6 ms·

My guess is that the current market conditions will accelerate the market toward whatever the new normal will be. Companies that hated having to give into deman

My guess is that the current market conditions will accelerate the market toward whatever the new normal will be. Companies that hated having to give into demands for remote work will use this as leverage to get people back into the office. Companies that were going to look at remote work as a way to save costs (either by hiring from cheaper regions, saving on real estate costs, or both) will be pushed into those decisions sooner, and companies that were remote first, or on a path to it, in order to get the best talent will be pushed to improving their remote work processes so they can be as efficient as possible. I’m not going to try to make a bet on where the lines will get drawn between remote and in person, but I expect hybrid work will become less common since it often ends up being then worst of all worlds (you pay for office space, limit your hiring pool, and decrease worker efficiency by encouraging repeated Covid exposure leading to both more short term leave due to sick employees and less effective employees in the long run due to long Covid, but you still have many of the organizational, communication and infrastructure challenges of a remote team)

timr 4y ago
> decrease worker efficiency by encouraging repeated Covid exposure leading to both more short term leave due to sick employees and less effective employees in the long run due to long Covid PSA: this is wild speculation. There's no definition of what "long covid" is, and there's certainly no evidence that it is made worse by getting Covid more than once. If anything, the opposite is true: we know that repeat infections lead to fewer symptoms and milder illness. Regardless, Covid is an endemic cold virus now, along with the other four circulating coronaviruses. It isn't going away. Everyone is going to get it multiple times in their lives, whether or not they work remote or in person.
- rebeccaskinner 4y ago
  You are (mostly) wrong. The definitions of long Covid are indeed a bit inconsistent for now, but there’s evidence that both repeated infections do tend to be worse with the omicron variants (possibly due to t-cell exhaustion but I’m not sure if that’s the only factor), and that repeat exposures are at least not protective against long Covid (this isn’t settled science yet, and there are a lot of confounding variables, but the recent studies I’ve seen seem to put the risk of long Covid at somewhere between 5% and 30% each time you are infected). To the extent that there are good consistent definitions of long Covid, they tend to agree that neurological symptoms- including brain fog and reduced cognition, are frequent (not a majority, but still common) symptoms associated with long Covid. Looking at cognitive effects in particular, some UK studies estimate that the impact is actually quite a lot higher than is reported, and is common even in people with asymptomatic or very mild initial symptoms. I’ve seen at least one estimate that puts the impact of an asymptomatic Covid infection on the brain as being equivalent to 10 years of normal aging. The cognitive effects don’t seem to be entirely evenly distributed- the impact is bigger on older (40+) people, and I’ve heard (but not read the study) that people with ADHD are also much more likely to experience cognitive issues after covid. Covid is also not yet endemic. We are still in the pandemic phase- there is not yet a regular and predictable load of infections or a reasonable model for the evolutionary trend of variants. In any case, endemic does not mean not dangerous, it just means predictable and well understood. Calling it a cold virus is also just a rhetorical trick to downplay the severity. Yes, some colds are caused by other coronaviruses, but covid19 remains far more severe on average than any of the other common coronavirus infections that we lump in with common colds. Finally, it’s probably true on our current trajectory that most people will be infected multiple times, even people that work from home. Given the evidence of compounding risks, it’s still better to prevent whatever vectors of infection that you can. It also gives people more flexibility in their own risk tolerance. I’m still avoiding bars and restaurants, but many of my coworkers aren’t. If we were in an office I’d be obliged to take on a much higher level of risk due to unavoidable exposure to higher risk people.
  - timr 4y ago
