5 ms·

I'm surprised that they coalesced around a "3 days a week in-office / 2 days a week work-from-home" arrangement. In some ways, that arrangement seems like the

by jawns 4y ago

I'm surprised that they coalesced around a "3 days a week in-office / 2 days a week work-from-home" arrangement. In some ways, that arrangement seems like the worst of both worlds. Unless everyone in the org works the same three days a week in-office, now you've got some people in office, some people still working from home, and coordination becomes more complex. Have you ever been on a Zoom call where half the people are in a conference room and the other half are working from home and calling in individually? It's a mess. Either the in-office workers completely dominate the conversation, or, if it's more evenly matched, it's a lot harder to understand the in-office people unless you have really carefully calibrated microphones for the room. Even if they were to agree on T/W/Th as everyone's in-office days, and everyone works from home on M/F, now you've got a large office space that is practically vacant for more than half of each week.

mtoner23 4y ago
Most companies ive seen who do this, strongly recommend everyone prioritze coming in tues wed thurs. Sure the office is vacant for 2 days, but its already vacant on the weekends and that doesnt bother anyone.
- Ancalagon 4y ago
  And so everyone schedules there new job interviews on Monday and Friday
hideo 4y ago
> Unless everyone in the org works the same three days a week in-office Amazon had a culture of small teams (≤15 people) being somewhat independent. I would imagine that you don't need _the whole org_ there, you just need the whole team there.
- kyleee 4y ago
  Yep so the decision should be decentralized to the teams and the case can be made for occasional in office days for inter team building, etc. maybe once a month for those within distance of office. Maybe a 2 days a quarter for those needing to fly in
- fmajid 4y ago
  Maybe the magic number 3 was chosen because it guarantees any pair of teams will have at least one day of the week in common, assuming the 3 days are all the same for all members of each team, but not necessarily across teams.
a2tech 4y ago
The only way that ends up working is everyone joins the meeting remotely...even if its from their desk in the office. People seem to like that anyway so they're not crammed into some hot (or icy cold) conference room with 10 people you'd rather not be stacked on top of
- jareklupinski 4y ago
  yikes, imagine an open office plan, where everyone is on a different meeting/call at the same time
  - malloci 4y ago
    Nothing to imagine. That's the way it was before the pandemic and the way it will be once my company adopts this strategy as well
  - wkat4242 4y ago
    That's what it's like in our office. I never get any work done on the day I have to come there.
- notyourwork 4y ago
  No not everyone likes that.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
theshrike79 4y ago
> Have you ever been on a Zoom call where half the people are in a conference room and the other half are working from home and calling in individually? Every day. Works just fine if everyone agrees to and follows a few ground rules. We name a facilitator for each meeting who tracks who has their hand up and if there are messages in the zoom chat. But if you're in a call with complete randoms, then it can be a mess.
trts 4y ago
It also kind of dictates that the employee dedicates square footage in his or her home for workspace, but also has to deal with commute, attire, transit schedules etc. Yes, I can just elect to do 5 days/wk in office, but it seems like at least one of those days will be a pointless commute to interact with no one, plus all the other negative things about commuting. Being in Seattle I know a _lot_ of people who have made lifestyle decisions about where to live and what kind of house to live in based on the assumption that WFH (specifically at Amazon) would persist. It's going to be somewhat disruptive and seems like another de facto layoff. However with this kind of layoff you lose people who have the most alternatives first.
- notyourwork 4y ago
  > to live and what kind of house to live in based on the assumption that WFH (specifically at Amazon) would persist. That’s a silly assumption considering what has been communicated thus far.
  - saagarjha 4y ago
    When I talked to Amazon they told me that my role would be remote and I could choose whether to come in or not. I didn’t join but if I did this seems like a pretty reasonable assumption to me?
XorNot 4y ago
My first actual job in the industry, we were all in the office but the stand ups were conducted entirely over Google Meet by video from our desks each morning. This worked great: headphones, mics and mute ensured common office noise didn't dominate, everyone could hear clearly, and the meeting didn't disrupt any flow you were in at the time.
ricardobayes 4y ago
I do calls regularly with US clients and constantly amazed how bad the average Internet connection is over there. I'd say it's one of the biggest factors why WFH can't really work there. Here in Europe what you mention was commonplace even before covid, senior people would regularly call in to an in-person meeting and it always worked fine. We used jabra stuff exclusively and it worked out well.
- konschubert 4y ago
  It’s not about internet speed. It’s about room reverb. It’s fine for the people in the room, terrible for the people calling in. You can fix it by proofing the room with soft audio mats on the walls but somehow nobody wants to do this.
  - batch12 4y ago
    Better audio equipment can help too. We don't have padding in our many conference rooms, and do t have this issue.
- OJFord 4y ago
  Are you sure it's not just the latency compared to talking to your more local clients? i.e. that yours doesn't seem as crap to them? (I'm also in Europe fwiw, not defending national pride in ISPs!)
- robswc 4y ago
  I've worked with 100s of clients in the US and we rarely ever had internet issues. At most it was just someone dialing in or something dropping connection. What _is_ a problem (and maybe what OP meant) is when people that aren't talking leave their mics open causing awful effects.
seydor 4y ago
superficially it seems hybrid work cannot exist. Having an office where people are videoconferencing is madness. Fully remote is a stable equilibrium point, the sooner we adapt the better
wildrhythms 4y ago
They've been trying this at my workplace for a few months. "3 days in-office" actually means everybody piles in on Tues, Wed, Thurs, making it impossible to find a meeting room on those days, and (it's a huge building with other companies) making the elevators slow and overcrowded as hell. It's a terrible 'solution' to a 'problem' that I'm not convinced even exists.

by jawns 4y ago

mtoner23 4y ago

Most companies ive seen who do this, strongly recommend everyone prioritze coming in tues wed thurs. Sure the office is vacant for 2 days, but its already vacant on the weekends and that doesnt bother anyone.

