37 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

Written communication is superior to verbal communication, especially when documented facts are important moving forward and double especially when $$ is involved.

 

Zoom calls keep freezing up.  Lots of 12" Spinal Tap stonehenges.  

 

 

 

A new report by Cushman and Wakefield anticipates an additional surplus of 330 million square feet of office space by the end of the decade...

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/najikelley_strategies-for-repositioning-or-repurposing-activity-7045292234547634176-OjBY

^I follow NYC construction fairly closely and despite all the trends, for some reason, there is a fair amount of office space under construction or planned.  It is true that a number of large developments are on hold or have been dropped but it still seems like a lot is going on, even if much of it was green lit before the pandemic.  And all this despite the fact that a number of large players have indeed cut back on space.

I think its way too early to make definitive statements about remote work and the future of the office. Its been, what a little over 3 years since covid hit America and maybe 1-2 years after things began to recover. Hardly time to see a trend or new era.

 

 

On 3/17/2023 at 11:10 AM, TBideon said:

Remote work may be decimating city businesses, public transportation and indirectly contributing to criminal activity and behavior, but it sure as s-hit isn't responsible for the higher interest rates, bond losses and bank run last week. 

 

 

 

There is a lot of fear of another wave of bank runs:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/10/business/commercial-real-estate-banks-offices/index.html

 

 

 

 

 

I included office market data from some cities surrounding Cleveland

 

 

Workers are recording zoom calls then posting clips without context in order to retaliate against bosses:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-rallying-cry-or-a-rant-pity-city-ceo-comments-show-perils-of-video-meetings-2a95d0b1?mod=hp_featst_pos3

 

I looked at the "pity city" video and it was so mild I couldn't believe it.   

Another unintended consequence of WFH, fewer corporate volunteers:

 

”Many of United Way’s volunteers are retirees who felt, or still feel, uncomfortable being out and about. Perhaps a bigger problem, though, is that United Way relies on groups of corporate volunteers.

 

“What I attribute to the shift in working from home and hybrid and remote work schedules have made it more difficult to engage some of the corporate groups that previously really provided robust support to some of these organizations,” Birchard said.

 

Worthington Resource Pantry Director Christa Passafiume also noticed a big drop in corporate volunteers. The pantry that serves eight zip codes in northern Franklin and southern Delaware counties, however, never suffered from lack of help.”

 

https://news.wosu.org/2023-04-27/central-ohio-nonprofits-say-volunteers-are-coming-back-after-significant-decrease-during-pandemic

Google offers on-campus hotel 'special' to lure workers back in (cnbc.com)

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/04/google-offers-on-campus-hotel-special-to-lure-workers-back-in.html

 

"Since the promotion is for unapproved business travel, the company will not reimburse their stays, but will require employees to use their personal credit cards, the special’s description states."

 

If only there were another arrangement that worked quite well from 2020-2022 in which employees didn't have to commute for hours, have an incomprehensible COLA, or spend a $100/day on an unecessary hotel.

 

But to be fair it is much harder sexually harassing or assaulting someone virtually than in person, so I get why Sundar and middle management are so insistent on dragging people into the office.

 

Edited August 4, 20231 yr by TBideon

https://twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/1707065309616652532

 

Hmm, RTO mandates having a downside effect?

Edited September 28, 20231 yr by DarkandStormy

That may actually be a benefit to some employers. Part of the RTO campaign is, after all, to once again re-enforce the (often) antagonistic manager/direct report and useless middle management dynamics.

 

It is harder for the sadistic ones to harass their direct reports remotely, after all. 

 

Also, there just aren't that many fully remote jobs any more, and the writing is on the wall for hybrid in many places. Managers 2, employees 0.

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-shifts-policy-wants-all-employees-back-in-the-office-full-time/

5 days a week is draconian. I’ve worked for employers since 2012 that allowed at least one day a week WFH. 
 

Zooming in people to meetings is here to stay. People stay home and work when they have colds or have family obligations. Before it was just on a telephone conference call and those are way worse because the person not in the room can’t tell what’s happening at all. 
 

