4 ms·

This is the issue with “hybrid” work. You either live somewhere where you can afford an office, or somewhere where the commute is bearable. Living somewhere whe

This is the issue with “hybrid” work. You either live somewhere where you can afford an office, or somewhere where the commute is bearable. Living somewhere where you have a dedicated office and the commute isn’t hell is a very expensive proposition in most American cities.

osigurdson 5y ago
Agree. WFH a couple of days a week is largely nonsensical. Employers still need to pay for office space. Employees need dedicated work space in their homes and additional equipment while still needing to be located relatively close to the office.
- watwut 5y ago
  That is the preferred way for me definitely. And it seems that for quite a lot of people.
- lazyresearcher 5y ago
  You can have a full office everyday if half of the company WFH part of the week and the other half the other part.
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    At the cost of drastically lowered productivity per person due to hot desking, and not having the space for an all hands.
    - rtkwe 5y ago
      Do you mean an 'all hands on deck' emergency or an all hands meeting? If the latter that's a problem with an event space not of desk space. If it's the former you rarely actually need everyone present and it's unlikely every department will be needed at once unless the whole company is failing and even then people can work remotely for those too.
- closeparen 5y ago
  I like my coworkers to be people I know in real life; I also like to code in a silent room. One way of accomplishing that would be a private office at work, but hybrid WFH is the next best thing.
- rtkwe 5y ago
  If people's work from home days aren't coordinated it can save a lot of per worker real estate because you can go to floating desks so you only need to accommodate peak attendance instead of having a single desk for every person. The schedule can be adapted to team needs too so that people working together are in the office on the same days so they can take advantage of in person collaboration when needed.

osigurdson 5y ago

Agree. WFH a couple of days a week is largely nonsensical. Employers still need to pay for office space. Employees need dedicated work space in their homes and additional equipment while still needing to be located relatively close to the office.

watwut 5y ago
That is the preferred way for me definitely. And it seems that for quite a lot of people.
lazyresearcher 5y ago
You can have a full office everyday if half of the company WFH part of the week and the other half the other part.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  At the cost of drastically lowered productivity per person due to hot desking, and not having the space for an all hands.
  - rtkwe 5y ago
    Do you mean an 'all hands on deck' emergency or an all hands meeting? If the latter that's a problem with an event space not of desk space. If it's the former you rarely actually need everyone present and it's unlikely every department will be needed at once unless the whole company is failing and even then people can work remotely for those too.
closeparen 5y ago
I like my coworkers to be people I know in real life; I also like to code in a silent room. One way of accomplishing that would be a private office at work, but hybrid WFH is the next best thing.
rtkwe 5y ago
If people's work from home days aren't coordinated it can save a lot of per worker real estate because you can go to floating desks so you only need to accommodate peak attendance instead of having a single desk for every person. The schedule can be adapted to team needs too so that people working together are in the office on the same days so they can take advantage of in person collaboration when needed.