4 ms·

I'm a little shocked by this. I thought the big tech companies and Google specifically were leading the charge in "we will allow significant WFH forever going f

by Cd00d 6y ago

I'm a little shocked by this. I thought the big tech companies and Google specifically were leading the charge in "we will allow significant WFH forever going forward", but maybe I wasn't paying enough attention. Personally, I'm at a small data company, and we're opening a new office for people where WFH is a burden (NYC apartments and all), but is so far voluntary. In fact, I think there are only seats for less than 1/3 of the company. I've been really impressed with how smoothly everyone shifted to all zoom all the time mode, and honestly, my small conference room meetings have been more productive the last year.

izacus 6y ago
Ok, so I'm a bit surprised by these responses. Google is obviously a company that marketed itself majorly by their extensive offices with perks like free food, coffee, snacks, gyms, etc. Their office design, campus and related perks were always on the forefront of their pitch. I don't quite understand why you'd expect them to be on the forefront of WFH.
- derwiki 6y ago
  At the beginning of the pandemic, their policies seemed aligned with WFH. Surprising to hear the opposite so soon.
  - hellbannedguy 6y ago
    I think they were all lying about how they liked WFH? They want employees in their cells. Zuck has been buying up commercial space in SF a few weeks into this pandemic.
    - izacus 6y ago
      I don't remember Google ever claiming they're liking WFH and will extend it? Did you mix up the companies?
    - dimmke 6y ago
      The insistence on comparing going into an office to jail that I see all over this thread really bothers me. This is such an extremely privileged viewpoint. When you're a minimum wage McDonalds worker, you can get written up for being 5 minutes late. But if you make $350k a year, being asked to come into a physical office to perform work is similar to jail. Okay. I guess the similarity is that they both serve meals :)
  - cmrdporcupine 6y ago
    I wouldn't say that. We were sent home to protect us and our community. I don't think WFH execution at Google has been better than anywhere else. My experience on a team that did embedded/hardware work is I suppose an outlier, but Google has policies like "no source code on laptops" and the like that make remote work tricky in many circumstances -- none of that changed. I am however much happier now that I've transferred into a more traditional cloud-based org. Myself, I am looking forward to a return to the office, 3/5 days a week, despite me having a long commute and driving giving me back pain: because this last year and a bit has not been pleasant at all.
  - wffurr 6y ago
    Google’s network security posture was ideal for WFH. BeyondCorp[1] had already been widely rolled out to most internal services and most internal networks in offices had been converted to MNPs: Managed Non-Privileged networks. The pandemic has been a great stress test for finding the limitations and gaps; like figuring out the remaining use cases for VPN and MNP exceptions, and accelerating the use of data center-hosted VMs instead of desk workstations. None of this had any bearing on the company culture however, which was and is very office-centric. It’s been clear from the beginning that WFH was temporary. [1]: https://cloud.google.com/beyondcorp https://cloud.google.com/beyondcorp
kelnos 6y ago
For Google, this doesn't surprise me at all. A big part of how they get people to work more is to keep them on campus as long as possible, and on-site incentives like meals, laundry, massage, etc. all serve that goal. The fact that Google's offices are often referred to as "campuses" rather than "offices" drives that point home as well.
- gfxgirl 6y ago
  Do you have any links to data that people at Google work more? That's certainly not my experience or understanding
- intricatedetail 6y ago
  I find these "services" that some companies offer degrading, as they decide for me what should I eat or where wash my clothes etc. They should instead pay employees more so they could afford these things on their own if they wanted.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    It’s not an issue of pay, it’s an issue of time and convenience.
- cutthegrass2 6y ago
  > The fact that Google's offices are often referred to as "campuses" rather than "offices" drives that point home as well. This. I find it an odd term to use for what is essentially a workplace. The modern meaning of "Campus" seems to have drifted from a location with multiple facilities where one could actually live, to office with table tennis and free meal facilities.
DebtDeflation 6y ago
When companies started announcing "permanent 100% WFH" last Spring I knew it would never last. I feel bad for the people who picked up and moved from SV or NYC and now are being told to expect to be back in their old office by June. Though it was naive to think you could move to a cabin in Wyoming with a Starlink and continue to pull an SV or NYC level TC.
- chii 6y ago
  > move to a cabin in Wyoming with a Starlink and continue to pull an SV or NYC level TC. so why exactly shouldn't that be possible!? It's not like the work/output decreased (for the most part). The only legitimate way for compensation to drop should be due to competition - allowing remote should also mean allowing more people to apply for a position, and thus, higher supply of potential workers. This _should_ naturally lower compensation, but not immediately.
  - DebtDeflation 6y ago
    >competition - allowing remote should also mean allowing more people to apply for a position That's exactly how it would happen, and it would happen very quickly. There are talented software engineers all over the US and the world, SV does not have the only ones.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    Well, the salaries are inflated b/c cost of living (an engineer in NYC is no different than an engineer in Pittsburgh except in salary), but your point of increasing applicants means an increase in supply of applicants for that position, many of which are happy to make $80,000/year in a cabin instead of $180,000. Soooo why would the company overpay? It wouldn’t make sense.
- Nebasuke 6y ago
  Maybe this is the case with companies that announced "permanent 100% WFH", but Google never announced this. As someone working at Google, there was never any surprise Google did not announce a permanent WFH solution, since it has not been part of the company culture nor did they put out any expectations you would be able to WFH permanently.