I don’t know what the sweet spot is by 5 required in person days a week is like requiring people to wear suits and ties now 

Edited December 17, 20231 yr by coneflower

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/14/walmart-to-lay-off-relocate-hundreds-of-corporate-workers.html

 

In other words, fukkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk you remote workers. Welcome to Arkansas. Try not to get raped and impregnated, or miscarry for that matter, because you better believe we'll be complying with state law.

 

 

 

Edited May 15, 20241 yr by TBideon

34 minutes ago, TBideon said:

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/14/walmart-to-lay-off-relocate-hundreds-of-corporate-workers.html

 

In other words, fukkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk you remote workers. Welcome to Arkansas. Try not to get raped and impregnated, or miscarry for that matter, because you better believe we'll be complying with state law.

 

 

 

 

This was always a risk for people accepting fully remote positions with companies that weren't offering fully remote positions prior to Covid. I've been telling people since 2021 that if they accept a fully remote position at one of these companies they need to either be willing to relocate to where the company is headquartered or be laid off. 

 

On 12/17/2023 at 11:28 AM, coneflower said:

I don’t know what the sweet spot is by 5 required in person days a week is like requiring people to wear suits and ties now 

 

I agree that 5 days a week in the office, for the vast majority of jobs, is pretty unnecessary. With that said, I personally don't feel fully remote work is very efficient or effective for most jobs.

 

I've been at the same company since 2016. WFH was virtually non existent pre-Covid, then we transition to full WFH from 2020-2022, and have had a hybrid setup (3 in office 2 wfh) since then. Full WFH was by far the most difficult setup to effectively get things accomplished in a timely manner. It was also extremely difficult to get comfortable with new members of the team that I had never worked with in person. There are obviously certain jobs where you work mostly in isolation and don't need to interact with anyone, so WFH is great for those jobs. With any job that requires collaboration of any kind though, full WFH greatly limits productivity.  A hybrid setup - either a 3 in 2 wfh or 4 in 1 wfh - will probably be the norm going forward for the majority of jobs/companies.

I have been working remote in team environments since 2020 and it has been good. I worked in a remote team more than 15 years ago (I was in an office but not the same state as my teammates) that worked well too. I understand there are varying preferences. Doing remote well requires a lot of effort. And I do think you need to get together in person periodically to help strengthen relationships 
 

But imo when giant companies make these moves it’s really just a way to reduce headcount. AT&T closed a bunch of corporate offices not long ago and said you had to move or lose your job, even if you were going into an office. 
 

It’s probably from the financial crisis of 08 and my upbringing here in Northeast Ohio that I’m mentally aware of the risk of getting laid off at any moment haha. 

Edited May 15, 20241 yr by coneflower

3 hours ago, cbussoccer said:

With that said, I personally don't feel fully remote work is very efficient or effective for most jobs.

 

As a software developer hired as a fully remote employee for a company that has no presence in the city where I live, I am confident that I am significantly more productive as a full time remote employee than I would be working in an office 5 days per week. However, I think the disadvantage of being fully remote is that any time a coworker has a moderately complex question for you, they end up scheduling a 30 minute or hour long meeting, and your days end up getting pretty broken up. For software developers this is especially disruptive because having at least 3-4 unbroken hours to focus on working with code is ideal; having multiple meetings at random times throughout your day adds a lot of context switching and really hurts productivity. If I was working together with coworkers in an office, they might just stop by and have a 5-10 minute conversation, and a lot of the time there would be no reason to even have a long meeting. For that reason, I think having all employees in the office on the same 2 or 3 days each week, allowing these spontaneous conversations to happen and having most of the big meetings on those days, and allowing people to avoid meetings and focus on heads-down work on the days they are remote, would be an ideal mix for my field. Other fields may vary, of course.

14 minutes ago, taestell said:

For that reason, I think having all employees in the office on the same 2 or 3 days each week, allowing these spontaneous conversations to happen and having most of the big meetings on those days, and allowing people to avoid meetings and focus on heads-down work on the days they are remote, would be an ideal mix for my field.

 

This is exactly how we function currently, and I think it's the best setup. When we first started coming back to the office, most people were in the office twice a week but not on consistent days. This essentially resulted in everyone continuing to work as if they were WFH even in the office because you never knew if someone was there or not. Most meetings continued to be on Teams. Most quick questions or conversations took place on Teams calls. It was highly inefficient and pointless.

