3 ms·

WFH: No commute. Disabled people can work. Less micro plastics in the environment from car tires. Potentially lower greenhouse emissions. No office means n

WFH: No commute. Disabled people can work. Less micro plastics in the environment from car tires. Potentially lower greenhouse emissions. No office means no costs from rent, heating/cooling, cleaning, furniture, etc etc. Spending time around your family. (Although on that last one, I really dislike kids screaming in the background of conference calls) Edited to add: I wonder how to compare energy usage or emissions? You have less road and office use, but more home use. I'm puzzled by the people in this thread that seem to be saying "everyone must RTO because I want to". It's great that you personally want to work in an office and I wish you every success, but why drag people to the office if they want to work from home?

SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
Why didn’t you list the negatives? And in a John Stewart Mill way, list the negatives in their most sincere and effective forms by the people that truly believe them. Not just your take that you happen to easily to refute. Steelman RTO from the point of a company dealing with WFH abuse and I’ll think you are more serious.
- nerevarthelame 3y ago
  I manage a team of 20 people who are fully remote. We conduct audits of their work to ensure it's up to par. It's the same thing I'd be doing if they were in the office. I don't have any notable issues with WFH abuse. My old boss ran a drop-shipping company with staff, multiple warehouses, and millions in revenue during the working hours of his primary job at the company we both worked for. What's your point? Can you explain some of the WFH abuse you think is rampant, and how those problems wouldn't also be relevant in an office environment?
- bloopernova 3y ago
  Why are you so invested in saying people "abuse" WFH? You've made several comments in this thread stating as such. What is your definition of abusing WFH? How much time do you think a person should work each week?

SV_BubbleTime 3y ago

Why didn’t you list the negatives? And in a John Stewart Mill way, list the negatives in their most sincere and effective forms by the people that truly believe them. Not just your take that you happen to easily to refute. Steelman RTO from the point of a company dealing with WFH abuse and I’ll think you are more serious.

nerevarthelame 3y ago
I manage a team of 20 people who are fully remote. We conduct audits of their work to ensure it's up to par. It's the same thing I'd be doing if they were in the office. I don't have any notable issues with WFH abuse. My old boss ran a drop-shipping company with staff, multiple warehouses, and millions in revenue during the working hours of his primary job at the company we both worked for. What's your point? Can you explain some of the WFH abuse you think is rampant, and how those problems wouldn't also be relevant in an office environment?
bloopernova 3y ago
Why are you so invested in saying people "abuse" WFH? You've made several comments in this thread stating as such. What is your definition of abusing WFH? How much time do you think a person should work each week?