandemic in which companies have been forced into a paradigm that requires methodical and progressive change. Similarly to asking someone who has never run to join a marathon and be in the top N.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ithkuil 6y ago
  Analogy: I heard meditation is good, I wish I had some time though. Yesterday I got blocked in an elevator for 6 hours, so I got plenty of time. I tried to used this opportunity and tried meditate though. Didn't work
graham_paul 6y ago
1. communication and collaboration is just much harder work remote: you are probably used to an office culture where communication happens in person and nothing is ever documented. That's understandable. in a remote culture, the written world rules, communication would be much better (asynchronous, no more pointless meetings) 2. Work was already flexible enough such that if you wanted to WFH you could: could you WFH permanently or 99% of the days in a year? 3. the meals and snacks -> if you can't cook, now is a good time to learn. save money 4. Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space -> in a normal period of time, you could just relocate to somewhere better. We are not doing normal WFH 5. Those of you who are claiming this will be some form of revolution I think are naive -> I agree but I also think that you are naive if you think remote working is not superior for information workers 6. If you need an office anyway you don't really save anything -> Wrong. Water, electricity, internet, coffee, amenities, cleaning equipment, toiletries, cleaning services. And of course, the office itself. For workers: they get absolute freedom to shape their home space as they see fit. Oh and the MOST important time, you save everyone their commute (which will get you well rested employees). 7. I just don't think a company with 50,000+ employees: do you HAVE to join a 50k company?
- borski 6y ago
  Re: “move somewhere better”; this is a flawed argument I’ve seen repeated a bunch. Some people just like where they live and don’t want to move to a bigger place. Bigger does not necessarily mean better. Cities provide more options for entertainment, more people to socially interact with, more unique opportunities (by the draw of the city population for these opportunities), etc. “Move somewhere better” is naive, because where they live isn’t necessarily bad; just may not be conducive to full-time remote work.
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    I agree, but my counterpoint would be this: I like having _access_ to the Bay Area, but I don't like how much it costs to live somewhere accessible to SF. If I could live somewhere a little further out to save money, but still be able to visit the City and other places when I wanted or needed, that would be theoretically ideal for me. In practical terms, I'll let you know after I get a chance to try it out. ;-)
m3kw9 6y ago
Technology We now have helps the shift To WFH, Covid accelerated it by maybe 5-10 years depending how long it lasts
m3kw9 6y ago
I wouldn’t worry about all tech companies going WFH. Probably most will have a mix. The wild card is that things may seem easier when people have no choice but to WFH, but once things open up completely, there could be a shift back but inevitably everyone would have already had a taste and some may want it permanently
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
lowbloodsugar 6y ago
>But communication and collaboration is just much harder work remote and you can't change my mind. Don't want to change your mind, so instead consider that your statement might be more accurate if you said: "But communication and collaboration for me is just much harder work remote."
johnghanks 6y ago
So I've now been WFH for 2 months and honestly I love it. Work wasn't flexible before, so I had to commute into the office every day. In fact, everyone had to. But communication and collaboration isn't that difficult with Zoom and Slack, you can't change my mind. You can make it work. I love being able to walk into my kitchen at lunch and make whatever I want. Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and and that's fine because your home is your space and you can make it work for you - even with someone else working in the same room as you. ...
friendlybus 6y ago
>Those of you who are claiming this will be some form of revolution I think are naive. I've found that advocates of WFH are mostly motivated by that's what they want to do more than anything else. I mean that's fine but it often leads to thinly-veiled, self-serving, biased arguments and proclamations of the benefits to everyone. I mean it's trivial to say you're projecting that on to others. Particularly with the closed minded comments like "you can't change my mind". The 'revolution' is already happening, but I don't think it will be across every company and every industry. I don't know who does say that. You can't just hammer WFH out of existence.

by cletus 6y ago

trimbo 6y ago

This is the best summary of everything I've felt about it. > I just don't think a company with 50,000+ employees can operate this way indefinitely. The other thing is that those-sized companies have made significant real estate investments in their office space. If suddenly their own workforce didn't use them, what would the value of those be? I imagine e.g. Apple Park would not be worth even close to what Apple paid for it if Apple wasn't going to use it.

