12 ms·

I don’t care about health like a lot of people do. I go out to restaurants, I meet people, I take public transportation for other things, I’m already putting my

• voisin 4y ago
  Beware, this attitude works while employees have relatively strong bargaining power. As tech layoffs accelerate, this bargaining power dynamic may change. Unless there’s strong unionization efforts on this basis, I suspect WFH is not long for this world in its current, widespread form.
• zbird 4y ago
  > and the companies I’ve worked for have only seen record profits This cannot be sufficiently overstated.
  • bitwize 4y ago
    Corporate overlords will only sacrifice the bottom line for one thing: the illusion of control. It's why open-plan offices and Scrum are still things, despite the money left on the table by adopting them.
    • metadat 4y ago
      How do you propose to keep in touch without periodic team meetings (aka scrum)?
      • cbtacy 4y ago
        You cannot do a scrum meeting over Zoom?
        • metadat 4y ago
          Over zoom is 99% all we do. Office is optional for those who want to get away from their families.
      • zbird 4y ago
        You get on a call periodically.
      • bitwize 4y ago
        Scrum is more than "periodic team meetings". It's daily standups, sprints, sprint planning, backlog grooming, retro (cited lengths for these meetings are aspirational; usually they take 1.5x-2x the recommended times). It's sprint goals and sprint commitments, failure to meet which will be recorded and used against you in performance reviews and disciplinary actions. (Don't tell me they're "forecasts" now. They're commitments because people higher than you in the org chart use them for long-term planning.) The only reason why major companies undergo Agile transformations -- and why these almost always take the form of Scrum -- is because of the promise of fine-grained metrics, analytics, and control of the SDLC by upper management. That's what the agile consultants pitched to the CTO. Everybody involved in a typical Scrum shop is playing a game of Mornington Crescent -- of pretending to deliver quality software in an organic developer-customer relationship when what they're really expected to deliver is stories, estimates, and burndown data to their bosses (or their bosses' bosses). Anyway, that has not much to do with WFH, aside from the fact that calling workers into the office comes from the same place as imposing Scrum: the bosses need to feel in total control.
        • nsxwolf 4y ago
          I was introduced to Scrum at 2 companies that didn't use Scrum this way, and am currently at a company that uses it exactly as you describe. It was a shock and it's a real pressure cooker.
  • anonuser123456 4y ago
    To be fair, most tech based companies have very long pipelines. Google is making money off software written over the course of two decades. Intel has a 4 year pipeline for chip tape outs. A lot of tech companies were positioned well to increase revenue due to the pandemic. So just because companies are making more money, doesn't mean productivity hasn't gone down. It could be that it's just lost in the noise at the moment and won't show up in the data for a few years.
    • Panzer04 4y ago
      I feel like this is a really good point - Most people are likely pretty bad at measuring their productivity, and honestly my expectation is that (if present), the productivity impacts of long term WFH are likely to manifest in ways that aren't entirely obvious. For example, it seems evident to me that there's going to be a lot less "cross pollination" (for lack of a better metaphor) between people in a WFH environment as opposed to an office. For those with plenty of experience, this will have a fairly minimal impact, but for anyone else I'm concerned about missing out on the little things that are seamlessly transferred in face-to-face interactions over time. That thing that takes you 30 minutes that can be resolved with a 5 minute chat with the guy who knows, etc. Things you won't even really think to ask about that don't get brought up. Even less direct things as well - eg random new product ideas that come from a chat with a coworker, or improvements, anything like that. Those can all add up to improving products and productivity, and are difficult to measure the effect of. All of this stuff is in the tail though, and we probably won't see the effects for years (and it'll be muddied by people who do genuinely work well in WFH environments too)
      • emptyparadise 4y ago
        >random new product ideas that come from a chat with a coworker, or improvements I've had this happen plenty of times over text. I suspect the "cross pollination" might get balanced out by the ability to interact with anyone at the company, rather than just those on your floor or building.
        • 4y ago
  • 3a2d29 4y ago
    Unpopular opinion, but you can’t just look at “companies made more profits” and decide that means WFH is more productive. People starting dying from covid while crypto markets soared, so I guess killing people with covid fuels bitcoin. Or possible they huge money printing influenced the picture. EDIT: Not saying we weren’t more productive, just saying that HN tends to be very scientific but is really ignoring correlation != causation which we all would point out for most other things.
    • darth_avocado 4y ago
      I didn’t say work from home is more productive, I meant the record profits while the ENTIRE company was WFH suggests that at the very least, drop in productivity cannot be an excuse to bring EVERYONE in.