    > You are (mostly) wrong. The definitions of long Covid are indeed a bit inconsistent for now, It's not a matter of "a bit inconsistent". There is no definition of "long covid". Literally anyone can claim they have it and not be wrong. > but there’s evidence that both repeated infections do tend to be worse with the omicron variants (possibly due to t-cell exhaustion but I’m not sure if that’s the only factor) No, there isn't, and "t-cell exhaustion" is not a thing. It's a phrase made up by pop scientists. > I’ve seen at least one estimate that puts the impact of an asymptomatic Covid infection on the brain as being equivalent to 10 years of normal aging. There are, sadly, a large number of irresponsible people making hysterical, pseudo-scientific claims with no data to back them up. This is a great example. Even if it were possible to quantify "10 years of normal aging" on "the brain" (it isn't), the specific claim advanced here -- asymptomatic infection leading to accelerated 'normal aging' -- is not backed by any evidence.
    - rebeccaskinner 4y ago
      > It's not a matter of "a bit inconsistent". There is no definition of "long covid". Literally anyone can claim they have it and not be wrong. Individual studies tend to look at different things, but most of the relevant studies give a particular definition. It generally involves symptoms 3,6, or 8 months after an acute infection, and some studies further limit the definition to a particular set of symptoms. Most control for the occurrence of those symptoms in the general population too. > No, there isn't, and "t-cell exhaustion" is not a thing. It's a phrase made up by pop scientists. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-019-0221-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-019-0221-9 https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2021/july/penn-medicine-discovery-clarifies-the-problem-of-t-cell-exhaustion https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2021/july/pe... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34288064/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34288064/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7389156/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7389156/ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-021-00750-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-021-00750-4
      - cheesewhizemacs 4y ago
- terminatornet 4y ago
  https://www.transtats.bts.gov/homedrillchart.asp https://www.transtats.bts.gov/homedrillchart.asp 59,033 and 34,793 flights cancelled in 2019 and 2018 respectively according to the US department of transporation. In 2022, we're already at 76,776 flights cancelled and not even halfway through the year, so nearly the amount cancelled in 2018 and 2019 combined. I'm curious if there's anything different that's happening this year vs those other two that would account for such a stark increase in cancelled flights, likely due to an impacted labor force. Probably just people out with colds.
  - timr 4y ago
    > Probably just people out with colds. That's a leap. My understanding is that airlines are affected by the same thing every other employer is seeing -- they can't hire. It might be exacerbated by the fact that airlines reduced/eliminated their training pipeline. For example: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/15/us-pilot-shortage-forces-airlines-to-cut-flights-scramble-for-solutions.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/15/us-pilot-shortage-forces-air... > The pandemic exacerbated a pilot shortage by slowing down training, hiring and creating a wave of early retirements. > Airlines offered pilots early retirements to cut labor bills during the depths of the pandemic. > The process to become airline-qualified in the U.S. is lengthy and expensive, making the barrier to entry high.
    - terminatornet 4y ago
      It takes more than pilots to run an airline, you need flight attendants, maintenance crew, ticketing agents. If pilot staffing issues due to training and early retirements then why did airlines that removed mask mandates see staff shortages first? > An EasyJet spokesperson attributed the increase in cancelled flights to "higher than usual staff sickness levels" due to a recent surge in COVID-19 cases across Europe. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/airlines-face-mask-covid-rules-flights-canceled/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/airlines-face-mask-covid-rules-...
      - timr 4y ago
        Sure, in April 2022.
- Tainnor 4y ago
  Regardless of your feelings and convictions around it, covid and its effects on the workforce are definitely something that many managers think a lot about, so even if what you said were true, it still wouldn't change corporate responses at least in the short to medium term.

