Spotify allows 6500 employees to work from anywhere they want. Its turnover dropping.

[Cthulhu 2020]

No shit people are happier and more productive if you give them a bit of autonomy. Companies love to think that an iron grip and controlling their employees and staring over their shoulders every second is the way to go, all because they had that one guy who goofed off so now they need to make everyone suffer.

[Kaleredar]

Some of us plan to work for more than a few years without health issues. People need good light-conditions, ergonomic chairs, a full-size screen (to avoid bending the neck), and in some jobs a full-size keyboard is better, etc.

Seriously you are giving advice that will hurt the health of people - https://uhs.umich.edu//computerergonomics

...you know you can buy those things, right?

The money a person would save on gas alone could easily finance a decently sized monitor and keyboard. And if companies are indeed so worried about employee health and ensuring they get the "right" equipment or sees this as some huge economic burden on the employee... they can always just provide those things, seeing as they would have provided them at the office anyway.

Decent chairs, monitors, keyboards, etc don't cost thousands of dollars such that the average person can't just buy their own, or weigh hundreds of pounds such that they couldn't be transported from an office. Equipment necessary for the vast majority of office jobs is easily accessible and transportable. And, even if it weren't, like I said... were it the company's genuine concern, they could provide the equipment themselves.

My company, for example, allows people to work from home and we use top-end computer rigs and graphics cards for art and in-engine development that the average person would actually have a hard time affording/building/finding the parts to. If you work from home, the company just gives you the computer you'd be using at the office and you set it up remotely. Because even a fancy-pants computer tower is easily liftable by an adult human and can sit nice and pretty in the well of your passenger seat as you drive it home. The average person editing spreadsheets in excel or collating data or creating power points or whatever needs no such equipment, so I see no reason why the majority of business wouldn't be able to swing it.

[Forogil]

...you know you can buy those things, right?

Yes, but most people don't want to pay for work stuff with their own money and companies buying things for your home is legally problematic (depends on the jurisdiction); as has already been stated.

And based on the number of people who think that working from coffee shops are a good thing I'm not sure everyone realizes those issues; especially as I responded to one who didn't think of it.
Same as everyone didn't realize that seat-belts and hardhats were a good idea.

[Forogil]

I don't know about where you live, but pretty much anyone I know that worked in an office, who then worked from home, had almost everything they needed to do the job provided by the company itself. Computer, monitor (sometimes dual setup), mobile phone, desk, even a chair.

Same, but that was somewhat temporary and some rules were waived then - and it is not clear that all of that will be straightforward in the future due to tax laws etc; especially not dual setups.

And even if you can take home e.g., chairs far from everyone did, even if their home chairs weren't that great.

[Rennadrel]

If you can do your job remotely, I don't see the issue. Unfortunately not all of us are working in such careers.

[Spectral]

Some of us plan to work for more than a few years without health issues. People need good light-conditions, ergonomic chairs, a full-size screen (to avoid bending the neck), and in some jobs a full-size keyboard is better, etc.

Seriously you are giving advice that will hurt the health of people - https://uhs.umich.edu//computerergonomics

My home workstation is a much nicer setup than what I have in the office. My office lacks windows, my home has floor to ceiling windows to on both sides of the corner my desk is in. My office chair is whatever perfectly acceptable corporate chair everyone has, my home has a chair I chose for myself that's comfortable for long periods of time. My office has a single extra 22-inch monitor to plug my laptop into, my home has a 32-inch gaming monitor and a spare 22-inch. I don't think this terribly uncommon for the kinds of jobs that support working from home well - quite a few white-collar workers, especially people in software, have nice setups at home.

Of course, the real point isn't that everyone should work from home, it's that there are plenty of situations where it makes sense to use discretion.

[Unholyground]

Companies that don't let people work from home are going to die.

[Poopymonster]

...you know you can buy those things, right?

The money a person would save on gas alone could easily finance a decently sized monitor and keyboard. And if companies are indeed so worried about employee health and ensuring they get the "right" equipment or sees this as some huge economic burden on the employee... they can always just provide those things, seeing as they would have provided them at the office anyway.

Decent chairs, monitors, keyboards, etc don't cost thousands of dollars such that the average person can't just buy their own, or weigh hundreds of pounds such that they couldn't be transported from an office. Equipment necessary for the vast majority of office jobs is easily accessible and transportable. And, even if it weren't, like I said... were it the company's genuine concern, they could provide the equipment themselves.

My company, for example, allows people to work from home and we use top-end computer rigs and graphics cards for art and in-engine development that the average person would actually have a hard time affording/building/finding the parts to. If you work from home, the company just gives you the computer you'd be using at the office and you set it up remotely. Because even a fancy-pants computer tower is easily liftable by an adult human and can sit nice and pretty in the well of your passenger seat as you drive it home. The average person editing spreadsheets in excel or collating data or creating power points or whatever needs no such equipment, so I see no reason why the majority of business wouldn't be able to swing it.

...so you're saying if we give the employees what they need to work and be healthy while working, they'll be more productive overall?
Have you tried casual Fridays?