 

After a few months, we switched to everyone being in the office Tuesday-Thursday which was initially met with some resistance but people quickly figured out they liked. Now, Tuesdays and Wednesdays tend to be the big meeting days with some sprinkled in on Thursdays. Mondays and Fridays end up being pretty free and because you are WFH tend to be great "focus" days. 

 

I think this hybrid setup is by far the best. It gives you the best of both worlds. I never want to go back to 5 days in the office, but I won't take a fully remote job either.

26 minutes ago, taestell said:

 

As a software developer hired as a fully remove employee for a company that has no presence in the city where I live, I am confident that I am significantly more productive as a full time remote employee than I would be working in an office 5 days per week. However, I think the disadvantage of being fully remote is that any time a coworker has a moderately complex question for you, they end up scheduling a 30 minute or hour long meeting, and your days end up getting pretty broken up. For software developers this is especially disruptive because having at least 3-4 unbroken hours to focus on working with code is ideal; having multiple meetings at random times throughout your day adds a lot of context switching and really hurts productivity. If I was working together with coworkers in an office, they might just stop by and have a 5-10 minute conversation, and a lot of the time there would be no reason to even have a long meeting. For that reason, I think having all employees in the office on the same 2 or 3 days each week, allowing these spontaneous conversations to happen and having most of the big meetings on those days, and allowing people to avoid meetings and focus on heads-down work on the days they are remote, would be an ideal mix for my field. Other fields may vary, of course.

 

With jobs that have a coding requirement (which seems to be every non-sales white collar job these days) a lot of people have ADHD (me) or are on the spectrum (or even both). The wrong kind of interruption can be maddening and breaks need to happen when they happen rather than on a set schedule. That's why tech firms are notorious for having things like game rooms and running tracks. Also food on site.

 

People with blue-collar jobs a lot of times don't get this because their brains don't work like that.

I worked in the office for about two years at my current company at what was then a tiny New England company, then transitioned to full-remote when we moved back to Ohio (for my wife's new job) in 2011. My title and specific role has since evolved, but I essentially do graphic design work - which is a lot of fairly independent working, with occasional meetings and checking in to get feedback/new projects.

I can't imagine I'd still be working for the same company if I was still in the office. I had a long and terrible commute, the office wasn't walkable to anything, the windowless building old and uncomfortable. My computer was old and outdated, I initially (by choice) used my own computer when I went remote. I also got to use my much nicer desk and Herman Miller chair at home, instead of the $99 Staples special that hurt my back in the office. It was a little challenging at first, mainly because of technological limitations and acclimating to the change. I had to figure out a file sharing solution, made tougher by the office's 3mbps DSL line. We used build-in tools like FaceTime and Apple's screen sharing over VPN for meetings.
 

A few years later we started using Slack, which made communication and workflow much easier. Shortly after, we were acquired by a much larger company based in a different state from me or my original office. The new company didn't have a very remote (or multi-site corporate) savvy culture at first. Eventually IT made us move from Slack to Teams (because out was free with O365), figuring that out for us turned out to be good for them when all the office staff went remote during COVID. That change made all of us offsite people site peers to WHQ, instead of an afterthought - we were all working the same way, using the same systems and technology. Most of corporate is now hybrid or back in the office, our group has stayed mostly remote. We remain one of the most productive and profitable divisions of our large company. I've only been to my "home office" and WHQ only a handful of times for various events that needed to be in person. That has been enough to get to know the people I regularly interact with, I see little benefit for me for hybrid.

Downsides/challenges of working remote:
• Spontaneous/non-specific conversations are tougher - good for both getting to know people, and randomly solving problems
• Tougher to ask quick questions
• Tougher to interact with physical product without shipping delays

• Collaboration with people unwilling to adapt how they work, or adopt new tools (ie Teams)
• I could see it being tough to start a new job, with people you don't know, fully remote
• Potential for work/home balance problems, requiring discipline to avoid
• The occasional kid or cat based interruption
• I could potentially be goofing off during work hours (like posting on an internet forum...), but that was true in the office as well. Small breaks throughout the day are necessary, especially doing creative work. It would also be obvious if I wasn't hitting my deadlines.

