this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2024
718 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
59217 readers
2773 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I’m so tired of businesses claiming that the only way for a company to be successful is if everyone is in person for the dear dear meetings. We all know exactly what this is about. 1. It’s more dofficult to micromanage employees when a manger can’t constantly observe them, and 2. All the giant real estate investments companies have made is now coming due and they cant fill up their buildings fast enough to get those tax breaks. Why the hell else are they “tracking” people in the office. Meanwhile senior leadership can come and go whenever they see fit. It’s control. Plain and simple.
You have it backwards. Completely.
The only thing I loath about working in another building is: the commute and distractions. The commute is expensive and a huge waste of time. I try and minimise the time waste with audio books but its forced waste of money. The distractions can be minimised with headphones.
I’d say it depends on the job and the person. If it’s the sort of job that can be done remotely, and the office culture is such that people are constantly getting interrupted by people ‘just passing by’ and ‘oh one more quick question’, and/or dragged into hours-long meetings that could easily have been a quick email thread, then it’s not a stretch at all to see that WFH has improved their productivity.
The realestate claim is just plain backwards. It does depend on the person, but making the claim that people in general are happy to donate part of their home to their employer and impact their families with work from home is just wrong. Emails instead of meetings should be common sense for status meetings and has no impact on the choice to work from home. Meetings that have agendas should be in person, especially if its on sensitive topics. All reasons I have listed above.
Some people sure do benefit working from home. I liked no commute, it saved a lot of money and wasted time but it made home worse.
We work to live. Work should have no place in our home.
What I was describing was something many people who are happy to work from home have said about their jobs. Others cite their terrible commute as the reason they love not having to go into the office.
If you don’t want to give up a part of your home to your job that’s totally fine. But don’t go around saying that everyone should do things your way. Many people are quite happy working from home, and cite having more time for their family and hobbies, and never having to deal with annoying meetings or commutes.
You can see many examples in the comments on this very post, as well as the sheer number of people quitting when their jobs tried to force them back into the office.