3 ms·
It's an incredibly unpopular view on HN, but I don't think we can categorically conclude yet that WFH is always equally good as working in-person for all white-
by marvin 4y ago
It's an incredibly unpopular view on HN, but I don't think we can categorically conclude yet that WFH is always equally good as working in-person for all white-collar jobs that have good prerequisites for WFH.
For me personally, the train has left the station and I would not expect to ever consider a non-WFH job again in my career.
But that's a completely different question than asking whether companies that require physical attendance can in some cases out-compete those that don't. I think we have a tendency to project our wishes onto this debate, and not make an honest attempt at figuring out the truth.
- ericd 4y agoThanks for the intellectual honesty, it seems to be a rare thing in the WFH discussion.
- _ph_ 4y agoActually, I would be surprised if anyone thinks, that WFH always beats working in an office. But that doesn't mean, that there are not a ton of jobs where it does, or just part time, even if the job requires a lot of on-site presence. But a company shouldn't have to mandate in-office work permanentely and for all. It should be obvious from the job profile and the working conditions, when it is advantageous to be in the office rather than at home.