3 ms·

> The implication that some people just live at a hotel for part of their life is still, I feel, like 20x better a quality of life than where we were pre-pandem

> The implication that some people just live at a hotel for part of their life is still, I feel, like 20x better a quality of life than where we were pre-pandemic with commuting. But it's still bloody weird. For a long time now, it's been not-weird for a lot of people. Within the realm of tech jobs, it's not-weird at some large companies to have folks travel, so everyone crunching on one project can be together to work on it. For certain types of IT equipment (mainframes, supercomputers, big tape libraries, and more), it's not weird for support and installing engineers to travel from location to location, working on service calls or new installs. For electricians with high-voltage experience, it's not weird to travel to where a new data center is being built, or other facility that needs major electrical work done under time constraints. And then your have pilots, railroaders, long-distance truckers, etc..

darth_avocado 3y ago
Well then pay for it. Requiring to travel but not paying for it is the part that’s problematic, not the travel part.
- CaliforniaKarl 3y ago
  The jobs I listed do pay for it, either directly (reimbursing hotel costs) or indirectly (for example, in per-mile trucking rates). I don't think the Google program referenced in this article are for people who are traveling out of their normal work area (like, someone traveling from New York to Mountain View). It's targeted toward employees already local to the Bay Area.
jauntywundrkind 3y ago
I'm upvoting because I see your point generally & it's good to keep in mind in general. The main constrast is that those are all events. They're for a reason. This is a steady state situation: every week you'll come back to the Bay area, work a normal in office week, then leave. Not because there's any real reason, but just because those are the arbitrary rules.

darth_avocado 3y ago

Well then pay for it. Requiring to travel but not paying for it is the part that’s problematic, not the travel part.

CaliforniaKarl 3y ago
The jobs I listed do pay for it, either directly (reimbursing hotel costs) or indirectly (for example, in per-mile trucking rates). I don't think the Google program referenced in this article are for people who are traveling out of their normal work area (like, someone traveling from New York to Mountain View). It's targeted toward employees already local to the Bay Area.

jauntywundrkind 3y ago

I'm upvoting because I see your point generally & it's good to keep in mind in general. The main constrast is that those are all events. They're for a reason. This is a steady state situation: every week you'll come back to the Bay area, work a normal in office week, then leave. Not because there's any real reason, but just because those are the arbitrary rules.