3 ms·

I don't understand the need to insist on the righteousness of your particular opinion with regard to remote work. To conclude that an organization that doesn't

I don't understand the need to insist on the righteousness of your particular opinion with regard to remote work. To conclude that an organization that doesn't meet your expectations about remote work as you is "all about power" seems to me to be a huge leap.

unexaminedlife 6y ago
I would disagree. I think it's definitely a power move when what you decide to do is (a) more expensive (b) unnecessary (c) less efficient. By ignoring an entire planet worth of qualified (probably highly qualified) people when you don't have to you're doing no favors to your shareholders.
- gwright 6y ago
  Where do you get so much self righteousness to conclude that your assessment is appropriate for all companies, all positions, everywhere? And why does there have to even be a single "formula" for work in any case? I find that attitude extremely narrow minded. At the same time I fully support your freedom to seek out the opportunities that work for you. I just don't understand the attitude that other people must be on power trips if they don't think they way you do in this regard.
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    He or she must be saying something right, if all of these tech megacorps are starting to embrace remote work, potentially sparking a sea change that will sweep Silicon Valley.
    - gwright 6y ago
      This is just sloppy logical thinking. Even assuming your statement that "all...megacorps are staring to embrace", it is not reasonable to then conclude that any alternate opinion about remote work at all is wrong thinking. By what logic can you assume the special case of some types of positions in Silicon Valley "megacorps" is generally applicable to all other jobs?
      - Apocryphon 6y ago
        I said "all of these", not all. Permanent remote is starting to be embraced by other white collar professions as well, including banking and insurance: https://fortune.com/2020/05/11/permanent-work-from-home-coronavirus-nationwide-fortune-100/ https://fortune.com/2020/05/11/permanent-work-from-home-coro... https://www.americanbanker.com/articles/capital-one-to-keep-most-staff-home-until-at-least-september https://www.americanbanker.com/articles/capital-one-to-keep-... https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/21/rbs-staff-work-from-home-september-bank-covid-19-safety https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/21/rbs-staff-w... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-barclays-results-offices/barclays-ceo-says-putting-7000-people-in-a-building-may-be-thing-of-the-past-idUSKCN22B0ZE https://www.reuters.com/article/us-barclays-results-offices/...
        gwright 6y ago
        So what? I'm not arguing against remote work. I'm arguing against the religion of "universal remote work". One size doesn't fit all. That should be completely uncontroversial.
        Apocryphon 6y ago
        I actually agree. I don’t think every single white collar position should be remote. However, the poster you’ve been replying to didn’t say that, either. He or she simply said that these companies that are doing an about-face and moving towards permanent remote were always in a position to try more remote- they had the resources and capabilities to experiment, and is bitter that they didn’t do so until forced by the pandemic. They weren’t saying that remote must be done in all circumstances, that’s a strawman you read into their posts.
  - unexaminedlife 6y ago
    I think it's strange you are saying this idea of remote work is a "single formula". If anything, refusing to do things differently is more like a "single formula" in my mind. Maybe you think differently about this, but I can't fathom a real-world scenario where tapping into all qualified candidates in the entire world vs tapping into all qualified candidates within a 20-30 mile radius from my HQ could be even close in comparison. Obviously we won't decide who is "right" here in a forum. But I will be interested to follow what happens to the companies who weren't prepared for this and companies who already were. I anticipate some major reshuffling will be happening in the coming years. The companies who built their entire culture around on-site teams vs companies who built infrastructure and culture around acceptance of work from home. Companies with large balance sheets will be able to hide it for some time, but their unpreparedness will begin to show within 1-3 years I think. This is all given the premise that things don't 100% go back to "normal".
    - CathedralBorrow 6y ago
      > Obviously we won't decide who is "right" here in a forum. Is there any debate to be had about that anyway? From what you've written here, you are right and everyone who thinks otherwise clearly hasn't thought things through well enough.
      - benibela 6y ago
        It is true. Here, unexaminedlife is right about everything
        CathedralBorrow 6y ago
        What exactly is true? That remote working is always better in all conceivable scenarios and that anyone saying anything else is stupid and wasteful and probably smells too?
        benibela 6y ago
        > That remote working is always better in all conceivable scenarios and that anyone saying anything else is stupid and wasteful This. Exactly this. >and probably smells too? But not this. It is probably the opposite. When I work remotely, I rarely shower. Showering is stupid and wasteful. Millions of people lack potable water and here we are wasting it for showering
  - engineeringwoke 6y ago
    Controlling managers lose power, that is not needed for the functioning of the business, when you are not in their physical presence. To call it power tripping seems like a logical conclusion.
    - gwright 6y ago
      Define "controlling", define "power", define 'not needed for the functioning of the business". Define "power tripping". I'm not sure how to draw any meaning from your statement when the terms you use are so abstract and ill-defined.
- asplake 6y ago
  You could be right on the economics and still wrong on the motivation. Are the economics so clear cut in every context that an uncharitable explanation is necessary?
  - 6510 6y ago
    Yes it is! If it is that people cant see their family an emotion free, strictly technical, unambiguous response should suffice.
Dumblydorr 6y ago
Reframe it this way: decision making managers and executives need to be in the office to do their work, thus they want their peons to be working away right near them as well. The decision makers are doing a different kind of work than the workers, that is the issue.
- gwright 6y ago
  You've divided the working world up into "decisions makers" and "peons" and you want me to view your thoughts on this as reasonable? And is there some law of physics that I'm not aware of that neatly divides all jobs into two buckets, "decision makers" and "workers"? Leaning on that sort of manufactured dichotomy is low resolution thinking.

