WFH hybrid and remote keep losing ground

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fully remote is a huge PiTA for companies as far as taxes, workers comp, unemployment insurance and state/local pay/benefits regulation. If everyone is in 3 days/wk, they are majority employed in the company’s home state so they don’t need to worry about other jurisdictions.

Also DC council put a huge tax on parking subsidies which is why you all lost your parking (unless you are fed or your employer owns the garage).

Why is that my problem? Plenty of software out there that will manage all of the taxes lol

LOL absolutely true. Any mid size company with any presence outside of one state handles the minutiae of payroll and state taxes easily. The previous poster is out of tune with the real issues

Nope. I’m a lawyer that does HR work. It’s not just the state taxes (which is NbD if your company uses an outside vendor like ADP but a PITA if they do it in-house) but also the WC and UI and complying with each state’s arcane rules about sick leave accrual, paid family leave, vacation, terminal pay, etc. especially if people are working from places like California which has a lot of rules. If it’s a big National company or a company set up as fully remote, they can handle it but most companies that are currently based in just one or two states don’t want to have to figure out compliance for every possible jurisdiction. And with lawyers it’s an additional burden with bar requirements, out of state practice, etc. depending on inustries some companies may also be required to register to do business in those states where employees have a home office.

+1million
The ignorance on this topic is astounding. Most people have no idea how hard it is for employers to comply with states rules. The US laws are simply not set up for people to work remotely anywhere they please. If people are looking for a villain in the RTO debate its your federal and state government. The cost to be compliant is outrageous. We just had a client that had to let 3 people go because they moved to a state that made it hard to do business. Another client we advised to institute geoblocking so that their systems could only be accessed by people in states where they were licensed to do business.
The WFH crowd cannot be reasoned with!

Different lawyer and you with are so on point. I’ve been surprised that companies didn’t put limits on from the beginning to avoid the need for mumtijurisdictional compliance.

I wish my firm, like other firms, limited where partners could move. I'm required to pay state taxes in a ridiculous number of jurisdictions. Even if the composite return is useable, it's ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You will never be promoted if you don't show up in the office and be seen.

LOL this is so false. I’ve seen more promotions during the pandemic/WFH era than I did in office. Including myself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fully remote is a huge PiTA for companies as far as taxes, workers comp, unemployment insurance and state/local pay/benefits regulation. If everyone is in 3 days/wk, they are majority employed in the company’s home state so they don’t need to worry about other jurisdictions.

Also DC council put a huge tax on parking subsidies which is why you all lost your parking (unless you are fed or your employer owns the garage).

Why is that my problem? Plenty of software out there that will manage all of the taxes lol

LOL absolutely true. Any mid size company with any presence outside of one state handles the minutiae of payroll and state taxes easily. The previous poster is out of tune with the real issues

Nope. I’m a lawyer that does HR work. It’s not just the state taxes (which is NbD if your company uses an outside vendor like ADP but a PITA if they do it in-house) but also the WC and UI and complying with each state’s arcane rules about sick leave accrual, paid family leave, vacation, terminal pay, etc. especially if people are working from places like California which has a lot of rules. If it’s a big National company or a company set up as fully remote, they can handle it but most companies that are currently based in just one or two states don’t want to have to figure out compliance for every possible jurisdiction. And with lawyers it’s an additional burden with bar requirements, out of state practice, etc. depending on inustries some companies may also be required to register to do business in those states where employees have a home office.

+1million
The ignorance on this topic is astounding. Most people have no idea how hard it is for employers to comply with states rules. The US laws are simply not set up for people to work remotely anywhere they please. If people are looking for a villain in the RTO debate its your federal and state government. The cost to be compliant is outrageous. We just had a client that had to let 3 people go because they moved to a state that made it hard to do business. Another client we advised to institute geoblocking so that their systems could only be accessed by people in states where they were licensed to do business.
The WFH crowd cannot be reasoned with!

Different lawyer and you with are so on point. I’ve been surprised that companies didn’t put limits on from the beginning to avoid the need for mumtijurisdictional compliance.

I wish my firm, like other firms, limited where partners could move. I'm required to pay state taxes in a ridiculous number of jurisdictions. Even if the composite return is useable, it's ridiculous.

The problem is that there was no time to think this through. If you were slow to adapt to work from home people would call you a covid denier and all sorts of names. So now what is we have is a system where people refuse to hear even legitimate WFM criticisms. Employees don't seem to realize or care that the employer is on the hook if they run afoul of some state law that they weren't aware of. I don't blame employers for fighting back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You will never be promoted if you don't show up in the office and be seen.

LOL this is so false. I’ve seen more promotions during the pandemic/WFH era than I did in office. Including myself.

That’s just to keep everyone from quitting. People seem to be getting whatever they want. Doesn’t mean they’re all that great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been fully remote for 20 years, as have many people I know in my field (tech).

You've been lucky. I don't believe the fully remote tech jobs receiving Federal funding are actually jobs that are important to national security. Or there's no way you would be allowed to work remotely without using government furnished equipment, some type of common access card to sign in, etc. I've seen the kind of "tech jobs" that are remote. Those can easily be outsourced if they weren't receiving Federal funding. Those are just jobs to fuel the Military Industrial Complex.

[Anonymous]

I work for a F200 and of my team in DC, those of us who live in/near DC we come in 2-3 days week typically. Some of the team live in other states and are full time WFH. We have a pretty close team so coming into the office isn't a burden, frankly, it's enjoyable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finance and been 3 days a w2ek for months. We're starting to weed out those who don't want to come in. Shifting to an employers market very quickly.

Biglaw and same.

Yeah, no. I’m a partner at a V20 firm and we absolutely are not “weeding out” anyone for not coming to the office. Most of us don’t care. Those that do can see very clearly that only half (give or take) of partners and associates are complying. And it’s not necessarily the under performers. We haven’t fired a single person or even suggested doing so. Haven’t heard of another firm doing so either.

+1 a lot of our partners no longer live within a commutable distance to their office. Think NY market office now in FL.

Gee, I wonder why. Could it be that Florida doesn't have a state income tax so they get to keep $100k-$200k more that would go to NY State & NYC taxes? Cheaper to fly up to NYC to meet with clients and fellow partners than it is to live anywhere near NYC and pay the exorbitant taxes.