Companies are on the war path against remote work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities threatening to get rid of tax breaks for companies if they don’t RTO, because apparently small businesses are suffering, downtowns are becoming ghost towns, CRE values are plummeting & public transportation is being crime-filled due to normies no longer taking it.

Honestly, I am sick and tired if the FT WFH evangelists acting like these are not valid concerns. They are. Acting as if they are not is making the RTO worse. If you’re unwilling to meet halfway with hybrid, they’ll just make everyone come in all the time. The war path is over. People go back now.

How about those of us who have large commute costs. And time. I can either work the two extra hours or commute with them.

No one forced you to live far from your job

We had the house before the job and cannot afford to move. So, if you want me to commute I will do my 8 hours and that’s it. I’m not doing my normal extra and will use that time to commutevvv

Why did you seek and accept a job that was further from your home than you wanted to commute. You don't sound too bright.

I’m not going to comment on PP’s intelligence but I agree that people taking jobs far from home have very empty rings of pity from me. I work for the Government and so does my husband and we own a house in MoCo. We both commute around an hour. People I work with who make more than I do live further and say they can’t afford anything closer. To me. Who makes several tens of thousands less than they do. I don’t know their financial situation so I don’t comment but it’s weird to me that they think that matters to me. I nod and say “oh okay” in a sympathetic tone when they say it, but also….really? REALLY?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s most disturbing about this conversation is the number of people who are deeply suspicious about what other people do, to the point where they are paranoid and fantasizing about their behavior.

It’s very similar to the attitude some conservatives have about welfare, being obsessed with the notion that someone else is getting some benefit.

It’s a peculiar/mental illness way of thinking. Remember the adage that you should only look in someone else’s bowl to be sure they have enough. Or, more simply, you worry about you.

Don’t post about how your personal Liberty is more important than the local business owners and how you don’t care if inner cities fall apart and then complain about conservatives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities threatening to get rid of tax breaks for companies if they don’t RTO, because apparently small businesses are suffering, downtowns are becoming ghost towns, CRE values are plummeting & public transportation is being crime-filled due to normies no longer taking it.

Honestly, I am sick and tired if the FT WFH evangelists acting like these are not valid concerns. They are. Acting as if they are not is making the RTO worse. If you’re unwilling to meet halfway with hybrid, they’ll just make everyone come in all the time. The war path is over. People go back now.

For people who believe their WFH productivity is just as good as in-office, these are NOT valid concerns. They’re somebody whining “who moved my cheese”. If you don’t believe WFH is productive, THAT’S a valid concern. Not some desire to prop up zombie businesses.

My spouse works more hours from home than on commute days. You can goof off in the office too.

I think that productivity need not be 10 hours a day and think I’d rather spend those 2 hours listening to podcasts in my car. The increased productivity of WFH is not really sustainable.

[Anonymous]

My circle of friends are still fully remote or hybrid… I don’t know anyone going in four or five days a week.

I will never go back to a job that requires more than probably once a week in the office… But I am late 40s making really good money and my skills lend themselves really well to remote work, I do a lot of data analysis and writing. If something happens to this job, I will probably spend the rest of my career just consulting on my own.

My (tech) company has a fully remote option, teams get together in person regularly but not weekly. There are some folks that like coming into the office a few days a week and for them, they do catered lunch and things, but we gave up a bunch of our space and we can figure the office mostly for meeting in groups.

The office concept will never go away, but I think you are delusional If you don’t see that it is revolutionizing, and it’s never going to go back to the way it was. The world has just changed too much.

[Anonymous]

"War path?"

Dramatic much, OP?

Put on pants, get to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities threatening to get rid of tax breaks for companies if they don’t RTO, because apparently small businesses are suffering, downtowns are becoming ghost towns, CRE values are plummeting & public transportation is being crime-filled due to normies no longer taking it.

Honestly, I am sick and tired if the FT WFH evangelists acting like these are not valid concerns. They are. Acting as if they are not is making the RTO worse. If you’re unwilling to meet halfway with hybrid, they’ll just make everyone come in all the time. The war path is over. People go back now.

How about those of us who have large commute costs. And time. I can either work the two extra hours or commute with them.

No one forced you to live far from your job

We had the house before the job and cannot afford to move. So, if you want me to commute I will do my 8 hours and that’s it. I’m not doing my normal extra and will use that time to commutevvv

Why did you seek and accept a job that was further from your home than you wanted to commute. You don't sound too bright.

I’m not going to comment on PP’s intelligence but I agree that people taking jobs far from home have very empty rings of pity from me. I work for the Government and so does my husband and we own a house in MoCo. We both commute around an hour. People I work with who make more than I do live further and say they can’t afford anything closer. To me. Who makes several tens of thousands less than they do. I don’t know their financial situation so I don’t comment but it’s weird to me that they think that matters to me. I nod and say “oh okay” in a sympathetic tone when they say it, but also….really? REALLY?

There are a lot of factors that go into where you choose to live and work. If you have kids, schools and neighborhoods are a big factor. If you are a dual income couple, you have to compromise on where to live versus where both people work. Not everyone has a job that can be found in every city. It's all complicated and most people are just doing the best that they can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My circle of friends are still fully remote or hybrid… I don’t know anyone going in four or five days a week.

