4 ms·

I’ve talked with colleagues that have confirmed exactly what the parent comment is saying. They benefit from the external structure, routine, and separation of

I’ve talked with colleagues that have confirmed exactly what the parent comment is saying. They benefit from the external structure, routine, and separation of work/home life. Some people just don’t want to work next to their gaming PC, completely unsupervised. Others live alone and don’t live near their friends and family. Both these groups (can) suffer from a fully remote environment.

toomuchtodo 1mo ago
I fully support coworking spaces for folks who need the in person socialization (especially in the context of entry level and juniors), but I will leave the labor force entirely before I ever go back into an office (~12 years remote, ~25 years in tech). I have a partner and kids, coworkers are not my friends (we simply share a paycheck provider and a body of shared work), but I understand other lives and the needs of others differs. Your social needs are not my needs. I get to eat lunch with my partner every day, see my kids more, no commute, etc.
- jambalaya8 1mo ago
  Either at the company or at home (though I mean working at a coffee shop sometimes isn't so bad). Coworking spaces might help with socialization and some people need it but I am not sure how that benefits who you work for.
  - deleted 1mo ago
    [deleted]
  - dijksterhuis 1mo ago
    > Coworking spaces might help with socialization and some people need it but I am not sure how that benefits who you work for. because, as someone else i replied to in the thread points out, miserable employees perform worse.
    - jambalaya8 1mo ago
      I get that. I said as much. Though suggesting employers should have no say in where their employees work on generally work protected by intellectual property law is tricky. If they have an office, usually that is where they want you to work if the goal is an office setting. Some companies do not and rent out coworking space. Different.
      - ghaff 1mo ago
        Very anecdotally, it seems to go both ways. If there is a relatively local office, people are generally expected to go in. If there isn't, the employee often pays (but not always).
        jambalaya8 1mo ago
        I believe some tax accountants say it can be used as a write-off (just like a certain number of square feet of where you live, if it is only and demonstrably for that). But as far as preference, I would be surprised if a company with an office somewhere near would be pleased with you working in a coworking space. Maybe some but big companies, probably legal issues (VPN or not).
        ghaff 1mo ago
        My accountant always told me maybe but there are conditions and it's a red flag.
    - jambalaya8 1mo ago
      I am curious, do believe that a company or an employee is responsible for paying for a ersatz "coworking space" (ersatz, in that the employer did not choose that as a place for their employees to work)?
      - dijksterhuis 1mo ago
        me personally? the company up to a reasonable point. it’s the company’s responsibility to ensure they provide a suitable working space. then again i live in the UK where we actually have workers rights.
- guelo 1mo ago
  You also share a professional social network which is something you own separately from any company and I have found to be very valuable and strengthened by in-person work.
- phil21 1mo ago
  I've worked remote most of my career. Starting in the late 90's if you squint hard enough. I built my first little company as remote-first before we knew what to call it. I had to be very careful who I would hire, since only a relatively small percentage of folks (around a third, by my estimate) were ready and able to be self-motivated and disciplined enough to work remotely. And my company was built with remote work in mind from the ground up. Asynchronous comms, everything written down, very well established information systems and work process, etc. I then worked for a company that became remote by accident. They were obviously an in-person company that never once sat down to figure out a remote-first work culture. It was the most exhausting and unproductive work of my life. Constant meetings, almost no concept of async comms, etc. That company would have worked 1,000% better as an in-person traditional company and the lack of mature process or strict guidelines could have been papered over. My rule of thumb now is that any company that expects you to be on more than a very small handful of Zoom calls a week is not worth working for. If you need meetings to sync up work like that, you likely have horrible remote work infrastructure, tools, processes, and culture. It seems a number of companies somehow combine the absolutely worst aspects of in-person work with the worst aspects of remote work and expect to see good results. Now - my absolute favorite way to work - was when my little company got acquired by a larger company and I effectively ran a small division where we worked remotely, but came into the office if/when we felt like it. That worked because everyone else had to be in the office though, so it wasn't exactly fair. But man, being able to take a 15 minute train ride downtown to spend a day or two in the office each week if I felt like it after I woke up each morning was by far the best of both worlds for me. I could do different types of work in each location to sort of break up my week, and get the benefits of the in-person socialization and relationship building with the lack of scheduling stress and deep focus time remote working gives you. Still though. I cannot stress enough how shitty Zoom calls are. Anything to do with video calls will be completely banned from any org I run should I ever get the startup itch again. At least on the engineering side of things. Either in person meetings if you must, or phone calls so people don't need to be uselessly staring at a screen for hours each day. I've found that following an Open Source model of collaboration works well for remote companies. And it gave me a hiring pool of talent with demonstrable abilities to get shit done without needing to be in an office. No open source project is running daily standup video calls.