PopeDotNinja 6y ago

I loved work from home until I wasn't allowed to outside for almost 2 months. Then I felt like a caged animal. Going outside is my offset to work.

blunte 6y ago
Not being able to go outside has nothing to do with WFH.
- mawif 6y ago
  It has quite a lot to do with many people's first experience of prolonged WFH, though.

dehrmann 6y ago

> Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and it's not conducive to being productivity, particularly if you live with other people, if you can't get some form of separation. There's a crowd on HN saying there will be a mass exodus from urban centers. I'm not sure if it will play out quite like that, but I think there will be a premium on locations and housing with extra room for a home office, easy access to open space, and nearby amenities.

r00fus 6y ago

> Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and it's not conducive to being productivity, particularly if you live with other people, if you can't get some form of separation. Could this be the tipping point to a sustained exodus from an urban kind of lifestyle? (spoken as someone who likes/values density)

CPLX 6y ago
The idea that this will result in an exodus from urban areas presupposes that jobs are the reason people moved to the urban areas, rather than social, leisure, or cultural reasons. That's highly arguable. Young people like cities, that's where the girls and the parties are. That's been true for a really long time.
- ponker 6y ago
  I lived in San Francisco solely for work. If I could work from home 3 days a week, I would have lived in Marin County and done a 2 hour commute twice a week, and maybe spend a weekend in the City from time to time.
- wtetzner 6y ago
  It may result in a shuffling of people between big cities. Instead of living near your job, you can pick the city you like based on other criteria.
- andreilys 6y ago
  If we’re talking about LA or NYC I would agree. In the case of SF almost every 20-something I’ve interacted with is here primarily for career and plans on relocating at some point.
  - nickv 6y ago
    Honestly, this is EXACTLY the problem with the current tech scene in SF. SF used to be a place people moved to because they wanted to live in San Francisco, they wanted the culture, the access to nature and its beauty, the arts scene that was traditionally more cutting edge (citylights, burning man), the cutting edge food and wine scene, the walkability. Nobody moves to San Francisco for that anymore. They move to San Francisco for work not life. They move to San Francisco to extract value from a job and then leave. San Francisco is too amazing a city to be relegated to becoming a company town. If there is a positive outcome from this, it will hopefully result in a recalibration and people who want to be in SF because they WANT TO BE IN SAN FRANCISCO will stay and the people who came here to just smash and grab some cash will leave.

dan_quixote 6y ago

| I've found that advocates of WFH are mostly motivated by that's what they want to do more than anything else. I've heard endless people state that WFH productivity is through the roof with absolutely no evidence. And lets not pretend that we can accurately measure productivity of software devs - we've all been down this road with agile.

ARandomerDude 6y ago
Perhaps if we measured lines of code... ;-)
- nchelluri 6y ago
  > If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter.
aswanson 6y ago
Can only speak for myself. Im far more productive without an hour commute, people constantly interrupting me in my cube with trivia, interrupts to explain you can't do X in the code because the repercussions are X^10, etc followed by a long commute home. But hey, to each his/her own.
ponker 6y ago
Here are some numbers... I work at a FAANG and 28-day commits in my division (~5K engineers) are down ~3% from February. Not an exact science but some real data I just pulled for you.
- Ankhers 6y ago
  This is also a fairly bad time to try and put a measurement on how effective WFH is. The fact that schools and daycares are currently closed means that parents are having to take care of their children while also working. It is also hard on people that are used to working in the office to be told that they now have to work from home suddenly. I'm sure a non-trivial amount of people did not have a space for themselves to be able to work and they are trying to figure things out as they go. Not to mention figuring out how to communicate properly while everyone is remote. There is also not a one size fits all solution. People will be more productive being where they are more comfortable. That may be at home, in a coffee shop, at a library, in the office or any other number of places. People are expected to work from home right now, so a lot of those other options are out of the question. TL;DR, don't judge work from home when everyone has to do it during a pandemic.