      • txcwpalpha 4y ago
        Correlation does not imply causation. A company achieving "record profits" does not necessarily have to be because there was no drop in productivity. It's entirely possible that a company can have a drop in productivity and record profits at the same time. Anecdotally, my company had record profits during the period of WFH, and I personally think my productivity stayed the same or improved. However, as a company we also shipped significantly less new features/products than we did in years past (and my opinion as to why is because we had significant organizational delays caused by miscommunication about timelines and priorities (stuff that in theory might have been improved if we were not WFH)). If we had not had a drop in the amount we shipped, it's possible our record profits would have been even higher record profits.
        • Apocryphon 4y ago
          If correlation does not imply causation, does that mean corporate productivity might correlate with, but not cause, profits?
          • txcwpalpha 4y ago
  • fgblanch 4y ago
    Clear "Correlation does not imply causation" case. The fact that people stayed more time at home implied they consumed more of everything online and accelerated digital services adoption making companies related with digital services sell more, plus less expenses (no travel, less expenses in facilities) made higher profits. Remote work correlating with Higher profits is a correlation not a cause afaik.
    • mejutoco 4y ago
      Not trying to be nitpicky but that sounds like actual causation. I would describe it as a second-order effect.
  • zbird 4y ago
    Many have commented on correlation-vs-causation. We get it, there is lag in the economics and the profits have partly been boosted by COVID. However, there has also been inflation-riding on behalf of these companies, and the same argument can be made in reverse: what evidence have they presented that WFH is causing a drop in productivity? None whatsoever. This move is simply to get employees back on the chairs so that the corporations may exert the same level of control they had in the past. On the other hand, those that are doing just fine and aren't cynical about their work practices are embracing WFH.
• jjtheblunt 4y ago
  > This is about fighting back to the tyranny of upper management hardware engineering requires shared access to tens of millions of dollars of shared equipment. disclaimer: ex Apple hardware engineer who used tens of millions of dollars of equipment.
  • darth_avocado 4y ago
    Okay, so hardware engineers can work from the office. Having a single set of rules for everyone else that doesn’t need to come in is something I don’t agree with.
    • knob 4y ago
      So don't work at Apple? Their company, their rules.
      • Apocryphon 4y ago
        Voicing dissatisfying as part of a mass popular outrage is a good way to get rules changed. Leaving a company also achieves that, but is a little more drastic.
        • jjtheblunt 4y ago
          I keep coming back and reading your idea about "mass popular outrage". I wonder if that pattern has almost been commodotized, because of social media, to the point where it has less impact than a few years earlier.
          • Apocryphon 4y ago
            I've long-considered that social media outrage, even something tech-specific like blog articles getting passed around on HN, is sadly sometimes the most effective form of customer service on these huge platforms that have mostly automated support: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17689749 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17689749 Oh, hey, over a decade ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2493645#2494528 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2493645#2494528 As far as it being commoditized, I think it might work a little differently in examples like the OP where the outraged people is the workforce itself. It's a more focused audience.
• xwdv 4y ago
  Just ignore any orders to come into the office. No one is checking.
• throwaway5959 4y ago
  And negatively affect their businesses.
• shishy 4y ago
  They just want people to come back to justify their corporate lease / rent on whatever offices they have. That's really what it's all about. All their productivity claims are bullshit.
  • 3a2d29 4y ago
    I think that and retention. It’s well known that remote jobs make it way easier to jump, plus people are less attached to their coworkers. That’s still not a good reason, since you are essentially trying to guilt people into staying or making their life more busy so interviewing is harder.
    • bredren 4y ago
      This sounds likely, but is there solid data to support this?
      • guelo 4y ago
        An HR department at a giant company probably does have solid data.
  • monkeywork 4y ago
    There is also a lot of pressure from local governments to get companies to force people back to work as the businesses built up around large biz centers suffer if everyone works from home (no one eating out for lunch, going to beers after work, getting coffees, getting dry cleaning, etc etc)
    • asdff 4y ago
      Or, if they want more people in the area, they could zone for housing in these downtowns that they previously hollowed out the housing for to build these offices and their parking lots.
    • shishy 4y ago
      This is true. I will say I've been work from home for years now and I still do all of those things ;). Just not with my coworkers. And not always in the heart of downtown, but more local to where I am. The money is still spent, just not in the same places.
• krrrh 4y ago
  It will take a while to determine which jobs lose or gain productivity from WFH. Some regimented jobs like radiologists, or call centres we’re doing a lot of WFH well before the pandemic. Jobs that require focus probably also benefit, but in a lot of cases it’s just regaining lost productivity from the switch to open office plans. The sort of major product breakthroughs that more creative people had during walks, cross team pollination over coffee breaks, or extended lunch brainstorms are probably fewer though. It’s hard to measure.
• elforce002 4y ago
  Man, I commuted 4hrs daily. I won't go back.
  • cbtacy 4y ago
    Same. Honestly, doubling my comp wouldn't get me back to that grind.