Upsides of working from home:
• Fewer interruptions - in office, my boss would constantly use the intercom or yell over with questions - which is fine, but it often ruined my concentration since that requires an immediate response. Chat or email questions can wait a minute until I'm ready to answer.
• No more commute - I get back two hours of my day, less wear-and-tear on the car
• I get to live where I want, not where my job is (in this case, close to where my wife works, and also closer to family)
• I can do things like go for a bike ride on my lunch break, or walk to food (since I chose to live somewhere walkable). I've also nibbled away at big home improvement projects during my lunch breaks. Amazing how many design solutions this change of scenery has produced.
• I'm here as my kid is growing up. I'm there when the bus picks him up and drops him off. We can do things or school activities in the evening because I'm not rushing around to get home in time. I can keep an eye on him during sick days or when there isn't school without taking a day off.
• I'm here for things like contractors, deliveries, etc.
• I'm close for appointments. I've also probably saved at least one cat who was having a medical emergency because I was home to see there was something very wrong.

• I rarely take a sick day, and only when I'm truly too sick to work. No worry about merely being contagious. 
• My workspace is set up exactly like I want it to be
• I can listen to whatever music I want all day while I work, on my good speakers, as loud as I want

• I have big monitors and a powerful desktop machine, which wouldn't be realistic working hybrid
• If I have to work extra (rare), I can do it after the kid goes to bed or just take a few minutes without throwing off our whole evening.

So yes, much of value is vastly-improved work/life balance. But the key there is vastly improved. I value my time and flexibility more than just about anything, and this gives me flexibility despite working a fairly defined 8-5. My early-career dream was to go freelance so I could work in sprints and have time off between projects, and work in the environment I preferred. This feels like most of the upsides without the downsides.

Addendum, since my first post was already way longer than intended - I was obviously looking at the advantages/disadvantages from the perspective of an individual (specifically me). I definitely see the downside WfH can bring to downtown areas, which need people to thrive.

While I didn't always like the specific jobs, I really liked working in proper downtowns over the years. Not that it's possible for my current job, but I'd probably be a lot more willing to go hybrid if the office was actually in a proper urban location. I liked going for lunch walks with coworkers and eating at interesting places, and there is something to the whole urban vibe. That said, lots of jobs anymore are in suburban office parks or otherwise away from anything resembling a real downtown. A hybrid arraignment for that sort of location has zero appeal to me.

I can see where suburban Boomer and Silent Gen location decisions would make going to the office unappealing to other generations.

 

There's a picture of Downtown Columbus from the mid 50s right after they shut down the streetcars but before they tore everything down for parking. Cars are so jammed into any open space that they would have had to do directed automotive Tetris every evening to empty the lots.

Edited May 15, 20241 yr by GCrites

Cars (everyone mobile on their own schedule), air conditioning (sealing everyone up inside in their own home), and the internet (media delivered to individuals, remote work) -- technology is redefining "community" and "neighbor." 

On 5/15/2024 at 12:39 PM, GCrites said:

I can see where suburban Boomer and Silent Gen location decisions would make going to the office unappealing to other generations.

 

There's a picture of Downtown Columbus from the mid 50s right after they shut down the streetcars but before they tore everything down for parking. Cars are so jammed into any open space that they would have had to do directed automotive Tetris every evening to empty the lots.

 

There's more to it than that...

On 5/15/2024 at 1:10 PM, Foraker said:

Cars (everyone mobile on their own schedule), air conditioning (sealing everyone up inside in their own home), and the internet (media delivered to individuals, remote work) -- technology is redefining "community" and "neighbor." 

 

This is true, and not necessarily a bad thing.

https://6abc.com/post/philadelphia-city-employees-must-work-on-site-5-days-per-week-starting-in-july-mayor-parker-announces/14847496/#:~:text=PHILADELPHIA (WPVI) -- Mayor Cherelle,news conference on Monday morning.

 

"“Employee presence at the workplace allows for more personal and productive interaction, it facilitates communication, it promotes social connections along with collaboration, innovation and inclusion,” she said."

 

Fukkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk you mayor.