dominotw 6y ago

> leads to thinly-veiled, self-serving, biased arguments and proclamations of the benefits to everyone. > So I've now been WFH for 2 months and honestly I hate it. > I just don't think a company with 50,000+ employees can operate this way indefinitely. ok. Why do you consider your arguments against WFH not biased and useful. "other side is biased" ...quite funny :D

furyofantares 6y ago
> Why do you consider your arguments against WFH not biased and useful. The software industry is doing quite well for itself, busily collecting all the world’s money. It doesn’t mean it’s doing everything right but it does put a larger burden of proof on advocates for change.
- detaro 6y ago
  The software industry likely is also among the industries with the highest amount of WFH already.
- andreilys 6y ago
  Wordpress/Automatic is a fully remote company. Considering that the number of total active websites is estimated at over 1.3 billion according to a survey published by Netcraft, that means that around 455,000,000 websites are using WordPress right now, which means that around 20% of all self-hosted websites use WordPress. So I’d say they’re doing pretty well for themselves.
  - trustfundbaby 6y ago
    Also Github.
- prostheticvamp 6y ago
  But a big part of how it’s doing that is using technologies to unbundle functions, that used to be bundled for practical reasons, to create new efficiencies and value. So...
6y ago

kjakm 6y ago

>> I of course miss the meals and snacks. I'm not trying to be facetious - you seriously can't provide your own meals and snacks working from home? >> Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and it's not conducive to being productivity, particularly if you live with other people, if you can't get some form of separation. Do you live in that space because it's close to your office? Ok, so now you're remote you can live anywhere. If there was no pandemic you could work from a library, or café or dozens of other places. You could move around each day. Or you could move to a cheaper location and have a nice home office.

edanm 6y ago
I'm a pretty big foodie and love going to restaurants and trying new things. That said, I've had catered lunches at Google when visiting friends, and that's way better than eating gum restaurants every day. The decision fatigue is real. But also, there are relatively few options that are genuinely good in the area, especially if you're trying to eat somewhat healthy. You get very bored after a while. Lunches provided by an in house chef are very good, tend to be healthier, and more interesting. I think - like I said, I mostly ate a meal here and there. (and if we're comparing to cooking at home, obviously that incurs greater time cost)
predictmktegirl 6y ago
I can easily eat $1000 worth of KIND bars in a year, if they're free!
zuppy 6y ago
> I'm not trying to be facetious - you seriously can't provide your own meals and snacks working from home? for me, at least, it's about the contact with other people and the talk during the lunch break. face to face human contact. i honestly can not comprehend how can people wish to be isolated... but maybe it's something different with me.
- tmh88j 6y ago
  > it's about the contact with other people and the talk during the lunch break. face to face human contact. i honestly can not comprehend how can people wish to be isolated... but maybe it's something different with me. Between meetings and misc. things that come up I had human contact all day. Lunch was the one time I could have to myself.

furyofantares 6y ago

I could see the whole team meeting in person 1-2 days per week and the whole team working from home the rest of the time. I find lots of teamwork to be way more effective in person, but tons of heads-down work to be way more effective in private.

skwb 6y ago

I think the optimum is 3 days of WFH, with the remainder being spent in person. For most people, you're going to have work you can do on your own. You probably only need a little bit of help here and there. The office specific days, you spend on meetings, working more directly with people. I think this would also significantly reduce stress on employees. You could live in more affordable areas, and take commuter transit for the days you have in office. It wouldn't bother me too much to take a 90 min transit if I knew it was only a couple of times week. It's the day after day that really kills ones soul.

whateveracct 6y ago
That defeats a lot of the benefit of remote work though. My output in 3 days of work is gonna be a week's worth in my experience. Padding it with face time is mostly me eating a loss. 2 days/week working synchronously with people? Of meetings? I can't remember a time when a project I've worked on needed that to succeed.
- mrich 6y ago
  It certainly depends on seniority and experience, the more you have the easier it is to work on your own. You don't need much guidance anymore and you know what communication and planning is needed in advance, so you can do it in batches.
  - skwb 6y ago
    I completely agree - this certainly isn't a configuration I would think works well for management. Meeting in person certainly are highly valued for even the most junior managers. But for a lot of white collar professionals at an associate to mid senior level, there's plenty of work that you should be able to do independently.
  - jacobr 6y ago
    Until you’re senior enough that most of your job is communication, then remote becomes difficult again. WFH now and maintaining Work/Life balance is really difficult when most of your time is spent sending emails, reviewing code and proposals and answering questions in a global company. Writing code at night happened occasionally before, but it required leaving my family and pulling out my laptop so it had to be for good reason. Helping an overseas team out over Slack with something at 11 pm can be done from my phone, “it’ll just take 5 minutes”.

goldenchrome 6y ago

I think it depends on your work style. I have a friend at FANG who hates WFH because his work style involves a lot of face to face conversations & relationship building. Whereas my wife and I (also FANG) just like doing our work and clocking out ASAP and we both absolutely love WFH. Video chat is more than good enough to make stuff happen with other people, and without a commute I can save hours of my life every single day. Everyone can't work this way, but it works great for a portion of people. I don't see why we can't let people individually decide. My only concern is that the WFH people will be such a minority that they'll be ignored in large meetings, but as long as ~20% of people are remote then I think it can work for everyone.

