EDIT: On average, WFH folks save 5 hours a week by not having commute. That means folks going into a workplace work 5 hours more. That's not even including all of the other perks/flexibility/cost savings WFH provides.
By staying home and giving up my office, I am taking on the cost burden of the work facilities (office space, internet, etc). These were previously paid by the employer and are now paid by me. I should be compensated.
I might save money by not commuting, but that expense has NOT been transferred to my employer -- it's GONE. I saved that money and nobody has to pay for my commute now.
Curious, what do you mean? I was WFH from 2006 to 2021, and I feel like the commute improved a bit over that time with the new vehicles and navigation apps, but otherwise not much changed, so maybe I miss something that was better immediately pre-pandemic?
(Re-reading, offices are also poorer experiences for many people post-Covid given that a lot of people aren't there.)
In both cases the employee factors in those expenses into the active rate they charge. If pay generally remained the same when moving to the home (and in cases when returning to the office), it seems the cost is generally deemed equivalent.
Most employees do not have the luxury and privilege to be able to demand a raise any time they feel like they deserve one, and actually get it—either directly, from their current employer, or indirectly, by changing jobs.
Yes, this includes tech employees. Remember, we don't all work within the Silicon Valley bubble.
It does not. There are far too many constraints on people's employment and the information they have for it to be amenable to "free market theory".
https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/how-small-business-owners-can-d...
People with short commutes would end up picking up the slack for those with long commutes, which could create some tension in the workplace. Why should those who are actually in the office working get compensated at the same rate as someone doing 20% less due to their shorter in-office work day?
That would only be a starting point, though. Because as others have already pointed out, employers still aren't compensating on-site employees for the time they spend commuting -OR- the time wasted preparing for the commute. The average one-way commute time in the US is just under 30 minutes. But in order to get to work at 9:00am, I used to have to wake up at 7:30am. That's an extra 1.5hrs per day, on top of the 1hrs spent commuting.
Finally, there's the human cost associated with working in the office. I didn't have time to help my kid get ready for school; he had to take the bus, which (yep) costs more money than if I could just drive him. When I got home, I usually missed dinner with my wife & kid. And I'd rarely have time to take care of all the daily chores: laundry, dishes, grocery shopping. Which means that once the weekend finally does arrive, I have to spend my free time working to take care of those remaining chores.
Now that I work from home, I can roll out of bed, drive my son to school, shower, get coffee, & show up to work at 9:00am every day. I can attend non-participant meetings while also doing laundry or dishes, while wearing a wireless headset. My cat spends part of his days in my office, which makes the work days feel less like work. I can grab a late lunch, pickup my son from school, & be home in same time it'd normally take me to get lunch downtown. I can make my own lunch at home, too, which is usually healthier & costs way less than eating near the office. When I'm done at work, I can actually have dinner with my family now. And when the week is over, I can actually spend most of my free time doing stuff I want to do, besides chores.
Honestly, I'm not convinced that employers could ever fairly compensate workers for what it costs us to commute. But forcing them to pay some of that price, instead of placing the majority of that burden on workers' shoulders, would be a start.
What preparation do you need for the commute that you wouldn't need working from home?
Any why do those preparations need 1 whole hour? When I'm in a rush, it takes me about 10 minutes from getting out of bed to being out the door.
You can pop back down to the kitchen at 9:15 and grab a breakfast to bring back to your seat.
You can hear the dog barking to get back in right from your desk, rather than having to wait for them to be done, then put them in the crate, before you go.
You know that the route to your desk won't have a random delay of 0-20 minutes, so you have to leave early just to guarantee arriving on time.
You know that there won't be a line at the coffee.
Even ignoring all those little improvements, there's a big difference between "the maximum speed I can get from bed to door in an emergency" and "the speed I am comfortable moving to get ready to go every morning of every workday."
You get what you negotiate, not what you sacrifice. If you feel you should be paid extra for going to the office (I agree), demand so!
Honestly, I have always felt that this would be true in any reasonable society. I'm a software engineer and I frequently think about what an absurd power structure we manage to maintain, in which those of us fortunate enough to sit at desks can keep the lower classes oppressed in this way. It seems very unstable to me.
I do agree that there's something wrong. But the reason it's structured this way is exactly because it's stable. It is what you get by letting people settle with minimum interference.
having less money than others doesn't make you oppressed
Wages are completely eclipsed by wealth, a far more significant differentiator.
"We treat these people poorly" isn't synonymous with, "Gee, I'd really like to be treated poorly."
If we think less about the asymmetry between employers and employees, and think they are 2 parties entering into an agreement, the employee also has to contribute something to their work. They are bringing in their expertise and availability, how that is achieved is a matter of agreement. If the agreement said your availability to be in the office is up to you, then you are free to optimize on your side how to optimally achieve this.
I have seen people choose to live far away in better condition, trading for longer commute time, and vice versa. Why should it not be your responsibility? Ie if employer pay for commute time and possibly cost, then the incentive for me is to live as far away as possible.
I mean I would have liked this too but it isn't realistic beyond what some companies have already been doing for years before covid, which is to pay for monthly public transit passes or towards the cost of it.
On the flipside it would mean companies limiting who is allowed to be in an office if that became mandatory. You live more than 15 min from the office? Sorry, WFH for you!
Factory job that absolutely can't be done WFH? You better come live in our communal housing where you have 5 min walk time to work or you are not getting that job!