9 ms·

That introduces a host of new problems. Workers will likely have to leave their families behind for a week every 2 months. And where will they stay during offic

That introduces a host of new problems. Workers will likely have to leave their families behind for a week every 2 months. And where will they stay during office-week?

gundmc 6y ago
> Workers will likely have to leave their families behind for a week every 2 months. Yes, or they could continue to live locally. It's about more flexibility for what is the right choice for each family. I don't see this as a problem. > And where will they stay during office-week? Hotel, AirBnb, corporate short-term housing? People travel for work all the time and it's not an issue. If hotel capacity becomes insufficient other solutions will pop up - like furnished apartment rentals. I don't see this as a large issue either.
- ACow_Adonis 6y ago
  Well, with all due respect, that doesn't result in me (or I would argue, most workers) being able to live wherever they want. Plus you would still have to live relatively close to a major airport or something (and I don't even know what that's going to look like yet post-covid). MAYBE it makes things better for a handful of relatively rich, highly paid workers/companies who don't mind spending significant time away from their families/homes, are happy to travel and who are willing to spring for regular accommodation for their workers, but I think for most workers springing for an office at home would be widely preferable. And I say that as someone who, pre-covid, had to do a couple of nights per couple-of-months away from my family because my employer's work was already distributed around the nation...(honestly, the travel was personally one of the worst aspects of my job, though I know other people loved it). Now with covid, i'm bitten with the "not enough space at home" problem (though thank god we got an in-built study put in beforehand), but I no longer have to travel long distances or stay overnight at any of the interstate offices, which i personally find a blessing. But i'd take the all-remote or "two days in" model in preference...
  - dheera 6y ago
    > live relatively close to a major airport Also not to mention that flying even ONCE per year round-trip across the country will likely emit more carbon than a full year's worth of local commutes. Now multiply that by 6 for every 2 months. Everything everyone says about greenhouse gas benefits of remote work just went out the window as soon as air travel is mentioned.
    - exdsq 6y ago
      Not sure why you’ve been downvoted, you’re absolutely correct.
      - hengri 6y ago
        I'm guessing it's a uncomfortable fact for the hackernews crowd who seem to travel a lot and also claim to care for climate change.
        dheera 6y ago
        Yep, I've noticed that in the past year on HN thre are a lot of people who would rather downvote than face truth. I wonder whether COVID brought in a bunch of low quality participants. Separately though I've noticed lately that pretty much all my comments get downvoted first; some disappear in the process, others get salvaged by upvotes. I wonder whether someone is running a downvote bot on my handle.
        onlydeadheroes 6y ago
        I noticed this a few months back, back when someone kept posting anti-meritocracy articles hoping for a thread that wasn't a train wreck. I started testing their algorithms by repeatedly posting the exact same comment and observing what happened. This triggered changes to the algo itself, and eventually it moved from downvoting to flagging, or maybe a human supervisor did. This was across multiple accounts and many weeks of posts. Eventually dang told me to stop. My current account name is a tribute to this.
mushbino 6y ago
In a hotel? Also, a week every couple of months isn't a bad trade off at all. Many people who drive trucks or are in sales or consulting travel every week for the whole work week.
- dheera 6y ago
  What if you're married? A week every 2 months means that you don't see your partner for likely 25% of the time, since your office weeks will likely not coincide.
  - sheepdestroyer 6y ago
    Do you mean 12.5% ?
    - deathanatos 6y ago
      No, the poster means 25%. 2 months is approximately 8 weeks, and they are presuming that you and your SO's "week" don't overlap, which is likely, so there will be 2 weeks every 2 months where you don't see each other: the week you travel, and the week your SO travels. 2 weeks / 8 weeks is 25%.
  - jlokier 6y ago
    It's obviously personal to each person, but I think it's quite healthy to spend a little while away from one's partner from time to time. A bit like working from home helps with "deep work" away from the office, being at home with partner off on some travel helps with "deep home", to really appreciate a quiet place, and be full of love and welcome when they come back.
    - dheera 6y ago
      > I think it's quite healthy to spend a little while away from one's partner from time to time. I fully agree with this, though I'd prefer it be more on a voluntary basis, e.g. by travelling alone from time to time, having a couple of hobbies separate from your partner, and friends that you hang out with. Not forced upon you by work. Being forced to be away from your partner 25% of the time by work is a bit much, unless you're a travelling consultant or flight attendant or something.
rainyMammoth 6y ago
If you don't want to leave your family for a couple days every quarter, you can still live close to the office. But the point is that you are now also flexible to go live wherever you want.
- BossingAround 6y ago
  > If you don't want to leave your family for a couple days every quarter, you can still live close to the office. And now, they have to live in a very expensive area and have to work from home except for a week every two monts?
  - srtjstjsj 6y ago
    No, if you live in the same region then you can make the trip in less time and not need to be away for a while week at once.
- powersnail 6y ago
  For people who live close, they still have to work from home, thus not avoiding the cost of it (higher utility fee, no company dining, need more space). For them, this is definitely more expensive than work onsite all the time.

