19 ms·
Ready to Work at Lesser Salaries or Even Quit, Employees Want Only WFH: Survey
- exabrial 5y agoI find there's a mix of people that either work well remote, or don't. I don't think this is as binary issue as people make it out to be
- postalrat 5y agoI'd like companies to break apart teams then build new teams based on who wants to work remote and who wants to be in the office.
- dmitrygr 5y agoMakes sense. I like what I do. I like my team. But I also like not having brain damage: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04569-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04569-5
- wfh_forever 5y agoWFH has to be THE blessing in disguise from the COVID pandemic. Unless you are walking distance from your workplace. WFH is the most productive form of work. As far decision making arguments. It boils down to good management practices and engineering documentation versus micro management and below par documentation practices.
- yrgulation 5y agoThe reduction in co2 emissions, not contributing to public transport overcrowding, saving on food, and the mental health benefits are just some of my reasons for avoiding on site work. Not to mention the savings. I am not against people working on site but i am against companies not allowing remote work. If a company’s culture cant cope with remote workers then that company is not internet ready. Probably shouldnt serve remote customers either and instead should switch to in person.
- mentaldeath 5y agoNot everyone's mental health has benefitted. I have been depressed for the past 2 years and started cutting myself and doing other selfharm. The only face to face social interactions I have are with baristas now.
- throwaway6532 5y agoSame. As time progresses it's just going from bad to worse. I need to be around people. I'm not functional in a fully remote environment :(
- Bancakes 5y ago
- plasma_beam 5y agoShocking. Why even reply. There is no need for this on HN.
- tessierashpool 5y agothat is not helpful and you should delete it.
- danesparza 5y agoYou didn't ask for advice, but I'm going to give you some. See a counselor (aka a therapist). Depression is treatable, but you need to get help. The world needs a "you" that is in the right headspace.
- barry-cotter 5y ago
- dijit 5y agoForcing everyone to be in the office because you are having a hard time having a social experience is definitely a personal problem. I would recommend social clubs. Or, opt for a company that’s on-site. I’ve always been pro-choice in this regard. The problem is that companies have to be all or nothing, you can’t 50/50 remote work between people. Some kind of hybrid is also good. Come in for a few hours or a couple days a week. All the benefits of both approaches.
- threads2 5y agoThe pandemic is never going to "end" so why oscillate between exclusively on-site and exclusively WFH? and why, as an manager, take on that kind of liability unless you absolutely need people to be on-site? Reminds me of an anecdote where a guy was working at a UPS near 9/11 ground zero and the manager tried to stop them from leaving work. Is it just the Will to Power? or am I missing some convincing opinion pieces in The Economist or FT? I'm so genuinely curious about why a manager would be compelled to insist on on-site. Cynically, I know it's easier to switch jobs if both are WFH... Would hate to think that Big Tech companies conspire to jointly enforce on-site (as an addendum to that infamous no-poaching agreement).
- tessierashpool 5y agomany managers don't know how to do remote. and even experienced people get blindsided by it sometimes. but change and learning are inherent to this field of work, so there must be something else. for large companies, it's real estate. nobody wants to sell a huge corporate campus at a loss.
- drewcoo 5y agoOn the managerial front (and PMs, to a lesser extent), I think the perma-demic calls for a different kind of work. Most devs love to be heads-down alone and cranking. Managers, not so much. - Communications are different. I think we're all trying to figure out the "right" protocols[1] for video meetings, as an example. That kind of thing hits managers especially hard. Managers (and PMs) are there not to wrangle code, but to wrangle meetings so the devs can be more productive! - Control changed. Micromanagement in any form (except via malware stalking) just got a lot harder. Even the softer "managing by walking around" doesn't work now. Delegation is more important than ever. And most managers were promoted into position because they did things well, not because they loosely lead things into happening. So it takes some manager (re-?)training. - Leading vs Managing is a more important divide than before. When people are left to themselves more, they'll find ways to solve their own problems. Partly because people have to solve more of their own problems and partly because managers haven't caught up to how to manage in a perma-demic, that means workers are more likely to self-organize.[2] - With the lack of human physical contact, we have to focus more on how to measure productivity than on the way it was perceived in the past. This is likely to shock many people, managers or not, who focused more on social aspects. Lots of "soft" measures like "happiness" or "asshole-free-ness" change when the social conditions change. We still don't want to work with assholes, but what that means is shifting. - Other - Profit? Manager Hint: delegate until it hurts. Hurts you and the person you delegated to. Set up checkpoints. And be available to help. Especially with firefighting and scutwork. That helps your team grow and act independently. Even if we ever get back to the office, that habit will pay off. [1] Pro- or anti-occupy, politically, they addressed comms problems with large open-air meetings meant to include everyone. We need to think along those lines. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement_hand_signals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement_hand_signals [2] Yes, "organize" was an intentional pun. Unionization in lots of fields, lots of shops is on the rise. And a shocking number of strikes goes unreported in the mainstream media (I can't find my original source, so Bloomberg will do). https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2021-10-20/the-real-scope-of-u-s-worker-strikes-mapped https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2021-10-20/the-re...
