2 ms·

>You're looking at it wrong. Plenty of jobs simply can't be done remotely. This data is now in. It's roughly 2/3s of jobs cant be done remotely. > If it gets

>You're looking at it wrong. Plenty of jobs simply can't be done remotely. This data is now in. It's roughly 2/3s of jobs cant be done remotely. > If it gets to the point that people can't afford to move around much, they'll either permanently move closer to their workplace or find a job closer to their home. That transition happened during the financial crisis in 2009. >Also, arguably the current discussion around WFH to me is evidence that even most office jobs can't be performed remotely (productively). Even if one person can WFH by themselves, they still need to interact with coworkers who may not be able to do it. That's a debate I'm sure many management are about to have and flipside going to make lots of recruiters pretty busy. Frankly for me it's 1 thing that really puts me off going back to the office. When I need to hit the shitter. I walk 2 seconds from my office to my toilet. I have nice soft toilet paper. At work, I have to go through like 2 security zones and then hope that nobody is using the stalls already. If they are, and that's common. I have to walk to the other side of the building and then hope those shitters arent in use. Then there's a good chance the one that's empty is going to be atrocious. Then I have to wipe with 1 ply sandpaper. It's just better to be at home.

greedo 5y ago
OP is talking about office jobs, your 2/3 stat is for all jobs. I think he's wrong though. Most office jobs should be capable of being remote, unless the mgmt is unwilling to make changes to the modern world.
- fluoridation 5y ago
  Note that what I'm saying is not that most office jobs can't be done remotely at all. What I'm saying is that most can't be done remotely without harming productivity in some way. For example, if someone can do their job entirely by themselves and only needs to periodic check ins to report progress, yes, that person can remotely just fine. If someone works in a closely-knit team where interaction needs to be frequent and someone in that team can't adapt to remote work productivity is going to suffer by having everyone in physically different locations. I don't think it's as simple as "management doesn't want WFH because of a temper tantrum".
  - greedo 5y ago
    I think it's incumbent on those professing a job can't be done remotely to demonstrate it. My mgmt hasn't done it beyond bland platitudes about culture and teamwork, despite record setting sales and profits the last 2 years. It's about control for most mgmt.

greedo 5y ago

OP is talking about office jobs, your 2/3 stat is for all jobs. I think he's wrong though. Most office jobs should be capable of being remote, unless the mgmt is unwilling to make changes to the modern world.

fluoridation 5y ago
Note that what I'm saying is not that most office jobs can't be done remotely at all. What I'm saying is that most can't be done remotely without harming productivity in some way. For example, if someone can do their job entirely by themselves and only needs to periodic check ins to report progress, yes, that person can remotely just fine. If someone works in a closely-knit team where interaction needs to be frequent and someone in that team can't adapt to remote work productivity is going to suffer by having everyone in physically different locations. I don't think it's as simple as "management doesn't want WFH because of a temper tantrum".
- greedo 5y ago
  I think it's incumbent on those professing a job can't be done remotely to demonstrate it. My mgmt hasn't done it beyond bland platitudes about culture and teamwork, despite record setting sales and profits the last 2 years. It's about control for most mgmt.