That introduces a host of new problems. Workers will likely have to leave their families behind for a week every 2 months. And where will they stay during office-week?

gundmc 6y ago

> Workers will likely have to leave their families behind for a week every 2 months. Yes, or they could continue to live locally. It's about more flexibility for what is the right choice for each family. I don't see this as a problem. > And where will they stay during office-week? Hotel, AirBnb, corporate short-term housing? People travel for work all the time and it's not an issue. If hotel capacity becomes insufficient other solutions will pop up - like furnished apartment rentals. I don't see this as a large issue either.

ACow_Adonis 6y ago
Well, with all due respect, that doesn't result in me (or I would argue, most workers) being able to live wherever they want. Plus you would still have to live relatively close to a major airport or something (and I don't even know what that's going to look like yet post-covid). MAYBE it makes things better for a handful of relatively rich, highly paid workers/companies who don't mind spending significant time away from their families/homes, are happy to travel and who are willing to spring for regular accommodation for their workers, but I think for most workers springing for an office at home would be widely preferable. And I say that as someone who, pre-covid, had to do a couple of nights per couple-of-months away from my family because my employer's work was already distributed around the nation...(honestly, the travel was personally one of the worst aspects of my job, though I know other people loved it). Now with covid, i'm bitten with the "not enough space at home" problem (though thank god we got an in-built study put in beforehand), but I no longer have to travel long distances or stay overnight at any of the interstate offices, which i personally find a blessing. But i'd take the all-remote or "two days in" model in preference...
- dheera 6y ago
  > live relatively close to a major airport Also not to mention that flying even ONCE per year round-trip across the country will likely emit more carbon than a full year's worth of local commutes. Now multiply that by 6 for every 2 months. Everything everyone says about greenhouse gas benefits of remote work just went out the window as soon as air travel is mentioned.
  - exdsq 6y ago
    Not sure why you’ve been downvoted, you’re absolutely correct.
    - hengri 6y ago
      I'm guessing it's a uncomfortable fact for the hackernews crowd who seem to travel a lot and also claim to care for climate change.
      - dheera 6y ago
        Yep, I've noticed that in the past year on HN thre are a lot of people who would rather downvote than face truth. I wonder whether COVID brought in a bunch of low quality participants. Separately though I've noticed lately that pretty much all my comments get downvoted first; some disappear in the process, others get salvaged by upvotes. I wonder whether someone is running a downvote bot on my handle.
        onlydeadheroes 6y ago
        I noticed this a few months back, back when someone kept posting anti-meritocracy articles hoping for a thread that wasn't a train wreck. I started testing their algorithms by repeatedly posting the exact same comment and observing what happened. This triggered changes to the algo itself, and eventually it moved from downvoting to flagging, or maybe a human supervisor did. This was across multiple accounts and many weeks of posts. Eventually dang told me to stop. My current account name is a tribute to this.

mushbino 6y ago

In a hotel? Also, a week every couple of months isn't a bad trade off at all. Many people who drive trucks or are in sales or consulting travel every week for the whole work week.

dheera 6y ago
What if you're married? A week every 2 months means that you don't see your partner for likely 25% of the time, since your office weeks will likely not coincide.
- sheepdestroyer 6y ago
  Do you mean 12.5% ?
  - deathanatos 6y ago
    No, the poster means 25%. 2 months is approximately 8 weeks, and they are presuming that you and your SO's "week" don't overlap, which is likely, so there will be 2 weeks every 2 months where you don't see each other: the week you travel, and the week your SO travels. 2 weeks / 8 weeks is 25%.
- jlokier 6y ago
  It's obviously personal to each person, but I think it's quite healthy to spend a little while away from one's partner from time to time. A bit like working from home helps with "deep work" away from the office, being at home with partner off on some travel helps with "deep home", to really appreciate a quiet place, and be full of love and welcome when they come back.
  - dheera 6y ago
    > I think it's quite healthy to spend a little while away from one's partner from time to time. I fully agree with this, though I'd prefer it be more on a voluntary basis, e.g. by travelling alone from time to time, having a couple of hobbies separate from your partner, and friends that you hang out with. Not forced upon you by work. Being forced to be away from your partner 25% of the time by work is a bit much, unless you're a travelling consultant or flight attendant or something.

rainyMammoth 6y ago

If you don't want to leave your family for a couple days every quarter, you can still live close to the office. But the point is that you are now also flexible to go live wherever you want.

BossingAround 6y ago
> If you don't want to leave your family for a couple days every quarter, you can still live close to the office. And now, they have to live in a very expensive area and have to work from home except for a week every two monts?
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  No, if you live in the same region then you can make the trip in less time and not need to be away for a while week at once.
powersnail 6y ago
For people who live close, they still have to work from home, thus not avoiding the cost of it (higher utility fee, no company dining, need more space). For them, this is definitely more expensive than work onsite all the time.