timr 4y ago

> decrease worker efficiency by encouraging repeated Covid exposure leading to both more short term leave due to sick employees and less effective employees in the long run due to long Covid PSA: this is wild speculation. There's no definition of what "long covid" is, and there's certainly no evidence that it is made worse by getting Covid more than once. If anything, the opposite is true: we know that repeat infections lead to fewer symptoms and milder illness. Regardless, Covid is an endemic cold virus now, along with the other four circulating coronaviruses. It isn't going away. Everyone is going to get it multiple times in their lives, whether or not they work remote or in person.

rebeccaskinner 4y ago
You are (mostly) wrong. The definitions of long Covid are indeed a bit inconsistent for now, but there’s evidence that both repeated infections do tend to be worse with the omicron variants (possibly due to t-cell exhaustion but I’m not sure if that’s the only factor), and that repeat exposures are at least not protective against long Covid (this isn’t settled science yet, and there are a lot of confounding variables, but the recent studies I’ve seen seem to put the risk of long Covid at somewhere between 5% and 30% each time you are infected). To the extent that there are good consistent definitions of long Covid, they tend to agree that neurological symptoms- including brain fog and reduced cognition, are frequent (not a majority, but still common) symptoms associated with long Covid. Looking at cognitive effects in particular, some UK studies estimate that the impact is actually quite a lot higher than is reported, and is common even in people with asymptomatic or very mild initial symptoms. I’ve seen at least one estimate that puts the impact of an asymptomatic Covid infection on the brain as being equivalent to 10 years of normal aging. The cognitive effects don’t seem to be entirely evenly distributed- the impact is bigger on older (40+) people, and I’ve heard (but not read the study) that people with ADHD are also much more likely to experience cognitive issues after covid. Covid is also not yet endemic. We are still in the pandemic phase- there is not yet a regular and predictable load of infections or a reasonable model for the evolutionary trend of variants. In any case, endemic does not mean not dangerous, it just means predictable and well understood. Calling it a cold virus is also just a rhetorical trick to downplay the severity. Yes, some colds are caused by other coronaviruses, but covid19 remains far more severe on average than any of the other common coronavirus infections that we lump in with common colds. Finally, it’s probably true on our current trajectory that most people will be infected multiple times, even people that work from home. Given the evidence of compounding risks, it’s still better to prevent whatever vectors of infection that you can. It also gives people more flexibility in their own risk tolerance. I’m still avoiding bars and restaurants, but many of my coworkers aren’t. If we were in an office I’d be obliged to take on a much higher level of risk due to unavoidable exposure to higher risk people.
- timr 4y ago
  > You are (mostly) wrong. The definitions of long Covid are indeed a bit inconsistent for now, It's not a matter of "a bit inconsistent". There is no definition of "long covid". Literally anyone can claim they have it and not be wrong. > but there’s evidence that both repeated infections do tend to be worse with the omicron variants (possibly due to t-cell exhaustion but I’m not sure if that’s the only factor) No, there isn't, and "t-cell exhaustion" is not a thing. It's a phrase made up by pop scientists. > I’ve seen at least one estimate that puts the impact of an asymptomatic Covid infection on the brain as being equivalent to 10 years of normal aging. There are, sadly, a large number of irresponsible people making hysterical, pseudo-scientific claims with no data to back them up. This is a great example. Even if it were possible to quantify "10 years of normal aging" on "the brain" (it isn't), the specific claim advanced here -- asymptomatic infection leading to accelerated 'normal aging' -- is not backed by any evidence.
  - rebeccaskinner 4y ago
    > It's not a matter of "a bit inconsistent". There is no definition of "long covid". Literally anyone can claim they have it and not be wrong. Individual studies tend to look at different things, but most of the relevant studies give a particular definition. It generally involves symptoms 3,6, or 8 months after an acute infection, and some studies further limit the definition to a particular set of symptoms. Most control for the occurrence of those symptoms in the general population too. > No, there isn't, and "t-cell exhaustion" is not a thing. It's a phrase made up by pop scientists. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-019-0221-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-019-0221-9 https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2021/july/penn-medicine-discovery-clarifies-the-problem-of-t-cell-exhaustion https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2021/july/pe... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34288064/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34288064/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7389156/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7389156/ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-021-00750-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-021-00750-4
    - cheesewhizemacs 4y ago
terminatornet 4y ago
https://www.transtats.bts.gov/homedrillchart.asp https://www.transtats.bts.gov/homedrillchart.asp 59,033 and 34,793 flights cancelled in 2019 and 2018 respectively according to the US department of transporation. In 2022, we're already at 76,776 flights cancelled and not even halfway through the year, so nearly the amount cancelled in 2018 and 2019 combined. I'm curious if there's anything different that's happening this year vs those other two that would account for such a stark increase in cancelled flights, likely due to an impacted labor force. Probably just people out with colds.
- timr 4y ago
  > Probably just people out with colds. That's a leap. My understanding is that airlines are affected by the same thing every other employer is seeing -- they can't hire. It might be exacerbated by the fact that airlines reduced/eliminated their training pipeline. For example: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/15/us-pilot-shortage-forces-airlines-to-cut-flights-scramble-for-solutions.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/15/us-pilot-shortage-forces-air... > The pandemic exacerbated a pilot shortage by slowing down training, hiring and creating a wave of early retirements. > Airlines offered pilots early retirements to cut labor bills during the depths of the pandemic. > The process to become airline-qualified in the U.S. is lengthy and expensive, making the barrier to entry high.
  - terminatornet 4y ago
    It takes more than pilots to run an airline, you need flight attendants, maintenance crew, ticketing agents. If pilot staffing issues due to training and early retirements then why did airlines that removed mask mandates see staff shortages first? > An EasyJet spokesperson attributed the increase in cancelled flights to "higher than usual staff sickness levels" due to a recent surge in COVID-19 cases across Europe. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/airlines-face-mask-covid-rules-flights-canceled/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/airlines-face-mask-covid-rules-...
    - timr 4y ago
      Sure, in April 2022.
Tainnor 4y ago
Regardless of your feelings and convictions around it, covid and its effects on the workforce are definitely something that many managers think a lot about, so even if what you said were true, it still wouldn't change corporate responses at least in the short to medium term.