6 ms·

What about office perks, maintenance of space, renovation, staff, commuter credits, office events, snacks, lunches, dinner, equipment, secretaries, and security

by aabhay 5y ago

What about office perks, maintenance of space, renovation, staff, commuter credits, office events, snacks, lunches, dinner, equipment, secretaries, and security?

lamontcg 5y ago
They've been paying rent on their offices the whole time. If they went permanent WFH they could sell/lease those spaces and probably save billions. Not to mention the cost all the employees have to endure for traveling to work, wear on vehicles, gas, repairs, collisions, insurance, medical payouts due to car accidents, etc. Plus just generally the externalities of higher carbon emissions.
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  This assumes the presence of enough office demand to replace a Google sized company in the markets they lease in. It’s not clear that this is true. US vacancies are projected to be 19.4% nationally. On top of that, there isn’t exactly another Google-sized employer waiting in the wings over in Mountain View.
  - thorwasdfasdf 5y ago
    With re-zoning this won't be a problem. Just rezone it to residential. or residential/commercial.
    - astrange 5y ago
      There's nothing Mountain View wants to do less than let anyone live there. Also, because of Prop 13 those people wouldn't be paying property tax in 10 years, much like how everyone living there now isn't paying any, so Google is paying for everyone's schools and sewer systems as is.
      - gabrielsroka 5y ago
        > because of Prop 13 those people wouldn't be paying property tax in 10 years I'm not sure what you mean. Prop 13 just caps the annual increase at 2%. I've lived in California and owned property here for 30 years. I pay property taxes.
        bseidensticker 5y ago
        If the annual increase is capped at 2% and inflation is >2% then the value reaped by property tax will eventually go to 0. Similar to how if you rent the same place for long enough and it's rent controlled your rent effectively gets cheaper even though it's going up.
        ghufran_syed 5y ago
        and if inflation is under 2% and the city always increases by the maximum of 2%, then eventually the value of the property tax paid will be infinite, right? How is that analysis useful?
        adrianN 5y ago
        If you make property tax a fixed percentage of the value of the property, it automatically adjusts with inflation.
        throwawayboise 5y ago
        Can't they game their way around that though by just increasing the assessed the value of the property? That's how my town effectively raises property taxes beyond the statutory limits. Sure you can appeal the assessed valuation but most people don't. It is expensive and time-consuming.
        astrange 5y ago
        It’s fixed at the original assessment the last time it was sold, I think. It also applies to businesses, with the result that the car dealership next to me pays less taxes than a new condo. Inheritance does not reset it, meaning the state is effectively living under feudalism. There was an attempt to fix this for businesses just last year, but it failed because homeowners were convinced it was a plot to get them.
    - tim_hutton 5y ago
      Imagine how much nicer the cities of the world would become with many of the offices turned into residential. There would be a rebirth of local community.
      - ghaff 5y ago
        With many of those offices gone, many people simply won't live in those cities. There seems to be an assumption here that people want to live in cities, but that's certainly not true across the board.
- jwogrady 5y ago
