9 ms·

Remote employees are working less, sleeping and playing more, Fed study finds

37 points by _____k 4y ago

tharkun__ 4y ago
Click bait title. Changes in behavior differ among age groups, with younger Americans using the saved commuting time to engage in leisure activities They consider commute time as working. Which on some level I would like to agree with but none of my employers so far has paid me to commute so I do not consider it working. Yes of course I don't use the commute time I save to get more work hours in. Duh!
- fundad 4y ago
  Seriously they big mad that companies haven't reclaimed saved commute hours for work, they believe that time belongs to them SMDH. “decrease in hours worked away from home only partially offset by an increase in working at home” cue the violins. By the way, this is all during a period of rapid US economic expansion. You're welcome plutes.
  - PM_me_your_math 4y ago
    What expansion? We've had two quarters of contraction. About to have a third, too, by all indicators.
  - mandelbrotwurst 4y ago
    > a period of rapid US economic expansion Over what time period? GDP growth is in a long term (i.e. multiple decades) downtrend. Growth is up over the last couple of years if you cherry-pick and use the COVID/lockdown crash the starting point.
    - fundad 4y ago
      Q3, sorry to disappoint you
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
- klyrs 4y ago
  > none of my employers so far has paid me to commute so I do not consider it working. Yikes, do you apply that same reasoning to slavery, or is it only your own time that you consider worthless until paid for? re: makeitrain -- you don't work for Amazon, then?
  - tharkun__ 4y ago
    I don't think you understood it the way I meant it. Let me explain. Commute time is time that I do not get any work output done. Employers know that and do not pay for that time. For me as an employee I have to basically treat this as "the cost of being employed" and I have a few knobs there. I can choose how far away I live, i.e. do I waste 15 minutes on the subway for this but pay high rent or for an expensive condo or do I waste 1.5 hours driving and paying for the maintenance, gas etc. each way and live in a nice house in the sticks. I may also have the option of taking a train for the 1.5 hour trip and I might be able to get an hour of work done on the train. Now it's up to my employer-employee relationship that I can get whether I am able to count this as work time or not. Some employers have strict policies: You gotta be at the office at 9 and clock in and clock out for lunch and back in and back out at 5. This is the time they count and you better be on time or you get dinged. Such an employer will not pay for your one hour of actual work you did on the commute. Other employers may not be as strict, people generally get to work around 9, no punch clocks but social pressure ensures that even if you did that hour of work on the train and do another hour of work on the train ride home, people only "see you at work" for 6 hours and think you're a slacker. So again effectively your employer does not pay your for your commute time i.e. I can't count it as work. It's my time. I may be fine with listening to an audio book or reading in that time and I might enjoy it. But it was never work time to begin with. I was just forced to make use of that time in some way in order to be employed somewhere to get money. Or you may be at a great place that understands this, some people come in at 7 and leave at 2, others come in at 11 and leave at 6. In any case, with WFH I can now finally do whatever I want with that time instead of being locked into doing something that I can do while commuting.
    - klyrs 4y ago
      I understand it the way you meant it. There are zero bona-fide reasons that I cannot work at home. If my employer wants me to battle traffic an hour each way, that's time taken away from myself and my family, it's fuel, wear & tear on my car, it's added stress and risk of permanent debilitating injuries -- all costs that my employer wants me to take on, for free, just because some exec who never comes to the office doesn't feel comfortable with peons doing the same. Getting to the office is work, and expense, that is not paid for. You're making an extremely narrow definition of "work" that your employer is delighted by. You're paying for the privilege of getting a paycheck. I'm saying that you aren't being paid for your time. Couple of scenarios: 1. Your employer wants you to go to a conference where you're to represent the company. Your "work" is programming, and your output is zero for the duration of the conference. Should you be paid for your time, should your plane & hotel costs be covered? 2. Your employer wants to buy some computers. The computers are worthless to your employer if they're sitting in a warehouse somewhere. Do they pay a shipping fee, or let them rot in the warehouse?
- makeitrain 4y ago
temende 4y ago
It's interesting that we're at a point in society (or maybe capitalism) where people working less and sleeping more is being played as a bad thing.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
sschueller 4y ago
Work less doesn't mean less productive. This article has practically no substance and has nothing to say. It's as if this was written by a bot.
yrgulation 4y ago
Articles like these are simply crap. Commuting less != working less. If commuting is work then employers should pay for it or have the time taken to commute deducted from work hours. Either way articles like these are horseshit and likely sponsored by those renting human farm space (offices).
- klyrs 4y ago