- tn890 5y agoIsn't it funny how just a few years ago the eternal HN discussion regarding remote working always took place in the same way: about half of commenters for, and half against. The typical arguments of social interaction, in person brainstorming and so on, vs free time, no commute, can work from anywhere, "zoom is just as good" always went round in circles. Now I see those in the mainstream and HN seems to have cross over almost completely to the WFH side. I wonder how "converted" HN-ers got where they are. If you're here and changed your mind regarding remote work since the pandemic started, I'd like to hear why; what, other than the obvious pathogen, has caused your change of heart?
- QuikAccount 5y agoI'm still really indifferent but you could almost say I'm converted in the opposite direction. I realized how awful my co-workers are at communication, especially asynchronous communication and it makes me want to pull my hair out.
- garciasn 5y agoThat’s an organizational and leadership/management issue at your current company and/or group/team; it’s not ubiquitous. It’s time for you to find a different company that hires people who can communicate or teaches them to do better.
- gnulinux 5y agoNot everyone is suited to work from home. I hated working from home, it destroyed my work focus and I think it put a good hole in my career. In the future, I'll prefer companies who offer in person (or hybrid) employment. Everyone is different.
- macksd 5y agoSome people are good at the discipline and self-motivation required to make this work and like the situation where you're more isolated except when you go out of your way not to be. Some people are much happier and productive in an environment where face-to-face communication can happen frequently and when unplanned, and when you can have more personal communication. Obviously it's not as simple as those 2 categories, but as some companies embrace WFH and others go back to in-person, we're going to find that people gravitate towards environments that are one or the way other and find people that are like them. I wouldn't view one as worse or caused by a "leadership / management issue".
- Melatonic 5y agoI like the option of working from home but from a social perspective I also definitely prefer in many ways going into a physical office. In a world where most people want to exclusively WFH I wonder if that will artificially limit my career growth.
- randomdata 5y agoWFH translates to “work from anywhere”, so social opportunities are actually greater when WFH rather than in the office. Anyone who started WFH within the last couple of years likely haven’t realized that yet, granted.
- mattgreenrocks 5y agoI’m a big remote work fan, and yet going into work has big benefits even for this introvert. Really I just want the choice in it all. I think if you explained to people that either is okay, but some things need you in, that seems quite fair.
- llamataboot 5y agoAnd here comes all the AI content flooding every niche ad-words style....
- macintux 5y agoI thought perhaps English wasn’t their first language but your explanation makes more sense. > Since the pandemic is around the corner and situation can go from bad to worse at any moment, it has to be considered is what has been reported.
- somehnacct3757 5y agoThe article is exceedingly poor quality by HN standards, textbook blog spam. But it doesn't matter cuz everyone read the title and jumped straight into the comments.
- bravetraveler 5y agoKind of in the same spirit, I'm not sure I could be paid enough to return to the office. I'm pretty sure remote positions I'm qualified for will be open. I could get by with about half of my pay if needed The idea of adding such dreadful routine to the day around already stressful work puts me over the edge For context: Architecture/compliance/operations dude with a lot of hats
- mabbo 5y ago> I'm not sure I could be paid enough to I think a better way to frame this: "No one will ever be willing to pay me enough to". Because everyone has a price for just about any job imaginable.
- Apreche 5y agoWe're beyond that. I've set a new goal. I'm going to try to negotiate a four day work week for myself. Not 4x10. 4x8. I mean, Ideally it would be as little as possible, but someone might actually agree to 4x8.
- city41 5y agoThis has worked for me as a contractor. I'm currently on a 4x8 schedule. There is also this site, which I've not really explored yet https://4dayweek.io/ https://4dayweek.io/
- commandlinefan 5y agoI suspect this will result in lesser salaries for everybody over time.