  Once an employee has built a report with their team, knows their roll, is fully trained, properly equipped, and demonstrates proficiency at their job..... then I'm cool letting staff work from home. I suspect Google has the leadership, supervision, and infrastructure to do all those things at a large scale. Unfortunately for my crew I find brining everyone in is waaaaay more efficient....carbon emissions aside.
  - akomtu 5y ago
    Of course, who cares about carbon emissions when profits are at stake.
    - jwogrady 5y ago
      Amen.
    - snovv_crash 5y ago
      If you completely ignore profits you go out of business and then the only companies left are the ones who ignore carbon. Better to get this changed at a legislative level to keep the playing field equal.
  - jlund-molfese 5y ago
    That's a model I'd be interested in working under. It's different for everyone, but I find onboarding most efficient in person, and long-term work most enjoyable fully remote.
  - LordAtlas 5y ago
    > Once an employee has built a report with their team, knows their roll Did you mean "rapport" and "role"? Because that sentence was a bit confusing.
    - pferde 5y ago
      Also, "brining everyone in"? They are all going to be very salty after that... :)
- akomtu 5y ago
  This is actually the biggest proof that the big players, including the gov, don't take co2 emissions seriously. If JP Morgan's Dimon is bragging about how he'll pull employees back to offices and the WH pretends to look the other way, it's safe to assume they don't give two shits about the carbon whatever. Real estate prices is what really matters to them.
  - rangoon626 5y ago
    Yeah. It’s totally fine to ask everyone to stop eating meat, but millions of Americans running their cars to/from the office everyday? Not a peep. Our politicians and business class are wholly unserious about this as they were about COVID-19.
  - waterhouse 5y ago
    The claim is usually that people are more productive in the office. Assuming that's true, then what's actually more expensive: having existing employees commute, or employing, say, 10% more people? Even if you only care about carbon costs, what are the carbon costs of raising, educating, training, and giving healthcare and everything else to 10% more people?
  - throwaway2037 5y ago
    If you read his comments closely, he was specifically talking about investment bankers. He talked about how it was hard to train junior bankers on deal making if not face-to-face. I think he used the term "apprenticeship". Even in the era of unlimited voice calls, emails, and video calls, as I understand, most M&A and IPO deals are still done face-to-face. For the investment bank, many of the employees work in New York City and use a train (or bus) to commute. That is pretty low carbon intensity.
    - Mauricebranagh 5y ago
      The same "apprenticeship" also applies to tech companies.
- megablast 5y ago
  > If they went permanent WFH they could sell/lease those spaces and probably save billions. To whom? Everybody is moving to work from home.
  - throwawayboise 5y ago
    Does it matter? Even if they have to sell or sublease at a loss, it's better than paying rent on empty buildings.
- EvilEy3 5y ago
  How much cost they will endure when their employees start getting insane from all the zoom meetings and working with a monitor instead of a real person?
  - jjav 5y ago
    > working with a monitor instead of a real person Pre and post pandemic I'm still communicating with coworkers via email and slack, on the monitor. No difference at all. Well, one difference is I used be able to hear them munch on their snacks a couple cubicles over, but I can do without that part. Also, erasing the two hour commute, total win.
    - LightG 5y ago
      We both win with WFH. I have a co-worker (generally a lovely person) who is about ready to explode when she hears someone crunching on an apple. WFH, I can now eat an apple without self-consciously slow-crunching.

