12 ms·

There is no doubt that some people are more productive at home. There is no doubt that some people are completely phoning it in at home. There are plenty of p

There is no doubt that some people are more productive at home. There is no doubt that some people are completely phoning it in at home. There are plenty of people who want to work in an office. And others who don’t. Leave this up to the companies and choose the type of workplace you want to work at.

ryanbrunner 4y ago
Seems like if the variance in productivity comes down to the individual employee, it would make more sense to let employees choose, not the company. Especially in fields that aren't as white hot for hiring as tech is (and tech certainly may not be quite so white hot in the near future), letting employers decide most likely leaves a lot of people stuck with a suboptimal arrangement for them.
- phendrenad2 4y ago
  The only downside is if half the team is remote, it could cause friction between the innies and the outies.
kelseyfrog 4y ago
Leave this up to the workers to choose how they want to work. It's easier and doesn't require everyone to go through a self-sorting process and switch jobs.
- chii 4y ago
  > Leave this up to the workers to choose how they want to work. while it sounds good, i dont think this works universally. The problem with letting workers choose themselves is that the workplace might not be setup properly for it - e.g., if some workers chose WFH, but there's no good culture for meetings to be held remotely, they miss out or must actively get informed via alternative channels. Or if a worker choose office, but they're the only one on location (and all their colleagues chose WFH), then they might not actually get the benefits of an office (such as socialization or face to face meetings & body language communications). So self-sorting thru companies might be a better option.
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    While self-sorting through companies sounds good, individual preference is actually the better option. Sorry. > Or if a worker choose office, but they're the only one on location (and all their colleagues chose WFH), then they might not actually get the benefits of an office. The correct answer here is not to mandate a return to work so that this guy has office play mates. He can re-skill himself to be effective without an office. Catch up or flunk out. We spend our own time leveling up on tech. It's not too much to ask someone to level up on getting the work done outside the office.
    - chii 4y ago
      > He can re-skill himself to be effective without an office. Catch up or flunk out aka, find some other company in which he is more effective or has an environment he prefers. Which is exactly my point.
      - kelseyfrog 4y ago
        No. I mean cease to work until reskilling.
selfhoster11 4y ago
Choosing a workplace is not always an option, especially during dry years or if you are not US based.
- refurb 4y ago
  Dry years indeed. My prediction is most people will end up back in the office. Why? Because most companies will go hybrid, and it’ll pretty quickly become apparent that the people in the office are getting the choice projects, bigger raises and the promotions everyone is gunning for. And on top of that if we end up in a recession employers will have the power to say “if you don’t want to work in an office we’ll find someone who does”. 100% remote would work fine, but those are unique situations and many companies can’t/won’t do it.

ryanbrunner 4y ago

Seems like if the variance in productivity comes down to the individual employee, it would make more sense to let employees choose, not the company. Especially in fields that aren't as white hot for hiring as tech is (and tech certainly may not be quite so white hot in the near future), letting employers decide most likely leaves a lot of people stuck with a suboptimal arrangement for them.

phendrenad2 4y ago
The only downside is if half the team is remote, it could cause friction between the innies and the outies.

kelseyfrog 4y ago

Leave this up to the workers to choose how they want to work. It's easier and doesn't require everyone to go through a self-sorting process and switch jobs.

chii 4y ago
> Leave this up to the workers to choose how they want to work. while it sounds good, i dont think this works universally. The problem with letting workers choose themselves is that the workplace might not be setup properly for it - e.g., if some workers chose WFH, but there's no good culture for meetings to be held remotely, they miss out or must actively get informed via alternative channels. Or if a worker choose office, but they're the only one on location (and all their colleagues chose WFH), then they might not actually get the benefits of an office (such as socialization or face to face meetings & body language communications). So self-sorting thru companies might be a better option.
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  While self-sorting through companies sounds good, individual preference is actually the better option. Sorry. > Or if a worker choose office, but they're the only one on location (and all their colleagues chose WFH), then they might not actually get the benefits of an office. The correct answer here is not to mandate a return to work so that this guy has office play mates. He can re-skill himself to be effective without an office. Catch up or flunk out. We spend our own time leveling up on tech. It's not too much to ask someone to level up on getting the work done outside the office.
  - chii 4y ago
    > He can re-skill himself to be effective without an office. Catch up or flunk out aka, find some other company in which he is more effective or has an environment he prefers. Which is exactly my point.
    - kelseyfrog 4y ago
      No. I mean cease to work until reskilling.

selfhoster11 4y ago

Choosing a workplace is not always an option, especially during dry years or if you are not US based.

refurb 4y ago
Dry years indeed. My prediction is most people will end up back in the office. Why? Because most companies will go hybrid, and it’ll pretty quickly become apparent that the people in the office are getting the choice projects, bigger raises and the promotions everyone is gunning for. And on top of that if we end up in a recession employers will have the power to say “if you don’t want to work in an office we’ll find someone who does”. 100% remote would work fine, but those are unique situations and many companies can’t/won’t do it.