PaulRobinson 6y ago

Linux (and almost all OSS ), was built from people WFH. Follow the same processes: be as asynchronous as possible,reduce meetings to a few times a year, rely on tools and build new ones if you need them. If you are permanently WFH, why are you in a small pad in the city? Look at what you can afford out in the country, or even another country entirely. Yes, it should be a choice and not forced onto everybody, but after a couple of years of being remote, I get worried about needing to ever go into an open plan office ever again. There are positives to all this, but you may need to adapt to make it work for you.

palijer 6y ago
I live in a city, because I like living in a city. I love commuting through it, looking at all the people and businesses, the architecture and smells of the city. I love taking public transit and thinking of background stories for all the folks on the tram. When I am stuck WFH for this quarantine, it doesn't even feel like I live in the city anymore. Moving out of the city would just make that permanent.
- spideymans 6y ago
  For a lot of people, especially in this industry, the bulk of the social interaction they get is through coworkers. Wouldn't be surprised if permeant working from home exacerbates feelings of loneliness and other mental health issues.
  - noirbot 6y ago
    I'd argue that's unhealthy behavior though. As someone who has less need for daily social contact, having my coworkers leaning on me for their "daily recommended dose" of social interactions isn't healthy for me. I came in to the office because I didn't have a choice not to and avoiding social contact with my coworkers at work isn't really something I can effect without obviously hiding away. It's not to say that it won't be a problem, but introverted folks have been forced into being in offices even when it stressed them out and caused them mental health issues for years. If the extroverts are getting the other end of it now, there's plenty of room to find clubs, meetups, gyms, and other hobbies. Just because I work with you doesn't mean I'm now obligated to be your social support network.

tomashertus 6y ago

I feel genuinely sorry for all the freshmen who enter a job market at this time. I can't imagine having my first full-time job remote only.

giancarlostoro 6y ago
Depends on the freshmen, some of us were coding on open source projects of sorts fully remote long before we decided to study CS in college.
pm90 6y ago
Well maybe they are better off not knowing. Or that they see it as the new normal. Could go either way.
spideymans 6y ago
Thinking about my first job, and how I constantly needed to lean on my coworkers for help for the first month or two. In a work from home setting, where I'd need to instant message them, constantly requesting a video chat or whatever, I'd definitely feel like a burden (compared to just walking over to their desk and starting a conversation). This feeling of being a burden doesn't make a whole lot of sense logically... but human psychology does what it does.

guptaneil 6y ago

Those are all perfectly valid points. However, I don't think WFH advocates are claiming that working from home is definitively better. Both options have different trade-offs. You're right that collaboration is much easier in person, even with the latest remote work technology. But could we offset that with companies that have monthly/quarterly offsites instead? What if they invest their office budget into helping people build better home offices? Ship snacks directly to employees or let them expense meals/snacks? The worst thing a lot of companies will do is jump into fully remote without rethinking how their culture works. This is not just a way to save money by getting rid of your office. That money has to be allocated differently to make up for the differences. I 100% agree that mixed in-perform/WFH is the worst of both worlds. Finally, I would note the last 2 months have been very abnormal for everyone, and it's been nothing like WFH under normal situations. I would wait to when things "return to normal" before making a decision on how you feel about WFH.

wolco 6y ago
No offsites please. I'd rather go in then fly around the world at this point.
- reidjs 6y ago
  How would you feel about local offsites?
ithkuil 6y ago
Indeed, it wasn't even normal WFH for people who already worked from home for ages and had all things sorted out. I work in a shed, 20m from my main house; with a red/green sign on it that my small kids learned to obey, good noise cancelling headphones etc. But as schools over here are closed now for about 3 months now, no amount of red/green signs or noise cancellation are going to save me from the fact my help is needed in several occasions during the day, or that (especially at the beginning of the lockdown) I have to block out 4 hours just to buy weekly groceries, or 1h to buy something in the local pharmacy. This thing disrupted everybody. I can only imagine how is it for people who live with kids in apartments with no gardens and no dedicated rooms.

andreilys 6y ago

“ Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and it's not conducive to being productivity, particularly if you live with other people, if you can't get some form of separation” If you have a remote first company, it means your employees can actually move somewhere that they can settle down and own a house. And yes if it’s mixed WFH and on-site then of course the remote workers will lose out. But both Shopify and twitter are doing perm remote for all employees, creating an even playing field.

