3 ms·
> they didn’t seriously try It would be interesting to hear from someone who works at Apple how far they went in trying to make it happen. My guess is that App
by aerosmile 5y ago
> they didn’t seriously try
It would be interesting to hear from someone who works at Apple how far they went in trying to make it happen. My guess is that Apple doesn't do anything half-assed, and if there was a way to save hundreds of millions of dollars, they would have done it.
I welcome your call for non-anecdotal evidence - here's one: the vast majority of companies are returning to the office. I don't think it would be fair to call all the executives of all those companies irresponsible and negligent. Again, the cheaper thing to do would have been not to come back to the office, so the negative impact of WFH must have been substantial.
- atty 5y agoI’d argue that any data collected during the last year (including the data I presented about my current employer, of course) is not actually a very valid measurement. I fully suspect all companies (including my employer) that try to support fully remote jobs to re-assess in another 2-3 years time, when life does not have the massive confounding factor of a global pandemic. And perhaps we will find that fully remote employees or teams significantly over- or under-perform individuals who go into the office. So while we don’t really have good data on if remote work is good or bad right now (we certainly know it’s not terrible - most tech businesses thrived last year), companies that decide to not start supporting it at least partially are taking a very real loss (reduced talent pool), for a perceived benefit that may or may not actually be there, that we just can’t measure yet.