- Apocryphon 5y agoCompanies could play it smart and seek out compromises- what about hybrid that’s a couple times a week every two or more weeks? What about getting rid of open office floor plans and instituting cubicles, if not individual offices or at least team offices?
- isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y agohybrid is no different than in office. I still have to live near the office.
- Apocryphon 5y agoYes, the commute is the major downside to RTO, but it’s not the only one. Some people might be fine with some commuting, but dislike working in offices full time, or just in open office environments.
- dqpb 5y agoAdults want autonomy. Surprise, surprise.
- lifeplusplus 5y agoI'll also take unpaid 3-4 month time off but keep insurance
- jzymbaluk 5y agoI'm sure lots of people want WFH exclusively, and that's valid, but for me a flexible hybrid setup where the office is there if you want it, and my team plans in-the-office meeting days is really ideal for me. I feel like I miss a lot not seeing people in person. I've felt extremely isolated these last 2 years and I'll be very happy to be getting some face-to-face time this year and in the future
- windex 5y agoFuel prices, traffic congestion, cheaper rents, healthier air, are all advantages that cannot be taken away. Taking the commute out of my job gave me an additional 4 hours everyday not counting lower stress levels. Doing away with random cafeteria talk gave me 90 minutes back. As to creativity, I think the management view that everyone sitting in a room is more creative is not really true. I'd rather meet up people outside a stuffy office. The clamor to come back to office is only from upper management whose primary concerns seems to stem from the fact that having control over physical bodies in an office is a sense of power. They also have nice offices, views, facilities, space and desks. The rent extracting industry is also going through a crisis of sorts and the political class is deeply invested in rent extraction. COVID hasn't gone away. Long term effects (cognitive, cardiac) of a COVID infection are not being accounted for either. COVID highlighted the fact that you can get digital work delivered from anywhere.
- jcims 5y agoI’ve been developing an opinion that it has more to do with propping up commercial real estate and protecting the value of existing investments.
- dvtrn 5y agoSee my other comment, but I suspect so too. Just listening to the rhetoric of my parent company about our clients (commercial real estate developers), a lot of companies are vocally fretting about what to do with their (expensive) office spaces when the BIS (butts in seats) factor is down to single digits.
- WrtCdEvrydy 5y agoI am 100% ready to shut down these attempts by asking if the company is paying for extra life insurance because I want my family to get a bit more when I catch COVID and die at the office. I don't expect it to happen under current management but as we promote new middle managers, I'm sure we'll have a push for it.
- spoonjim 5y agoA reminder that just because WFH is in an employee’s interest doesn’t mean it’s it in an employer’s interest and that the dynamics of this will be much like “employees want more money” — people with leverage will get it and people without it will not.
- somehnacct3757 5y agoThe passing play is now in favor of WFH. In other words if you think the choices are fully onsite, fully remote, or mixed - mixed is not a terminal state. It's an interim state which drifts toward fully remote. Say you have a mixed workforce where they have to be in 3 days a week. They are going to commute to work, sit at a desk, and spend all day on zoom anyway to accommodate the 40% of workers having a WFH day. Also consider the companies that allowed a subset of workers to go permanent remote. If you work directly with even one of those ppl, all your meetings are now zoom meetings. In both cases the person in the office is penalized. They have a WFH experience but they have to needlessly commute to get it. Is the salary boost worth the commute costs and time lost? There's a thousand other ways for us to solve quote unquote mental health issues related to WFH. The lockdowns are over. You can join a club. You've got 2 extra hours in your day from no commute to tend a community garden, join a rec league, go to the local pub. You don't need coworkers or employers for these things.
- edmundsauto 5y agoWhat about people for whom WFH means less, or no, productivity? Lots of my colleagues are willing to brave the commute in order to be in an environment that is focused on the business at hand.
- somehnacct3757 5y agoThis is the group I think will hold out the longest, the people who need a reliable, socially accepted way to escape their home environment. When they say 'focus on the business at hand' they really mean 'not distracted by my home'. I don't think businesses will continue to provide for these employees after the commercial real estate correction. In time, having an office flips into a multi-faceted liability. But until that happens, the leases were already signed so let the good times roll. These employees and employers form a complementary artificial need for an office.
- shihab 5y ago> not distracted by my home Why is that not a good reason? Our surrounding very much impacts many of our thinking, productivity. And some people do benefit from a focused environment, you can't really dismiss that as "artificial need".
- tippytippytango 5y agoThis is one of those cases where the market will figure it out.
