9 ms·

This sounds like you haven't really investigated the issue. Apple's plan, for instance, does allow a lot of flexibility; they are making Wednesdays and Fridays

by Bud 5y ago

This sounds like you haven't really investigated the issue. Apple's plan, for instance, does allow a lot of flexibility; they are making Wednesdays and Fridays work-from-home days.

atty 5y ago
That’s not the same thing as remote. I’m fully aware of their proposed hybrid work setup. But the main reasons people want remote is to 1. Freedom to choose where to live 2. Reduce/eliminate commute time 3. Avoid in person interactions due to being extremely introverted, or certain medical conditions, or just because. The hybrid in the office 3 days a week does not fix any of those three things. You’re still forced to live near your office, you’re still forced to commute, and you’re still forced to interact in person.
- borski 5y ago
  1. This is not going to happen, outside of a proper full-remote position, and those are still going to be much harder to come by (though there will be more of them than now, to be sure). Most companies are still going to require you to live within the vicinity of an office, for lots of reasons; not having to manage multiple states in which they employ people, the ability to have someone come in for a meeting, etc. 2. Your commute time is reduced by not having to commute twice a week. 3. This is a question for HR, and they will likely make accommodations for whatever your needs are. The point is that those things haven't changed; companies are likely to offer more flexibility about WFH days, but it is going to be rare, at least for the short-term, for companies to go full remote. Expecting anything else is just a setup for disappointment, imho.
chadlavi 5y ago
That still requires you to live in the Bay Area and commute 3/5 days. Token crumbs.
- borski 5y ago
  Not crumbs; intentional flexibility, likely while still maintaining the in-office requirement 3 days / week and keeping people near the office because their data says it's better that way. Also, this isn't a 'plan for the decade'; this is a 'return to work plan.' The social contract pre-pandemic was that you were in office; I don't know why anyone expected large companies, who generally change direction as quickly as an ocean liner, to suddenly embrace remote work and give up on decades of hard-learned management techniques for in-office workers. That was never going to happen instantly. People are welcome to (and should) advocate for themselves and their needs, but to expect suddenly for the world to go full remote immediately is, frankly, misguided.

by Bud 5y ago

This sounds like you haven't really investigated the issue. Apple's plan, for instance, does allow a lot of flexibility; they are making Wednesdays and Fridays work-from-home days.

atty 5y ago

That’s not the same thing as remote. I’m fully aware of their proposed hybrid work setup. But the main reasons people want remote is to 1. Freedom to choose where to live 2. Reduce/eliminate commute time 3. Avoid in person interactions due to being extremely introverted, or certain medical conditions, or just because. The hybrid in the office 3 days a week does not fix any of those three things. You’re still forced to live near your office, you’re still forced to commute, and you’re still forced to interact in person.

borski 5y ago
1. This is not going to happen, outside of a proper full-remote position, and those are still going to be much harder to come by (though there will be more of them than now, to be sure). Most companies are still going to require you to live within the vicinity of an office, for lots of reasons; not having to manage multiple states in which they employ people, the ability to have someone come in for a meeting, etc. 2. Your commute time is reduced by not having to commute twice a week. 3. This is a question for HR, and they will likely make accommodations for whatever your needs are. The point is that those things haven't changed; companies are likely to offer more flexibility about WFH days, but it is going to be rare, at least for the short-term, for companies to go full remote. Expecting anything else is just a setup for disappointment, imho.

chadlavi 5y ago

That still requires you to live in the Bay Area and commute 3/5 days. Token crumbs.

borski 5y ago
Not crumbs; intentional flexibility, likely while still maintaining the in-office requirement 3 days / week and keeping people near the office because their data says it's better that way. Also, this isn't a 'plan for the decade'; this is a 'return to work plan.' The social contract pre-pandemic was that you were in office; I don't know why anyone expected large companies, who generally change direction as quickly as an ocean liner, to suddenly embrace remote work and give up on decades of hard-learned management techniques for in-office workers. That was never going to happen instantly. People are welcome to (and should) advocate for themselves and their needs, but to expect suddenly for the world to go full remote immediately is, frankly, misguided.