  > If commuting is work then employers should pay for it or have the time taken to commute deducted from work hours. If your employer requires you to come to the office, then getting there is part of the job, and I think you should be compensated for that time. Commuting during rush hour certainly isn't a pleasure activity that I'd be doing without obligation.
  - scottiebarnes 4y ago
    And if you move closer to your work, do you have to give up part of your compensation?
    - asdff 4y ago
      Only if you frame it that way. On the other hand, a shorter commute means you now have free time you can monetize however you like, which you can put a value on at whatever hourly rate you think your free time is worth, instead of being forced to monetize it by commuting.
    - guptaneil 4y ago
      Yes, in the form of higher housing costs.
      - kelnos 4y ago
        It could be worse than that. If your employer were to pay you specifically for the time it takes you to commute, then the only rational thing to do (assuming you don't care all that much where you live) is to find the cheapest house, far from your office. If you commute 2 hours each way, your employer has to compensate you for 4 extra hours of work per day, and, to make matters better, you're saving on housing costs. But if you move to the city center and now have a 15-minute commute, your housing costs have likely gone up a lot, and your employer is now only paying you for 30 minutes of commute time per day. Now, you could say that an employer wouldn't do it this way; they'd basically just give everyone a fixed "commute time stipend", and let people "spend" it how they wish: either on an actual longer commute, or on higher housing costs that shorten the commute. That's probably more fair in the case where the office is in a city center. But if it's the reverse, and the office is out in a cheap suburb, then it perhaps becomes more fair again to pay for the actual amount of time in someone's commute.
calvinmorrison 4y ago
Just say "No" to these work-a-holic junkies. Don't open the article, don't read the article, don't engage it any further than "Nice try Mr. Capitalist" Anyone writing these articles is a Fed. All of these article are just trying to guilt trip and shame people into working more.
swagasaurus-rex 4y ago
Tldr: Government pension workers pretending like time in office in’t filled with time wasting bullshit
- ParetoOptimal 4y ago
  And a sure-fire way to increase time wasting bullshit and malicious compliance in an office is to treat people badly and take advantage of them.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
noobermin 4y ago
That's right, I should go to work and browse and comment on HN there instead.
quintu5 4y ago
Less time wasted commuting. More time sleeping. More leisure time. I still spend the same real number of hours working (if not longer when I'm in the zone) and have a higher quality of life. That all sounds good to me, so what's the problem?
ewokone 4y ago
Misinformation.
slt2021 4y ago
garbage article filled with propaganda from FED who are lobbied by Commercial Real Estate investors. CREs are losing their ass over companies canceling/downsizing their office presence - all thanks to remote work. If you ask who this article benefits, then it becomes clear their motivation for study. There is a reason Fed decided suddenly to launch this study of remote workers and came to this conclusion, completely ignoring employee wellbeing & work output (which are the main things employers should care about)
Cryptonic 4y ago
Lol clickbait a bit. I assumed the article is about me actually working less, but it isn't. It's actually pro remote work.
GaryNumanVevo 4y ago
You've really got to follow the money on this whole "let's all get back into the office" nonsense. Commercial real estate is extremely overpriced and a market correction might affect some people (including the FED's lobbyists). Not to mention higher commercial real estate prices contribute to inflated housing prices near urban centers. Honestly, I'm tired of it. Let's move on a society, let people who want to work from home do it, and downsize / revamp offices for the people who do. Saving on the commute alone is worth it.
- joecot 4y ago
  There's a longer tail effect than that. I used to put 100 miles a day on my car, now it's maybe 2 if I go to a couple stores. This isn't just commercial real estate, it's car manufacturers, gas companies, all the service businesses for commuters (parking lots, the starbucks on the corner, all the restaurants near offices), etc. I don't think that's a bad thing. Anything that means less car usage is a good thing, and as commercial real estate keeps losing demand, those spaces will end up converted to residential real estates in cities with ludicrous housing prices. Work from home is good for workers, for the environment, for residential renters. It's the companies who benefit the most from forced office commutes that are hand wringing.
- slt2021 4y ago
  remote work = better mental health, more time spent with kids, flexible work schedule, all while rich fat commercial landlords lose $$$$ ? sounds like a dream coming true. I wonder if it will lead to more outsourcing/offshoring IT work, the more remote becomes norm
xchip 4y ago
Did anybody here participate, or know someone that participate in such a poll?
ok_coo 4y ago
I slacked off more in the office, got up from my desk more, walked around more. When I was actually at my desk, I would browse random websites more than I do at home. There are too many distractions in the office and not enough private offices to work in, for the people who require deep concentration to work. I don't see that changing anytime soon because a private office (with a door) is seen as a perk/privilege for managers who are mostly stuck in meetings anyway, and not for those who need to be able to concentrate.
togs 4y ago
Good