I will never go back to a job that requires more than probably once a week in the office… But I am late 40s making really good money and my skills lend themselves really well to remote work, I do a lot of data analysis and writing. If something happens to this job, I will probably spend the rest of my career just consulting on my own.

My (tech) company has a fully remote option, teams get together in person regularly but not weekly. There are some folks that like coming into the office a few days a week and for them, they do catered lunch and things, but we gave up a bunch of our space and we can figure the office mostly for meeting in groups.

The office concept will never go away, but I think you are delusional If you don’t see that it is revolutionizing, and it’s never going to go back to the way it was. The world has just changed too much.

I agree with you. And you make a good point that I think gets lost in these discussions. Rarely is this a choice between "never step foot in an office" and "work fully onsite five days a week forever."

Most organizations are landing on a middle ground hybrid approach, and making adjustments as they learn. This is entirely appropriate.

[Anonymous]

If I’m going to RTO, I refuse to do anything after hours from home, either. If I’m not allowed to WFH, that means I’m not required to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I’m going to RTO, I refuse to do anything after hours from home, either. If I’m not allowed to WFH, that means I’m not required to.

Does this apply only if you are required to go in five days a week? What if it is 2? or3?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I’m going to RTO, I refuse to do anything after hours from home, either. If I’m not allowed to WFH, that means I’m not required to.

Does this apply only if you are required to go in five days a week? What if it is 2? or3?

m

On any of the days I’m required to go in. It’s basic logic. If WFH is bad, then it’s bad & I shouldn’t do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities threatening to get rid of tax breaks for companies if they don’t RTO, because apparently small businesses are suffering, downtowns are becoming ghost towns, CRE values are plummeting & public transportation is being crime-filled due to normies no longer taking it.

Honestly, I am sick and tired if the FT WFH evangelists acting like these are not valid concerns. They are. Acting as if they are not is making the RTO worse. If you’re unwilling to meet halfway with hybrid, they’ll just make everyone come in all the time. The war path is over. People go back now.

How about those of us who have large commute costs. And time. I can either work the two extra hours or commute with them.

No one forced you to live far from your job

We had the house before the job and cannot afford to move. So, if you want me to commute I will do my 8 hours and that’s it. I’m not doing my normal extra and will use that time to commutevvv

Why did you seek and accept a job that was further from your home than you wanted to commute. You don't sound too bright.

You don’t sound too bright yourself. People often take the job based on the situation at the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I’m going to RTO, I refuse to do anything after hours from home, either. If I’m not allowed to WFH, that means I’m not required to.

Does this apply only if you are required to go in five days a week? What if it is 2? or3?

m

On any of the days I’m required to go in. It’s basic logic. If WFH is bad, then it’s bad & I shouldn’t do it.

If your employer is allowing you to do both WFH and work onsite, how are they saying either is bad?

So if you go into the office on a Monday, you shut it down completely after 8 hours, but if you WFH on Tuesday you'll put in some extra hours in the evening? Just trying to see how this plays out in practice....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities threatening to get rid of tax breaks for companies if they don’t RTO, because apparently small businesses are suffering, downtowns are becoming ghost towns, CRE values are plummeting & public transportation is being crime-filled due to normies no longer taking it.

Honestly, I am sick and tired if the FT WFH evangelists acting like these are not valid concerns. They are. Acting as if they are not is making the RTO worse. If you’re unwilling to meet halfway with hybrid, they’ll just make everyone come in all the time. The war path is over. People go back now.

How about those of us who have large commute costs. And time. I can either work the two extra hours or commute with them.

No one forced you to live far from your job

We had the house before the job and cannot afford to move. So, if you want me to commute I will do my 8 hours and that’s it. I’m not doing my normal extra and will use that time to commutevvv

Why did you seek and accept a job that was further from your home than you wanted to commute. You don't sound too bright.

I’m not going to comment on PP’s intelligence but I agree that people taking jobs far from home have very empty rings of pity from me. I work for the Government and so does my husband and we own a house in MoCo. We both commute around an hour. People I work with who make more than I do live further and say they can’t afford anything closer. To me. Who makes several tens of thousands less than they do. I don’t know their financial situation so I don’t comment but it’s weird to me that they think that matters to me. I nod and say “oh okay” in a sympathetic tone when they say it, but also….really? REALLY?

You bought your house a 1000 years ago when it was much more affordable. Don’t act so smug and obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was driving over I-95 in the Fort Belvoir / Lorton area yesterday at around 2:30 pm and it was totally gridlocked. Just like the old days! I guess folks go into the office for a few hours then commute home to continue working from there. Is that considered hybrid?

I'm not in the DC area, but traffic here is heavy all the time. I don't know where everyone is going, but they are definitely out and about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I’m going to RTO, I refuse to do anything after hours from home, either. If I’m not allowed to WFH, that means I’m not required to.

Does this apply only if you are required to go in five days a week? What if it is 2? or3?

m

On any of the days I’m required to go in. It’s basic logic. If WFH is bad, then it’s bad & I shouldn’t do it.

If your employer is allowing you to do both WFH and work onsite, how are they saying either is bad?

So if you go into the office on a Monday, you shut it down completely after 8 hours, but if you WFH on Tuesday you'll put in some extra hours in the evening? Just trying to see how this plays out in practice....

Correct.

And if I’m RTO 5 days a week, I won’t put in any extra hours whatsoever.