  • codereviewed 4y ago
    Holy shit, to me you are a giant. I could not stand a driving commute of more than ~30 minutes.
• onlyrealcuzzo 4y ago
  I like how no companies complained of productivity problems when everyone was working from home. After RTO, companies start mentioning productivity problems. Maybe they're related? I'm a huge fan of working in the office - but it astounds me that anyone can miss that people have different working styles.
• fgblanch 4y ago
  Many assumptions in your statement. You probably can't evaluate your productivity by yourself and record profits come at specific context, specific time and based on a historic inertia and multi-year strategy. This is not about fighting any tyranny, this is about running companies, and the same way there are costs associated to work in an office for you, there are costs associated with employees working remotely (and not only economic), but you don't see them.
  • rzz3 4y ago
    It’s fairly easy for most people to compare their own productivity before and after working from home. Mine is significantly greater. The number of hours I’ve spent working has drastically increased due to losing my 2 hour commute, and the focus I’ve been able to achieve at home is like nothing I’ve ever seen at an office.
    • fgblanch 4y ago
      How you know it was not anecdotical due to switching workspaces and it is not regressing to normal?
    • txcwpalpha 4y ago
      Personal productivity isn't the same as organizational productivity. This is one of the key things at the heart of the WFH discussion. It's entirely possible that you personally wrote more lines of code, but the team still fell behind in products shipped. This could be due to many different factors. One easily identifiable one is that while good employees might be more productive WFH, poor performers are even more poor when WFH, and it becomes much more difficult to actively manage/coach/mentor poor performers when they are remote. There's many more metrics too, like attrition, or poor onboarding experience for new hires, or inability to coordinate across teams (sure you're producing more personal output, but is it the right output?) Organizations are more than individuals working in isolation. They're coordinated masses of people that have to work together, and what is best for one person's personal productivity may not be best for the organization's overall productivity.
• social_quotient 4y ago
  I get your point but I’d hardly say asking people to come to the office for their job 3 days a week is “tyranny of upper management”. If this is your tyranny then I’d say you have had a pretty lax career. Good for you I suppose and let’s hope times don’t get tough.
  • A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    If you are doing something against your will, it is tyranny. If you do things based on reasonable conversation, it is partnership. That said, to be fair, most entities are organized as 'on command' workplaces and management does not really understand and/or like empowered workers. Now, we can quibble over money and such, but most employees already voted, quite vocally, some with their feet.
    • social_quotient 4y ago
      Seriously, against your will? This is not an interment camp where you are forced to mine rocks out of the ground. Quit the job if it has requirements that don’t meet yours. Welcome to freedom!
      • A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
        >>Seriously, against your will? Yes. Does an average person wake up and thinks 'gosh golly, today is a good day to write a better way to track people for ad targeting purposes' or 'today is a splendid day to test that software package'? I don't. If I don't, it is against my will. It is not rocket science. It is basic logic. Naturally, you could argue that you are doing it for money and this negates it, but, well, it does not. It just means you are paid to do something against your will. But wait, I can go somewhere else! That is freedom. You are just changing one tyranny for another and that does not change the fact that it is tyranny.
        • social_quotient 4y ago
          Thanks for the detail. I think I follow the perspective but let me ask a couple of questions to make sure I got it right. (not intended to bait you here but want to know where the nuance lines are) Is paying for food/rent also a tyranny? (because who actually wants to pay for that) Is the need to contribute to society a tyranny? Is it a tyranny to enforce laws like a speed limit through a school zone?
• teaearlgraycold 4y ago
  Why would you commute that long? I’ve never had and would never tolerate a commute longer than 20 minutes. I go into the office every day of the week because the time spent in the car is negligible when you consider it’s just podcast time.
  • SirSourdough 4y ago
    I'd say it's a pretty rare luxury to be able to commute less than 20 mins for your entire career. There are tons of jobs that happen in major cities that don't pay enough to live within 20 minutes. Many don't pay enough to reasonably commute by car. Plus there are a lot of life circumstances that make people accept different tradeoffs over time (schools/districts, medical care, aging/ailing relatives, space vs price, urban vs natural, car vs transit etc).
• kcplate 4y ago
  >This is about fighting back to the tyranny of upper management who have nothing better to do than make poor decisions that affect other people negatively. No, this is about Apple spending $5B on a state of the art amazing HQ that no one was doing much complaining about except those folks walking into the windows.
  • Apocryphon 4y ago
    I remember when the plans for the new HQ were first unveiled. There was some disquiet from colleagues about the shift towards open floorplans. Not sure how it ended up being received by those who did relocate to there.
    • kcplate 4y ago
      > I recall some disquiet from some colleagues about the shift towards open floorplans. I can’t blame them for that. I am of the opinion that Frank Lloyd Wright may be the greatest sadist ever to walk the earth for popularizing the concept.