by Cd00d 6y ago

izacus 6y ago

Ok, so I'm a bit surprised by these responses. Google is obviously a company that marketed itself majorly by their extensive offices with perks like free food, coffee, snacks, gyms, etc. Their office design, campus and related perks were always on the forefront of their pitch. I don't quite understand why you'd expect them to be on the forefront of WFH.

derwiki 6y ago
At the beginning of the pandemic, their policies seemed aligned with WFH. Surprising to hear the opposite so soon.
- hellbannedguy 6y ago
  I think they were all lying about how they liked WFH? They want employees in their cells. Zuck has been buying up commercial space in SF a few weeks into this pandemic.
  - izacus 6y ago
    I don't remember Google ever claiming they're liking WFH and will extend it? Did you mix up the companies?
  - dimmke 6y ago
    The insistence on comparing going into an office to jail that I see all over this thread really bothers me. This is such an extremely privileged viewpoint. When you're a minimum wage McDonalds worker, you can get written up for being 5 minutes late. But if you make $350k a year, being asked to come into a physical office to perform work is similar to jail. Okay. I guess the similarity is that they both serve meals :)
- cmrdporcupine 6y ago
  I wouldn't say that. We were sent home to protect us and our community. I don't think WFH execution at Google has been better than anywhere else. My experience on a team that did embedded/hardware work is I suppose an outlier, but Google has policies like "no source code on laptops" and the like that make remote work tricky in many circumstances -- none of that changed. I am however much happier now that I've transferred into a more traditional cloud-based org. Myself, I am looking forward to a return to the office, 3/5 days a week, despite me having a long commute and driving giving me back pain: because this last year and a bit has not been pleasant at all.
- wffurr 6y ago
  Google’s network security posture was ideal for WFH. BeyondCorp[1] had already been widely rolled out to most internal services and most internal networks in offices had been converted to MNPs: Managed Non-Privileged networks. The pandemic has been a great stress test for finding the limitations and gaps; like figuring out the remaining use cases for VPN and MNP exceptions, and accelerating the use of data center-hosted VMs instead of desk workstations. None of this had any bearing on the company culture however, which was and is very office-centric. It’s been clear from the beginning that WFH was temporary. [1]: https://cloud.google.com/beyondcorp https://cloud.google.com/beyondcorp

kelnos 6y ago

For Google, this doesn't surprise me at all. A big part of how they get people to work more is to keep them on campus as long as possible, and on-site incentives like meals, laundry, massage, etc. all serve that goal. The fact that Google's offices are often referred to as "campuses" rather than "offices" drives that point home as well.

gfxgirl 6y ago
Do you have any links to data that people at Google work more? That's certainly not my experience or understanding
intricatedetail 6y ago
I find these "services" that some companies offer degrading, as they decide for me what should I eat or where wash my clothes etc. They should instead pay employees more so they could afford these things on their own if they wanted.
- ericmay 6y ago
  It’s not an issue of pay, it’s an issue of time and convenience.
cutthegrass2 6y ago
> The fact that Google's offices are often referred to as "campuses" rather than "offices" drives that point home as well. This. I find it an odd term to use for what is essentially a workplace. The modern meaning of "Campus" seems to have drifted from a location with multiple facilities where one could actually live, to office with table tennis and free meal facilities.

DebtDeflation 6y ago

When companies started announcing "permanent 100% WFH" last Spring I knew it would never last. I feel bad for the people who picked up and moved from SV or NYC and now are being told to expect to be back in their old office by June. Though it was naive to think you could move to a cabin in Wyoming with a Starlink and continue to pull an SV or NYC level TC.

chii 6y ago
> move to a cabin in Wyoming with a Starlink and continue to pull an SV or NYC level TC. so why exactly shouldn't that be possible!? It's not like the work/output decreased (for the most part). The only legitimate way for compensation to drop should be due to competition - allowing remote should also mean allowing more people to apply for a position, and thus, higher supply of potential workers. This _should_ naturally lower compensation, but not immediately.
- DebtDeflation 6y ago
  >competition - allowing remote should also mean allowing more people to apply for a position That's exactly how it would happen, and it would happen very quickly. There are talented software engineers all over the US and the world, SV does not have the only ones.
- ericmay 6y ago
  Well, the salaries are inflated b/c cost of living (an engineer in NYC is no different than an engineer in Pittsburgh except in salary), but your point of increasing applicants means an increase in supply of applicants for that position, many of which are happy to make $80,000/year in a cabin instead of $180,000. Soooo why would the company overpay? It wouldn’t make sense.
Nebasuke 6y ago
Maybe this is the case with companies that announced "permanent 100% WFH", but Google never announced this. As someone working at Google, there was never any surprise Google did not announce a permanent WFH solution, since it has not been part of the company culture nor did they put out any expectations you would be able to WFH permanently.