unexaminedlife 6y ago

I would disagree. I think it's definitely a power move when what you decide to do is (a) more expensive (b) unnecessary (c) less efficient. By ignoring an entire planet worth of qualified (probably highly qualified) people when you don't have to you're doing no favors to your shareholders.

gwright 6y ago
Where do you get so much self righteousness to conclude that your assessment is appropriate for all companies, all positions, everywhere? And why does there have to even be a single "formula" for work in any case? I find that attitude extremely narrow minded. At the same time I fully support your freedom to seek out the opportunities that work for you. I just don't understand the attitude that other people must be on power trips if they don't think they way you do in this regard.
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  He or she must be saying something right, if all of these tech megacorps are starting to embrace remote work, potentially sparking a sea change that will sweep Silicon Valley.
  - gwright 6y ago
    This is just sloppy logical thinking. Even assuming your statement that "all...megacorps are staring to embrace", it is not reasonable to then conclude that any alternate opinion about remote work at all is wrong thinking. By what logic can you assume the special case of some types of positions in Silicon Valley "megacorps" is generally applicable to all other jobs?
    - Apocryphon 6y ago
      I said "all of these", not all. Permanent remote is starting to be embraced by other white collar professions as well, including banking and insurance: https://fortune.com/2020/05/11/permanent-work-from-home-coronavirus-nationwide-fortune-100/ https://fortune.com/2020/05/11/permanent-work-from-home-coro... https://www.americanbanker.com/articles/capital-one-to-keep-most-staff-home-until-at-least-september https://www.americanbanker.com/articles/capital-one-to-keep-... https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/21/rbs-staff-work-from-home-september-bank-covid-19-safety https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/21/rbs-staff-w... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-barclays-results-offices/barclays-ceo-says-putting-7000-people-in-a-building-may-be-thing-of-the-past-idUSKCN22B0ZE https://www.reuters.com/article/us-barclays-results-offices/...
      - gwright 6y ago
        So what? I'm not arguing against remote work. I'm arguing against the religion of "universal remote work". One size doesn't fit all. That should be completely uncontroversial.
        Apocryphon 6y ago
        I actually agree. I don’t think every single white collar position should be remote. However, the poster you’ve been replying to didn’t say that, either. He or she simply said that these companies that are doing an about-face and moving towards permanent remote were always in a position to try more remote- they had the resources and capabilities to experiment, and is bitter that they didn’t do so until forced by the pandemic. They weren’t saying that remote must be done in all circumstances, that’s a strawman you read into their posts.
- unexaminedlife 6y ago
  I think it's strange you are saying this idea of remote work is a "single formula". If anything, refusing to do things differently is more like a "single formula" in my mind. Maybe you think differently about this, but I can't fathom a real-world scenario where tapping into all qualified candidates in the entire world vs tapping into all qualified candidates within a 20-30 mile radius from my HQ could be even close in comparison. Obviously we won't decide who is "right" here in a forum. But I will be interested to follow what happens to the companies who weren't prepared for this and companies who already were. I anticipate some major reshuffling will be happening in the coming years. The companies who built their entire culture around on-site teams vs companies who built infrastructure and culture around acceptance of work from home. Companies with large balance sheets will be able to hide it for some time, but their unpreparedness will begin to show within 1-3 years I think. This is all given the premise that things don't 100% go back to "normal".
  - CathedralBorrow 6y ago
    > Obviously we won't decide who is "right" here in a forum. Is there any debate to be had about that anyway? From what you've written here, you are right and everyone who thinks otherwise clearly hasn't thought things through well enough.
    - benibela 6y ago
      It is true. Here, unexaminedlife is right about everything
      - CathedralBorrow 6y ago
        What exactly is true? That remote working is always better in all conceivable scenarios and that anyone saying anything else is stupid and wasteful and probably smells too?
        benibela 6y ago
        > That remote working is always better in all conceivable scenarios and that anyone saying anything else is stupid and wasteful This. Exactly this. >and probably smells too? But not this. It is probably the opposite. When I work remotely, I rarely shower. Showering is stupid and wasteful. Millions of people lack potable water and here we are wasting it for showering
- engineeringwoke 6y ago
  Controlling managers lose power, that is not needed for the functioning of the business, when you are not in their physical presence. To call it power tripping seems like a logical conclusion.
  - gwright 6y ago
    Define "controlling", define "power", define 'not needed for the functioning of the business". Define "power tripping". I'm not sure how to draw any meaning from your statement when the terms you use are so abstract and ill-defined.
asplake 6y ago
You could be right on the economics and still wrong on the motivation. Are the economics so clear cut in every context that an uncharitable explanation is necessary?
- 6510 6y ago
  Yes it is! If it is that people cant see their family an emotion free, strictly technical, unambiguous response should suffice.

Dumblydorr 6y ago

Reframe it this way: decision making managers and executives need to be in the office to do their work, thus they want their peons to be working away right near them as well. The decision makers are doing a different kind of work than the workers, that is the issue.

gwright 6y ago
You've divided the working world up into "decisions makers" and "peons" and you want me to view your thoughts on this as reasonable? And is there some law of physics that I'm not aware of that neatly divides all jobs into two buckets, "decision makers" and "workers"? Leaning on that sort of manufactured dichotomy is low resolution thinking.