toomuchtodo 1mo ago

I fully support coworking spaces for folks who need the in person socialization (especially in the context of entry level and juniors), but I will leave the labor force entirely before I ever go back into an office (~12 years remote, ~25 years in tech). I have a partner and kids, coworkers are not my friends (we simply share a paycheck provider and a body of shared work), but I understand other lives and the needs of others differs. Your social needs are not my needs. I get to eat lunch with my partner every day, see my kids more, no commute, etc.

jambalaya8 1mo ago
Either at the company or at home (though I mean working at a coffee shop sometimes isn't so bad). Coworking spaces might help with socialization and some people need it but I am not sure how that benefits who you work for.
- deleted 1mo ago
  [deleted]
- dijksterhuis 1mo ago
  > Coworking spaces might help with socialization and some people need it but I am not sure how that benefits who you work for. because, as someone else i replied to in the thread points out, miserable employees perform worse.
  - jambalaya8 1mo ago
    I get that. I said as much. Though suggesting employers should have no say in where their employees work on generally work protected by intellectual property law is tricky. If they have an office, usually that is where they want you to work if the goal is an office setting. Some companies do not and rent out coworking space. Different.
    - ghaff 1mo ago
      Very anecdotally, it seems to go both ways. If there is a relatively local office, people are generally expected to go in. If there isn't, the employee often pays (but not always).
      - jambalaya8 1mo ago
        I believe some tax accountants say it can be used as a write-off (just like a certain number of square feet of where you live, if it is only and demonstrably for that). But as far as preference, I would be surprised if a company with an office somewhere near would be pleased with you working in a coworking space. Maybe some but big companies, probably legal issues (VPN or not).
        ghaff 1mo ago
        My accountant always told me maybe but there are conditions and it's a red flag.
  - jambalaya8 1mo ago
    I am curious, do believe that a company or an employee is responsible for paying for a ersatz "coworking space" (ersatz, in that the employer did not choose that as a place for their employees to work)?
    - dijksterhuis 1mo ago
      me personally? the company up to a reasonable point. it’s the company’s responsibility to ensure they provide a suitable working space. then again i live in the UK where we actually have workers rights.
guelo 1mo ago
You also share a professional social network which is something you own separately from any company and I have found to be very valuable and strengthened by in-person work.
phil21 1mo ago
I've worked remote most of my career. Starting in the late 90's if you squint hard enough. I built my first little company as remote-first before we knew what to call it. I had to be very careful who I would hire, since only a relatively small percentage of folks (around a third, by my estimate) were ready and able to be self-motivated and disciplined enough to work remotely. And my company was built with remote work in mind from the ground up. Asynchronous comms, everything written down, very well established information systems and work process, etc. I then worked for a company that became remote by accident. They were obviously an in-person company that never once sat down to figure out a remote-first work culture. It was the most exhausting and unproductive work of my life. Constant meetings, almost no concept of async comms, etc. That company would have worked 1,000% better as an in-person traditional company and the lack of mature process or strict guidelines could have been papered over. My rule of thumb now is that any company that expects you to be on more than a very small handful of Zoom calls a week is not worth working for. If you need meetings to sync up work like that, you likely have horrible remote work infrastructure, tools, processes, and culture. It seems a number of companies somehow combine the absolutely worst aspects of in-person work with the worst aspects of remote work and expect to see good results. Now - my absolute favorite way to work - was when my little company got acquired by a larger company and I effectively ran a small division where we worked remotely, but came into the office if/when we felt like it. That worked because everyone else had to be in the office though, so it wasn't exactly fair. But man, being able to take a 15 minute train ride downtown to spend a day or two in the office each week if I felt like it after I woke up each morning was by far the best of both worlds for me. I could do different types of work in each location to sort of break up my week, and get the benefits of the in-person socialization and relationship building with the lack of scheduling stress and deep focus time remote working gives you. Still though. I cannot stress enough how shitty Zoom calls are. Anything to do with video calls will be completely banned from any org I run should I ever get the startup itch again. At least on the engineering side of things. Either in person meetings if you must, or phone calls so people don't need to be uselessly staring at a screen for hours each day. I've found that following an Open Source model of collaboration works well for remote companies. And it gave me a hiring pool of talent with demonstrable abilities to get shit done without needing to be in an office. No open source project is running daily standup video calls.