37 points by _____k 4y ago

Click bait title. Changes in behavior differ among age groups, with younger Americans using the saved commuting time to engage in leisure activities They consider commute time as working. Which on some level I would like to agree with but none of my employers so far has paid me to commute so I do not consider it working. Yes of course I don't use the commute time I save to get more work hours in. Duh!

fundad 4y ago
Seriously they big mad that companies haven't reclaimed saved commute hours for work, they believe that time belongs to them SMDH. “decrease in hours worked away from home only partially offset by an increase in working at home” cue the violins. By the way, this is all during a period of rapid US economic expansion. You're welcome plutes.
- PM_me_your_math 4y ago
  What expansion? We've had two quarters of contraction. About to have a third, too, by all indicators.
- mandelbrotwurst 4y ago
  > a period of rapid US economic expansion Over what time period? GDP growth is in a long term (i.e. multiple decades) downtrend. Growth is up over the last couple of years if you cherry-pick and use the COVID/lockdown crash the starting point.
  - fundad 4y ago
    Q3, sorry to disappoint you
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
klyrs 4y ago
> none of my employers so far has paid me to commute so I do not consider it working. Yikes, do you apply that same reasoning to slavery, or is it only your own time that you consider worthless until paid for? re: makeitrain -- you don't work for Amazon, then?
- tharkun__ 4y ago
  I don't think you understood it the way I meant it. Let me explain. Commute time is time that I do not get any work output done. Employers know that and do not pay for that time. For me as an employee I have to basically treat this as "the cost of being employed" and I have a few knobs there. I can choose how far away I live, i.e. do I waste 15 minutes on the subway for this but pay high rent or for an expensive condo or do I waste 1.5 hours driving and paying for the maintenance, gas etc. each way and live in a nice house in the sticks. I may also have the option of taking a train for the 1.5 hour trip and I might be able to get an hour of work done on the train. Now it's up to my employer-employee relationship that I can get whether I am able to count this as work time or not. Some employers have strict policies: You gotta be at the office at 9 and clock in and clock out for lunch and back in and back out at 5. This is the time they count and you better be on time or you get dinged. Such an employer will not pay for your one hour of actual work you did on the commute. Other employers may not be as strict, people generally get to work around 9, no punch clocks but social pressure ensures that even if you did that hour of work on the train and do another hour of work on the train ride home, people only "see you at work" for 6 hours and think you're a slacker. So again effectively your employer does not pay your for your commute time i.e. I can't count it as work. It's my time. I may be fine with listening to an audio book or reading in that time and I might enjoy it. But it was never work time to begin with. I was just forced to make use of that time in some way in order to be employed somewhere to get money. Or you may be at a great place that understands this, some people come in at 7 and leave at 2, others come in at 11 and leave at 6. In any case, with WFH I can now finally do whatever I want with that time instead of being locked into doing something that I can do while commuting.
  - klyrs 4y ago
    I understand it the way you meant it. There are zero bona-fide reasons that I cannot work at home. If my employer wants me to battle traffic an hour each way, that's time taken away from myself and my family, it's fuel, wear & tear on my car, it's added stress and risk of permanent debilitating injuries -- all costs that my employer wants me to take on, for free, just because some exec who never comes to the office doesn't feel comfortable with peons doing the same. Getting to the office is work, and expense, that is not paid for. You're making an extremely narrow definition of "work" that your employer is delighted by. You're paying for the privilege of getting a paycheck. I'm saying that you aren't being paid for your time. Couple of scenarios: 1. Your employer wants you to go to a conference where you're to represent the company. Your "work" is programming, and your output is zero for the duration of the conference. Should you be paid for your time, should your plane & hotel costs be covered? 2. Your employer wants to buy some computers. The computers are worthless to your employer if they're sitting in a warehouse somewhere. Do they pay a shipping fee, or let them rot in the warehouse?
makeitrain 4y ago

temende 4y ago

It's interesting that we're at a point in society (or maybe capitalism) where people working less and sleeping more is being played as a bad thing.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

sschueller 4y ago

Work less doesn't mean less productive. This article has practically no substance and has nothing to say. It's as if this was written by a bot.

yrgulation 4y ago

Articles like these are simply crap. Commuting less != working less. If commuting is work then employers should pay for it or have the time taken to commute deducted from work hours. Either way articles like these are horseshit and likely sponsored by those renting human farm space (offices).