by aabhay 5y ago

What about office perks, maintenance of space, renovation, staff, commuter credits, office events, snacks, lunches, dinner, equipment, secretaries, and security?

lamontcg 5y ago

They've been paying rent on their offices the whole time. If they went permanent WFH they could sell/lease those spaces and probably save billions. Not to mention the cost all the employees have to endure for traveling to work, wear on vehicles, gas, repairs, collisions, insurance, medical payouts due to car accidents, etc. Plus just generally the externalities of higher carbon emissions.

bobthepanda 5y ago
This assumes the presence of enough office demand to replace a Google sized company in the markets they lease in. It’s not clear that this is true. US vacancies are projected to be 19.4% nationally. On top of that, there isn’t exactly another Google-sized employer waiting in the wings over in Mountain View.
- thorwasdfasdf 5y ago
  With re-zoning this won't be a problem. Just rezone it to residential. or residential/commercial.
  - astrange 5y ago
    There's nothing Mountain View wants to do less than let anyone live there. Also, because of Prop 13 those people wouldn't be paying property tax in 10 years, much like how everyone living there now isn't paying any, so Google is paying for everyone's schools and sewer systems as is.
    - gabrielsroka 5y ago
      > because of Prop 13 those people wouldn't be paying property tax in 10 years I'm not sure what you mean. Prop 13 just caps the annual increase at 2%. I've lived in California and owned property here for 30 years. I pay property taxes.
      - bseidensticker 5y ago
        If the annual increase is capped at 2% and inflation is >2% then the value reaped by property tax will eventually go to 0. Similar to how if you rent the same place for long enough and it's rent controlled your rent effectively gets cheaper even though it's going up.
        ghufran_syed 5y ago
        and if inflation is under 2% and the city always increases by the maximum of 2%, then eventually the value of the property tax paid will be infinite, right? How is that analysis useful?
        adrianN 5y ago
        If you make property tax a fixed percentage of the value of the property, it automatically adjusts with inflation.
        throwawayboise 5y ago
        Can't they game their way around that though by just increasing the assessed the value of the property? That's how my town effectively raises property taxes beyond the statutory limits. Sure you can appeal the assessed valuation but most people don't. It is expensive and time-consuming.
        astrange 5y ago
        It’s fixed at the original assessment the last time it was sold, I think. It also applies to businesses, with the result that the car dealership next to me pays less taxes than a new condo. Inheritance does not reset it, meaning the state is effectively living under feudalism. There was an attempt to fix this for businesses just last year, but it failed because homeowners were convinced it was a plot to get them.
  - tim_hutton 5y ago
    Imagine how much nicer the cities of the world would become with many of the offices turned into residential. There would be a rebirth of local community.
    - ghaff 5y ago
      With many of those offices gone, many people simply won't live in those cities. There seems to be an assumption here that people want to live in cities, but that's certainly not true across the board.
jwogrady 5y ago
Once an employee has built a report with their team, knows their roll, is fully trained, properly equipped, and demonstrates proficiency at their job..... then I'm cool letting staff work from home. I suspect Google has the leadership, supervision, and infrastructure to do all those things at a large scale. Unfortunately for my crew I find brining everyone in is waaaaay more efficient....carbon emissions aside.
- akomtu 5y ago
  Of course, who cares about carbon emissions when profits are at stake.
  - jwogrady 5y ago
    Amen.
  - snovv_crash 5y ago
    If you completely ignore profits you go out of business and then the only companies left are the ones who ignore carbon. Better to get this changed at a legislative level to keep the playing field equal.
- jlund-molfese 5y ago
  That's a model I'd be interested in working under. It's different for everyone, but I find onboarding most efficient in person, and long-term work most enjoyable fully remote.
- LordAtlas 5y ago
  > Once an employee has built a report with their team, knows their roll Did you mean "rapport" and "role"? Because that sentence was a bit confusing.
  - pferde 5y ago
    Also, "brining everyone in"? They are all going to be very salty after that... :)
akomtu 5y ago
This is actually the biggest proof that the big players, including the gov, don't take co2 emissions seriously. If JP Morgan's Dimon is bragging about how he'll pull employees back to offices and the WH pretends to look the other way, it's safe to assume they don't give two shits about the carbon whatever. Real estate prices is what really matters to them.
- rangoon626 5y ago
  Yeah. It’s totally fine to ask everyone to stop eating meat, but millions of Americans running their cars to/from the office everyday? Not a peep. Our politicians and business class are wholly unserious about this as they were about COVID-19.
- waterhouse 5y ago
  The claim is usually that people are more productive in the office. Assuming that's true, then what's actually more expensive: having existing employees commute, or employing, say, 10% more people? Even if you only care about carbon costs, what are the carbon costs of raising, educating, training, and giving healthcare and everything else to 10% more people?
- throwaway2037 5y ago
  If you read his comments closely, he was specifically talking about investment bankers. He talked about how it was hard to train junior bankers on deal making if not face-to-face. I think he used the term "apprenticeship". Even in the era of unlimited voice calls, emails, and video calls, as I understand, most M&A and IPO deals are still done face-to-face. For the investment bank, many of the employees work in New York City and use a train (or bus) to commute. That is pretty low carbon intensity.
  - Mauricebranagh 5y ago
    The same "apprenticeship" also applies to tech companies.
megablast 5y ago
> If they went permanent WFH they could sell/lease those spaces and probably save billions. To whom? Everybody is moving to work from home.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  Does it matter? Even if they have to sell or sublease at a loss, it's better than paying rent on empty buildings.
EvilEy3 5y ago
How much cost they will endure when their employees start getting insane from all the zoom meetings and working with a monitor instead of a real person?
- jjav 5y ago
  > working with a monitor instead of a real person Pre and post pandemic I'm still communicating with coworkers via email and slack, on the monitor. No difference at all. Well, one difference is I used be able to hear them munch on their snacks a couple cubicles over, but I can do without that part. Also, erasing the two hour commute, total win.
  - LightG 5y ago
    We both win with WFH. I have a co-worker (generally a lovely person) who is about ready to explode when she hears someone crunching on an apple. WFH, I can now eat an apple without self-consciously slow-crunching.