4 ms·

I see a lot of comments here, but what I don't see is anybody speaking the quiet part out loud. No judgment here to those who did, but during the pandemic, sev

I see a lot of comments here, but what I don't see is anybody speaking the quiet part out loud. No judgment here to those who did, but during the pandemic, several people, including several software engineers, took the opportunity to work multiple jobs. Notably, at Equifax, which is probably the worst place to do it because they have records of most people's employment. https://www.businessinsider.com/equifax-used-itsproduct-to-fire-employees-working-two-jobs-2022-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/equifax-used-itsproduct-to-f... This is the main reason. Management doesn't want you pulling 2 salaries, even if you could, so they are trying to make it difficult so you don't even try. In addition, if WFH becomes normalized, there is a lot of debt floating office buildings in major cities, and there will be a great renegotiation. This is really bad for senior management, the stock market, transit systems and the budget of most cities. So most people that manage you and manage your managers are aligned against you. https://nypost.com/2024/08/02/real-estate/huge-midtown-office-building-sells-for-a-97-discount/ https://nypost.com/2024/08/02/real-estate/huge-midtown-offic... Lastly, and I'm only mentioning this because I think it needs to be said, but I think that most people who are pushing WFH are short sighted. If it is proved conclusively that software development can be managed and completed remotely, then it will devalue your labour as you are forced to compete with smart people in countries with significantly lower housing and energy costs. Anecdotally, this is already occurring.

iLoveOncall 2y ago
> This is the main reason. No it's not. According to your own article, Equifax fired 24 out of 10,000 employees for working multiple jobs. That's 0.24% of their employees. This doesn't even come close to being a factor in their decision. > there is a lot of debt floating office buildings in major cities, and there will be a great renegotiation. This is really bad for senior management, the stock market, transit systems and the budget of most cities. Why is it bad for senior management, outside of senior management for commercial real estate? You think Google gives a flying fuck about the fact that there are empty buildings and that it's costing money to the few massive companies who own most of the commercial real estate in the US and in the world? No. Do you think the stock market cares? No. > If it is proved conclusively that software development can be managed and completed remotely, then it will devalue your labour as you are forced to compete with smart people in countries with significantly lower housing and energy costs. You say it yourself, "Anecdotally, this is already occurring", so why isn't it generalized? Why is there still ANY line of code written in the US or in western Europe? Because outsourcing simply doesn't work for the vast majority of software.
- willhslade 2y ago
  I appreciate the pushback. Fine, if it isn't the real reason, what is the real reason? Why can't any executives, at any organization, proffer a reason that makes sense?
  - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
    Executives at pretty much every organization offer the same sensible reason. Working in an office together greatly reduces the cost of collaboration, which is valuable in its own right as well as leading to more inventiveness and better mentorship. The problem is that, as you can see a bit upthread, a lot of ICs don't notice or don't care about the collaborative aspects of their job. To someone who feels that writing out lots of code is their real job, that sensible reason sounds like a weird deflection, since "reduces the cost of collaboration" means by definition that I'm getting interrupted or distracted when I could be heads-down programming.
    - kj4211cash 2y ago
      There's very little in the way of evidence demonstrating your "sensible" hypothesis. On the other hand, a lot of ICs have experience working in office and at home and have noticed we do better work at home.
      - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
        The question is what you mean when you say "better work". Are you able to unblock new grads more quickly at home? Are you able to achieve consensus on a new product direction more quickly at home? Or are you able to write code better at home, because you can keep the the new grads and product managers in your Slack backlog for as many hours as you need to maximize code throughput? I don't want to put words in your mouth, but every time I've had this conversation in the past it's been that last option.
        dumbledoren 2y ago

iLoveOncall 2y ago

> This is the main reason. No it's not. According to your own article, Equifax fired 24 out of 10,000 employees for working multiple jobs. That's 0.24% of their employees. This doesn't even come close to being a factor in their decision. > there is a lot of debt floating office buildings in major cities, and there will be a great renegotiation. This is really bad for senior management, the stock market, transit systems and the budget of most cities. Why is it bad for senior management, outside of senior management for commercial real estate? You think Google gives a flying fuck about the fact that there are empty buildings and that it's costing money to the few massive companies who own most of the commercial real estate in the US and in the world? No. Do you think the stock market cares? No. > If it is proved conclusively that software development can be managed and completed remotely, then it will devalue your labour as you are forced to compete with smart people in countries with significantly lower housing and energy costs. You say it yourself, "Anecdotally, this is already occurring", so why isn't it generalized? Why is there still ANY line of code written in the US or in western Europe? Because outsourcing simply doesn't work for the vast majority of software.

willhslade 2y ago
I appreciate the pushback. Fine, if it isn't the real reason, what is the real reason? Why can't any executives, at any organization, proffer a reason that makes sense?
- SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
  Executives at pretty much every organization offer the same sensible reason. Working in an office together greatly reduces the cost of collaboration, which is valuable in its own right as well as leading to more inventiveness and better mentorship. The problem is that, as you can see a bit upthread, a lot of ICs don't notice or don't care about the collaborative aspects of their job. To someone who feels that writing out lots of code is their real job, that sensible reason sounds like a weird deflection, since "reduces the cost of collaboration" means by definition that I'm getting interrupted or distracted when I could be heads-down programming.
  - kj4211cash 2y ago
    There's very little in the way of evidence demonstrating your "sensible" hypothesis. On the other hand, a lot of ICs have experience working in office and at home and have noticed we do better work at home.
    - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
      The question is what you mean when you say "better work". Are you able to unblock new grads more quickly at home? Are you able to achieve consensus on a new product direction more quickly at home? Or are you able to write code better at home, because you can keep the the new grads and product managers in your Slack backlog for as many hours as you need to maximize code throughput? I don't want to put words in your mouth, but every time I've had this conversation in the past it's been that last option.
      - dumbledoren 2y ago