klyrs 4y ago
> If commuting is work then employers should pay for it or have the time taken to commute deducted from work hours. If your employer requires you to come to the office, then getting there is part of the job, and I think you should be compensated for that time. Commuting during rush hour certainly isn't a pleasure activity that I'd be doing without obligation.
- scottiebarnes 4y ago
  And if you move closer to your work, do you have to give up part of your compensation?
  - asdff 4y ago
    Only if you frame it that way. On the other hand, a shorter commute means you now have free time you can monetize however you like, which you can put a value on at whatever hourly rate you think your free time is worth, instead of being forced to monetize it by commuting.
  - guptaneil 4y ago
    Yes, in the form of higher housing costs.
    - kelnos 4y ago
      It could be worse than that. If your employer were to pay you specifically for the time it takes you to commute, then the only rational thing to do (assuming you don't care all that much where you live) is to find the cheapest house, far from your office. If you commute 2 hours each way, your employer has to compensate you for 4 extra hours of work per day, and, to make matters better, you're saving on housing costs. But if you move to the city center and now have a 15-minute commute, your housing costs have likely gone up a lot, and your employer is now only paying you for 30 minutes of commute time per day. Now, you could say that an employer wouldn't do it this way; they'd basically just give everyone a fixed "commute time stipend", and let people "spend" it how they wish: either on an actual longer commute, or on higher housing costs that shorten the commute. That's probably more fair in the case where the office is in a city center. But if it's the reverse, and the office is out in a cheap suburb, then it perhaps becomes more fair again to pay for the actual amount of time in someone's commute.

calvinmorrison 4y ago

Just say "No" to these work-a-holic junkies. Don't open the article, don't read the article, don't engage it any further than "Nice try Mr. Capitalist" Anyone writing these articles is a Fed. All of these article are just trying to guilt trip and shame people into working more.

swagasaurus-rex 4y ago

Tldr: Government pension workers pretending like time in office in’t filled with time wasting bullshit

ParetoOptimal 4y ago
And a sure-fire way to increase time wasting bullshit and malicious compliance in an office is to treat people badly and take advantage of them.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

noobermin 4y ago

That's right, I should go to work and browse and comment on HN there instead.

quintu5 4y ago

Less time wasted commuting. More time sleeping. More leisure time. I still spend the same real number of hours working (if not longer when I'm in the zone) and have a higher quality of life. That all sounds good to me, so what's the problem?

ewokone 4y ago

Misinformation.

slt2021 4y ago

garbage article filled with propaganda from FED who are lobbied by Commercial Real Estate investors. CREs are losing their ass over companies canceling/downsizing their office presence - all thanks to remote work. If you ask who this article benefits, then it becomes clear their motivation for study. There is a reason Fed decided suddenly to launch this study of remote workers and came to this conclusion, completely ignoring employee wellbeing & work output (which are the main things employers should care about)

Cryptonic 4y ago

Lol clickbait a bit. I assumed the article is about me actually working less, but it isn't. It's actually pro remote work.

GaryNumanVevo 4y ago

You've really got to follow the money on this whole "let's all get back into the office" nonsense. Commercial real estate is extremely overpriced and a market correction might affect some people (including the FED's lobbyists). Not to mention higher commercial real estate prices contribute to inflated housing prices near urban centers. Honestly, I'm tired of it. Let's move on a society, let people who want to work from home do it, and downsize / revamp offices for the people who do. Saving on the commute alone is worth it.

joecot 4y ago
There's a longer tail effect than that. I used to put 100 miles a day on my car, now it's maybe 2 if I go to a couple stores. This isn't just commercial real estate, it's car manufacturers, gas companies, all the service businesses for commuters (parking lots, the starbucks on the corner, all the restaurants near offices), etc. I don't think that's a bad thing. Anything that means less car usage is a good thing, and as commercial real estate keeps losing demand, those spaces will end up converted to residential real estates in cities with ludicrous housing prices. Work from home is good for workers, for the environment, for residential renters. It's the companies who benefit the most from forced office commutes that are hand wringing.
slt2021 4y ago
remote work = better mental health, more time spent with kids, flexible work schedule, all while rich fat commercial landlords lose $$$$ ? sounds like a dream coming true. I wonder if it will lead to more outsourcing/offshoring IT work, the more remote becomes norm

xchip 4y ago

Did anybody here participate, or know someone that participate in such a poll?

ok_coo 4y ago

I slacked off more in the office, got up from my desk more, walked around more. When I was actually at my desk, I would browse random websites more than I do at home. There are too many distractions in the office and not enough private offices to work in, for the people who require deep concentration to work. I don't see that changing anytime soon because a private office (with a door) is seen as a perk/privilege for managers who are mostly stuck in meetings anyway, and not for those who need to be able to concentrate.

togs 4y ago

Good