ABeeSea 6y ago
> If you have a remote first company, it means your employees can actually move somewhere that they can settle down and own a house. People don’t live in cities just for jobs. I live in the city to go to museums, art galleries, the symphony, plays, comedy shows, concerts, restaurants, happy hours etc. I have no interest in living outside the city and I especially have no interest in maintaining a house. I really want to go back to my nice office for work.
- rhodysurf 6y ago
  All of those things you mentioned exist outside of major cities.
  - ABeeSea 6y ago
    Right but it requires planning and a “night out in the city.” Meanwhile, I buy symphony tickets an hour before show on a lark because they are cheap on stubhub.
- steverb 6y ago
  I also live in the city to go to museums, art galleries, the symphony, plays, comedy shows, concerts, restaurants, happy hours etc. I have no interest in living outside the city and I especially have no interest in maintaining a house. And there is no way I am going back to going to an office to work. YMMV
- 6y ago

trianglem 6y ago

It’s different strokes. I have never been as productive ever in 5 years of in office work. I find picking up a phone and calling people is just so much quicker than walking over to someone’s desk. Couple that with the fact that I don’t enjoy the office environment means that I hate you cletus for typing out this drivel I clearly don’t agree with and care about.

mingabunga 6y ago
We've been WFH for about 3 years now, and aside from meeting up each Friday for lunch, if you're finding it hard to get the point across on Slack/email or it's taking too long, the best option is to pick up the phone and talk it through. Saves so much time, and of course it's nice to hear the voice of the other person.

cmrdporcupine 6y ago

Somewhat agree with you, but I think right now is not representative of what WFH can be. I miss face to face for sure. Am having a hard time being motivated. And projects don't really seem functionally well managed right now. But I also think this is an artifact of how the WFH transition has happened. I think it's likely in the long run it will get sorted out. Also after this lockdown period I suspect there will be a longer period of low% office usage. So we will still be face to face meetings and the like, but less frequently. And that I think will help smooth things out. I've been wanting a lifestyle change for a while, this might be the gateway for that. I already live rural, but the commute has been unpleasant for me to where I work. I am enjoying not driving. If this scenario continues, I could see our family moving closer to what we like -- skiing, outdoor recreation, etc. -- and having lower cost of living in the process.

mifeng 6y ago

Don't work for a company with 50k employees. Don't live in a big city.

shoulder-track 6y ago

50k+ employee companies already work remote. They got dozens of offices all over the world, and bunch of projects I did for these large companies involved me coming in to an office so I can be on the call with people in different offices - which is pretty idiotic and can be just as effectively done from home. And catered meals/snacks are not the norm there either - instead, you smelling microwaved fish Bob brought for lunch, plus Karen is babbling away about how her kid didn't get into the honors program. You don't have an office, you're sitting next to bunch of other people who keep talking, walking, watching funny Youtube videos. The best option is to come in late and work late so you have a somewhat distraction-free workplace to yourself - which again is pretty idiotic. And the communication is not really that much harder, it's actually gets much easier and streamlined the more you WFH. You learn to focus on what matters, you learn to present your thoughts coherently and in an engaging manner as people need to understand you and listen to you even though they don't see you and no one even knows whether they are listening to you or not.

wh-uws 6y ago

If you work and FAANGM+ and you have an awesome cafeteria where they feed you every day and your commute isnt long I see how you would feel that way. However if not and especially if you have a commute WFH is great. I agree with other comments in that fully remote isn't always ideal though. I've done both (ex-LinkedIn) and I currently run a tech consulting firm. I think the right mix is a choice. I prefer 2 or 3 days in the office and the rest of the week from home.

aczerepinski 6y ago

Zoom calls definitely aren't as good as real sitting in the same room meetings, but I aim to be in meetings less than an hour a day anyway. I find that it's plenty good enough for 2-3 person calls, and for one person presenting to a large group of muted listeners. A bit more challenging for 5-10 person collaborative sessions. I've been working remotely for a couple years, and at some point started auto-deleting recruiter emails for jobs in the city. Commuting 2-3 hours per day is just a non-starter for me at this point. The extra sleep and exercise I get remotely is probably going to extend my life expectancy.