- zmmmmm 5y agoIt does seem that that there is a pretty strong push for return to on site in a lot of organizations. However it is interesting the premise is often not well articulated beyond diffuse sentiments such as improving "team work" etc etc. Few seem to be arguing that productivity is the issue. By and large, everyone is acknowledging that the work gets done either way. Which leaves the question of what is motivating it? I feel like this is more managers struggling to recapture their previous sense of identity which was founded in some way on there being a physical place full of warm bodies with a specific culture shaped by management through various decisions. Without that managers are left with a much more intangible sense of what their role and value is. Everything seems a lot more hollow if your only reason to exist is to deliver on bare bones work requirements. Then, managers also feel they have a lot of influence over employees by controlling their physical environment which they don't have with WFH. The problem the managers have is, the factors in favor of WFH are pretty clear and objective. Just eliminating commute saves most employees a couple of hours a day which is already probably more productivity gain than you could achieve through any other kind of workplace measure. The benefits for the environment, reduction in burden on infrastructure, etc etc are all pretty easy to add up. So we are left with management weirdly struggling to assert a rationale made up entirely of intangibles against pretty obvious hard objective facts. It's going to be pretty interesting to see who wins this one.
- dvtrn 5y agoWhich leaves the question of what is motivating it? As someone who works in a software shop that sells directly to this sector, I have a guess (and it’s just a guess but a quasi-informed one): Office/Building leases.
- rtomanek 5y agoWhat about them?
- swearwolf 5y agoMany companies, like mine, are somewhere in the middle of a 10 year lease with very steep early exit penalties. People think that having everyone working from home saves the company money, but when it comes to the office, chances are it’s already a sunk cost. In my company’s case, we’re paying for quite a bit of space, but currently allowing people to choose whether to come in or not. Most of the time only a handful of people do, but the office is still there whether 10, 100 or 1,000 people are using it. Plus, there’s a lot of capitalized equipment set up there, already paid for and waiting for people to use it. Moving out would be expensive (because of the lease break fees), and a hassle. So instead, the people in charge of a lot of companies probably rationalize that they might as well get some benefit out of those sunk costs by forcing people to use them again.
- clouddevs 5y ago
- 5350-uiop-1130 5y agoAs an asthmatic is there some kind of medical route I can take to avoid ever going back? I don't trust that things will improve for 95% of people long term, I think the agenda is clear. So, I'm looking for some hard lines that my employers can't cross.
- weatherlite 5y agoSounds reasonable if the offices are in a polluted place (which is often the case) and you get a doctor to sign that smog/pollution exacerbates your asthma (which sounds reasonable as well). It's a known fact that pollution exacerbates asthma. Hope it gets better for you!
- kkfx 5y agoA modern society can very well exists with much of jobs from remote, of course not all can be done remotely and that means those jobs will get paid more, witch is actually good BUT that demand a revolution many do not want: that demand a distributed economy. WFH it's ok, but outside my new home on mountains I need groceries, health services, real-life leisure services etc those can only exists in a new old distributed economy because who want to open a megastore on mountains collecting a small fraction of people of even a small city? Such transformation is needed ALSO for environmental reasons: we can't make "green tall buildings" simply because we can't practically upgrade them, while we can make homes "for a human life" to be destroyed and rebuilt with modern techniques of the present time forever. We still need factories, witch still need many humans in place, witch means a new kind of society where the wealthy are physically far from poors, poors are concentrated in factory-smart-cities-labor-camps-alike places and wealthy are spread in the territory, but since in nature there is the principle of communicating vessels that can't really last longer etc. Actually ALMOST NO ONE want to face such big revolution, also neoliberals schools believe that population can't really evolve in "short" time, even if some try hard to push them to a new and better life. That's the challenge and probably the response will be "individual" with big unrest in the meantime...
- d4rkp4ttern 5y agoI think there is another trend going on, perhaps spurred by the pandemic: the rise of consultancy (or contract) work. It feels like the whole concept of “I work at company X” is fast becoming old fashioned. Especially in software some increasing percentage of people people seem to much prefer being consultants. Or am I wrong about this trend ?
- thawaya3113 5y agoThey will get their wishes for lower salaries pretty soon. WFH is just a small transitory step towards work from the cheapest 3rd world country you can find.
- djohnston 5y agoI'm not going back to the office but there is a sense that outsourcing to cheaper east euro / s.e. Asian dev shops will become more commonplace.