Ancalagon 4y ago
And so everyone schedules there new job interviews on Monday and Friday

hideo 4y ago

> Unless everyone in the org works the same three days a week in-office Amazon had a culture of small teams (≤15 people) being somewhat independent. I would imagine that you don't need _the whole org_ there, you just need the whole team there.

kyleee 4y ago
Yep so the decision should be decentralized to the teams and the case can be made for occasional in office days for inter team building, etc. maybe once a month for those within distance of office. Maybe a 2 days a quarter for those needing to fly in
fmajid 4y ago
Maybe the magic number 3 was chosen because it guarantees any pair of teams will have at least one day of the week in common, assuming the 3 days are all the same for all members of each team, but not necessarily across teams.

a2tech 4y ago

The only way that ends up working is everyone joins the meeting remotely...even if its from their desk in the office. People seem to like that anyway so they're not crammed into some hot (or icy cold) conference room with 10 people you'd rather not be stacked on top of

jareklupinski 4y ago
yikes, imagine an open office plan, where everyone is on a different meeting/call at the same time
- malloci 4y ago
  Nothing to imagine. That's the way it was before the pandemic and the way it will be once my company adopts this strategy as well
- wkat4242 4y ago
  That's what it's like in our office. I never get any work done on the day I have to come there.
notyourwork 4y ago
No not everyone likes that.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

theshrike79 4y ago

> Have you ever been on a Zoom call where half the people are in a conference room and the other half are working from home and calling in individually? Every day. Works just fine if everyone agrees to and follows a few ground rules. We name a facilitator for each meeting who tracks who has their hand up and if there are messages in the zoom chat. But if you're in a call with complete randoms, then it can be a mess.

trts 4y ago

It also kind of dictates that the employee dedicates square footage in his or her home for workspace, but also has to deal with commute, attire, transit schedules etc. Yes, I can just elect to do 5 days/wk in office, but it seems like at least one of those days will be a pointless commute to interact with no one, plus all the other negative things about commuting. Being in Seattle I know a _lot_ of people who have made lifestyle decisions about where to live and what kind of house to live in based on the assumption that WFH (specifically at Amazon) would persist. It's going to be somewhat disruptive and seems like another de facto layoff. However with this kind of layoff you lose people who have the most alternatives first.

notyourwork 4y ago
> to live and what kind of house to live in based on the assumption that WFH (specifically at Amazon) would persist. That’s a silly assumption considering what has been communicated thus far.
- saagarjha 4y ago
  When I talked to Amazon they told me that my role would be remote and I could choose whether to come in or not. I didn’t join but if I did this seems like a pretty reasonable assumption to me?

XorNot 4y ago

My first actual job in the industry, we were all in the office but the stand ups were conducted entirely over Google Meet by video from our desks each morning. This worked great: headphones, mics and mute ensured common office noise didn't dominate, everyone could hear clearly, and the meeting didn't disrupt any flow you were in at the time.

ricardobayes 4y ago

I do calls regularly with US clients and constantly amazed how bad the average Internet connection is over there. I'd say it's one of the biggest factors why WFH can't really work there. Here in Europe what you mention was commonplace even before covid, senior people would regularly call in to an in-person meeting and it always worked fine. We used jabra stuff exclusively and it worked out well.

konschubert 4y ago
It’s not about internet speed. It’s about room reverb. It’s fine for the people in the room, terrible for the people calling in. You can fix it by proofing the room with soft audio mats on the walls but somehow nobody wants to do this.
- batch12 4y ago
  Better audio equipment can help too. We don't have padding in our many conference rooms, and do t have this issue.
OJFord 4y ago
Are you sure it's not just the latency compared to talking to your more local clients? i.e. that yours doesn't seem as crap to them? (I'm also in Europe fwiw, not defending national pride in ISPs!)
robswc 4y ago
I've worked with 100s of clients in the US and we rarely ever had internet issues. At most it was just someone dialing in or something dropping connection. What _is_ a problem (and maybe what OP meant) is when people that aren't talking leave their mics open causing awful effects.

seydor 4y ago

superficially it seems hybrid work cannot exist. Having an office where people are videoconferencing is madness. Fully remote is a stable equilibrium point, the sooner we adapt the better

wildrhythms 4y ago

They've been trying this at my workplace for a few months. "3 days in-office" actually means everybody piles in on Tues, Wed, Thurs, making it impossible to find a meeting room on those days, and (it's a huge building with other companies) making the elevators slow and overcrowded as hell. It's a terrible 'solution' to a 'problem' that I'm not convinced even exists.