chpmrc 6y ago

> and you can't change my mind. Welp, why bother commenting then? Also half remote half in office doesn't work. I've been working for all remote companies for the past 4 years and (asynchronous) communication has always been great. It's "just" a mindset shift. You say we're naive for thinking this is a revolution. I'd say naive is the one evaluating the viability of remote work by looking at an incredibly noisy dataset (or a single data point in your case) during a pandemic in which companies have been forced into a paradigm that requires methodical and progressive change. Similarly to asking someone who has never run to join a marathon and be in the top N.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ithkuil 6y ago
Analogy: I heard meditation is good, I wish I had some time though. Yesterday I got blocked in an elevator for 6 hours, so I got plenty of time. I tried to used this opportunity and tried meditate though. Didn't work

graham_paul 6y ago

1. communication and collaboration is just much harder work remote: you are probably used to an office culture where communication happens in person and nothing is ever documented. That's understandable. in a remote culture, the written world rules, communication would be much better (asynchronous, no more pointless meetings) 2. Work was already flexible enough such that if you wanted to WFH you could: could you WFH permanently or 99% of the days in a year? 3. the meals and snacks -> if you can't cook, now is a good time to learn. save money 4. Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space -> in a normal period of time, you could just relocate to somewhere better. We are not doing normal WFH 5. Those of you who are claiming this will be some form of revolution I think are naive -> I agree but I also think that you are naive if you think remote working is not superior for information workers 6. If you need an office anyway you don't really save anything -> Wrong. Water, electricity, internet, coffee, amenities, cleaning equipment, toiletries, cleaning services. And of course, the office itself. For workers: they get absolute freedom to shape their home space as they see fit. Oh and the MOST important time, you save everyone their commute (which will get you well rested employees). 7. I just don't think a company with 50,000+ employees: do you HAVE to join a 50k company?

borski 6y ago
Re: “move somewhere better”; this is a flawed argument I’ve seen repeated a bunch. Some people just like where they live and don’t want to move to a bigger place. Bigger does not necessarily mean better. Cities provide more options for entertainment, more people to socially interact with, more unique opportunities (by the draw of the city population for these opportunities), etc. “Move somewhere better” is naive, because where they live isn’t necessarily bad; just may not be conducive to full-time remote work.
- pmiller2 6y ago
  I agree, but my counterpoint would be this: I like having _access_ to the Bay Area, but I don't like how much it costs to live somewhere accessible to SF. If I could live somewhere a little further out to save money, but still be able to visit the City and other places when I wanted or needed, that would be theoretically ideal for me. In practical terms, I'll let you know after I get a chance to try it out. ;-)

m3kw9 6y ago

Technology We now have helps the shift To WFH, Covid accelerated it by maybe 5-10 years depending how long it lasts

m3kw9 6y ago

I wouldn’t worry about all tech companies going WFH. Probably most will have a mix. The wild card is that things may seem easier when people have no choice but to WFH, but once things open up completely, there could be a shift back but inevitably everyone would have already had a taste and some may want it permanently

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

lowbloodsugar 6y ago

>But communication and collaboration is just much harder work remote and you can't change my mind. Don't want to change your mind, so instead consider that your statement might be more accurate if you said: "But communication and collaboration for me is just much harder work remote."

johnghanks 6y ago

So I've now been WFH for 2 months and honestly I love it. Work wasn't flexible before, so I had to commute into the office every day. In fact, everyone had to. But communication and collaboration isn't that difficult with Zoom and Slack, you can't change my mind. You can make it work. I love being able to walk into my kitchen at lunch and make whatever I want. Many people who work at these companies live in big cities where they don't have huge amounts of space and and that's fine because your home is your space and you can make it work for you - even with someone else working in the same room as you. ...

friendlybus 6y ago

>Those of you who are claiming this will be some form of revolution I think are naive. I've found that advocates of WFH are mostly motivated by that's what they want to do more than anything else. I mean that's fine but it often leads to thinly-veiled, self-serving, biased arguments and proclamations of the benefits to everyone. I mean it's trivial to say you're projecting that on to others. Particularly with the closed minded comments like "you can't change my mind". The 'revolution' is already happening, but I don't think it will be across every company and every industry. I don't know who does say that. You can't just hammer WFH out of existence.