21 hours ago, TBideon said:

https://6abc.com/post/philadelphia-city-employees-must-work-on-site-5-days-per-week-starting-in-july-mayor-parker-announces/14847496/#:~:text=PHILADELPHIA (WPVI) -- Mayor Cherelle,news conference on Monday morning.

 

"“Employee presence at the workplace allows for more personal and productive interaction, it facilitates communication, it promotes social connections along with collaboration, innovation and inclusion,” she said."

 

Fukkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk you mayor.

 

Looks like the buzzword fairy hit some turbulence flying by and lost some cargo.

Move over, remote jobs. CEOs say borderless talent is the future of tech work

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/30/move-over-remote-ceos-say-borderless-talent-future-tech-jobs.html

 

Without UBI, national healthcare, and seemingly ANY government regulation over offshoring, I am not enjoying my morning coffee.

Tech has been wanting to have people in India do everything for a while. Remember the education systems in other countries have kids take only a few classes a day once they reach high school age. While your kid is learning how the insides of animals work, reading Shakespeare and throwing balls around in gym class under the American system kids in other countries are coding all day. And that's before they go to college.

Edited June 30, 2024Jun 30 by GCrites

I agree US public schools are trainwrecks, but I don't know if Indian schools are that effective as a whole. China too. Those countries encompass such a huge chunk of the global population that there must be an insane range of school quality. 

 

Meanwhile US city schools are zoos and Oklahoma is mandating teaching the Bible. Seems like we can't help but race to the bottom. Generations of useless graduates. 

On 5/15/2024 at 9:22 AM, taestell said:

 

As a software developer hired as a fully remote employee for a company that has no presence in the city where I live, I am confident that I am significantly more productive as a full time remote employee than I would be working in an office 5 days per week. However, I think the disadvantage of being fully remote is that any time a coworker has a moderately complex question for you, they end up scheduling a 30 minute or hour long meeting, and your days end up getting pretty broken up. For software developers this is especially disruptive because having at least 3-4 unbroken hours to focus on working with code is ideal; having multiple meetings at random times throughout your day adds a lot of context switching and really hurts productivity. If I was working together with coworkers in an office, they might just stop by and have a 5-10 minute conversation, and a lot of the time there would be no reason to even have a long meeting. For that reason, I think having all employees in the office on the same 2 or 3 days each week, allowing these spontaneous conversations to happen and having most of the big meetings on those days, and allowing people to avoid meetings and focus on heads-down work on the days they are remote, would be an ideal mix for my field. Other fields may vary, of course.

My employer is going to start requiring remote employees to travel into the office one day per month. I think that’s a pretty reasonable requirement, as it allows people to have a little bit of face time on a regular basis. Personally I’m happy to earn the frequent flyer miles. However, I think some employees who moved away from the office thinking that they would be permanently 100% remote are not happy about the new policy.

17 hours ago, taestell said:

My employer is going to start requiring remote employees to travel into the office one day per month. I think that’s a pretty reasonable requirement, as it allows people to have a little bit of face time on a regular basis. Personally I’m happy to earn the frequent flyer miles. However, I think some employees who moved away from the office thinking that they would be permanently 100% remote are not happy about the new policy.

 

Sounds reasonable to me, and somewhat similar to what I am hearing from other companies. 

 

My company just provides a lot of benefits that lure us into the office. I am hybrid with no set schedule of needing to be anywhere at any specific time. But I was actually concerned that if I never came in they would eventually place me at 100% remote and I would lose all those in-office perks.  

 

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, taestell said:

My employer is going to start requiring remote employees to travel into the office one day per month. I think that’s a pretty reasonable requirement, as it allows people to have a little bit of face time on a regular basis. Personally I’m happy to earn the frequent flyer miles. However, I think some employees who moved away from the office thinking that they would be permanently 100% remote are not happy about the new policy.

Is your company paying for those flights, or is it on the employee to pay for the flights? 

Oh I think we know that answer.

Pretty sure that my company is paying the bill for flights, hotel, and meals for employees that are considered “remote” which means they’re more than 75 miles from the office. But for anyone closer than that, they’ll be required to go in more often and won’t get reimbursed.