64% would prefer to permanently WFH rather than get a $30k-a-year raise
forbes.com
forbes.com
Humans are animals. We stretch. We burp. We fart. We scratch ourselves. We eat. We drink. We dance. We might want to randomly punch something. We nap. We naturally do all sorts of things which are "unprofessional." When we get tired, we need a break to recoup and come back supercharged.
None of those interfere with getting stuff done.
I hate going to work in any job where I'm on display since I need to suppress all of that for 8 hours a day. More with most jobs.
I don't mind going in nearly as much if I have an office with a door which closes.
When I was an executive, I'd sometimes hold longer business meetings with people I knew well hiking, walking, on a kayak, or similar. Those were hyper-productive meetings compared to sitting in office chairs across a coffee table. It only worked for meetings which didn't need a whiteboard or computer, but that's a lot of meetings.
I won't say whether WFH or in-person is the future, but I suspect many traditional corporate practices won't survive.
In a team where one member might only be present in the office 1 or 2 days a week, i tend to talk to the other team members instead.
Steve jobs was also known for his walking meetings. I walk around during phone calls since I'm working remotely and it has improved my focus 100x.
Equivalent family house and lifestyle would need way more then that to live there.
jokes apart, if remote culture consolidates with different compensation and benefit packages compared with those in the office, we'll likely start to see lawsuits in that matter.
I think that's the take-away for employers here.
Intentionally make the default (come into work) option uncomfortable or inconvenient. Offer “upgrades” for more comfort (work from home) and convenience.
The question what price do people put on that convenience.
But on the other hand, WFH creates savings for employers so they are actually able to pay people more for the same overall cost as working from office, if they so wish (e.g. to attract top talents in a concurrential market)
If employers feel employees working from home are less valuable, and employees prefer working from home, it sounds logical this will results in lower compensation for WFH employees. Not sure what laws they would be breaching here, it's just the market at work. It doesn't even matter whether they are right or wrong, the market should take care of that.
Of course ofice vs home is often not like-for-like and it enables people to live in different locations.
Does it? When I'm working, I don't need that room during working hours for another purpose. I just work in it, tapping away and speaking into the microphone and so on, and when work is done, I use the room for sitting, reading, all that sort of thing; it's the lounge, I guess. Worked out fine so far.
But I think some people do not really envision a person in the tech industry with a family living in, like, a tiny studio apartment.
Where I live, that would suggest a household income of <$40K. Even if salaries are low here, entry level is more like $75K.
Are we talking about the SF bay area?
Same argument as before, I guess. I could sit in there working away quite happily. No extra room needed.
Sure, it's not the case for everyone, and some people share bedrooms, but the blanket statement that "working from home essentially requires permanent rental of a room on your house you might otherwise use for something else, or not need in the first place" is a massive generalisation that doesn't apply to many households in which people have bedrooms and in which there is a lounge.
Sure, add a desk, change the furniture layout. I'm saving 25% of my rent by not having to commute. It's a two-bed flat; between us, we have 50% of the rent to spend again each month on furniture, rearranging things, or just renting a place with two extra rooms. Not that we need them, with three rooms available to work in during the day (two bedrooms and a lounge). My experience is not uncommon and in no way do we essentially need more rooms to work in.
Here is how we can do it in 2021:
1. Poor people cannot afford to live close to the office (probably true)
2. Certain minority groups are poor (probably true)
3. Minority is likely to commute for longer time and distance
4. Commute kills people with road accidents
5. Accuse execs of racism and killing minority.
I imagine part of that is physically separating the micromanagers from their reports. Another big part is not putting everyone in a distracting cube farm.
From wiki- " Police officers may be particularly badly suited for some community issues, such as mental health crises.[50] However, 1 in 4 people who are killed by the police have severe mental illness. Some activists argue that, if someone is experiencing a mental health crisis, and if there is no emergent threat to themselves or other people, mental health professionals may be more adept and capable responders. Furthermore, if more funds were diverted to help treat and support those with mental health issues, there could be better outcomes"
Also he's talking as if defunding(which he thinks) has already happened, what a dimwit.