[Low Hanging Fruit]

The company I work for adopted remote work during the pandy like a lot of them did. Saw a huge production increase. HR incidents decreases. On the job accidents disappeared. Moral exploded upward. They even invested a ton of money for it to continue by getting people new laptops, cams, mics, software, docking stations, and hired staff for remote and travel to site IT assistance. It was rocking and rolling. Then the "every 5 year" job analysis came out where they determine if you need more or less or each position and if pay scales need to be adjusted.. you know.. things like that (should be mentioned it's done by an independent firm). It was damning for management. It showed we had way to many managers and they were getting over paid. I shit you not less then a day after that report hit the companies intranet all orders for new stuff was halted, everyone was recalled back to the office and as a result production collapsed, mass quitting occurred, and ever since the company has a MASSIVE cultural issue that is damaging it to the core.

The sad reality is they figured out the people in power weren't that critical or necessary if it went remote and to save themselves they probably sank the company.

[Kaleredar]

Yes, but most people don't want to pay for work stuff with their own money and companies buying things for your home is legally problematic (depends on the jurisdiction); as has already been stated.

The company doesn’t need to “buy it for their home” the employee just borrows the equipment they would have to have supplied them.

You’re making up problems for why this incredibly obvious and easy solution shouldn’t work; a solution, mind you, which itself is just countering another problem you made up about “ergonomics” as if that’s something that companies 1) usually care so deeply about that they’d feel the need to prevent working from home entirely and 2) is something people are utterly incapable of doing on their own.

And based on the number of people who think that working from coffee shops are a good thing I'm not sure everyone realizes those issues; especially as I responded to one who didn't think of it.
Same as everyone didn't realize that seat-belts and hardhats were a good idea.

Then the company sends out a memo specifying the home setup everyone needs to maintain.

Like, do you think people are morons that can’t follow simple instructions? That’s the actual heart of the matter. Some businesses think that if they don’t constantly look over their employees shoulders, ready to whip them into submission or conformity because they think their employees are too dumb or lazy to do anything, then everything will fall apart.

[Forogil]

The company doesn’t need to “buy it for their home” the employee just borrows the equipment they would have to have supplied them.

That worked during the pandemic - but long-term you cannot assume that there's an office that has the equipment if you start working from home.

Additionally it doesn't work reliably in all jurisdictions, as it can be misused (especially as most of the equipment can be used for non-work purposes) - similarly as the company lending people a car can be seen as a taxable benefit.

Perhaps IRS in the US hasn't fully realized it yet, but they might get there and update the 50% rule for monitors, depreciation rules, etc.

Some businesses think that if they don’t constantly look over their employees shoulders, ready to whip them into submission or conformity because they think their employees are too dumb or lazy to do anything, then everything will fall apart.

So everyone would use seat-belts and hard-hats if no-one checked them?

Note that in some jurisdictions companies are is liable if the employees get hurt while teleworking (seems like a good idea), and thus companies, of course, want to avoid that. Additionally EU-OHSA state that the managers shouldn't just send out a memo but be more proactive, whereas it may be less clear in the US.

[Kaleredar]

That worked during the pandemic - but long-term you cannot assume that there's an office that has the equipment if you start working from home.

...the exact same equipment they'd supply if you worked in the office?

Additionally it doesn't work reliably in all jurisdictions, as it can be misused (especially as most of the equipment can be used for non-work purposes) - similarly as the company lending people a car can be seen as a taxable benefit.

Perhaps IRS in the US hasn't fully realized it yet, but they might get there and update the 50% rule for monitors, depreciation rules, etc.

Then you put it in your employee manual that the equipment given is only to be used for work purposes.

Just. Like. In. Office.

So everyone would use seat-belts and hard-hats if no-one checked them?

Do you have someone sitting in everyone's car on the way to and from work to ensure that they wear their seatbelts? Or do you just kind of assume that grown-ass adults can follow simple instructions?

Note that in some jurisdictions companies are is liable if the employees get hurt while teleworking (seems like a good idea), and thus companies, of course, want to avoid that.

You're vastly more likely to be injured in a car accident on your way to work than you are to be in your own home siting at a desk, let alone "years of using sub-optimal equipment contributing to an overall loss of physical dexterity because the company inexplicably couldn't provide them with the correct equipment and/or the employee did not see fit to buy it themselves."

Additionally EU-OHSA state that the managers shouldn't just send out a memo but be more proactive, whereas it may be less clear in the US.

Then you have the employee do a zoom meeting or, hell, send a photo they took on their phone, where they briefly show that they've set up their personal workspace to conform to office regulations so that you don't have to worry about it so that some middle-manager can continue to feel important.

Your entire concern here seems to be "employees are too dumb and/or lazy to set up a personal workspace responsibly, and therefore may develop long-term adverse health affects from using such a workspace, and because simply supplying a keyboard, mouse and chair might could potentially land an employer in some sort of weird nebulous litigation, working from home is a simply unfeasible concept."

Give that little corporate spiel to a prospective employee who wants to not have to commute an hour both ways or wants to be able to spend more time with their family and you're probably going to miss out on an employee, whereas a company that figured out these triflingly simple barriers will have a lot more prospective employees on hand.

[Endus]

That worked during the pandemic - but long-term you cannot assume that there's an office that has the equipment if you start working from home.

It's so much easier to handle this as a permanent ongoing practice than the temporary measures enacted during the height of the pandemic. Plus, a ton of people work remotely already, often from different countries, without ever being able to go into any office. The current status quo already solves most of the complaints you're trying to raise.

Additionally it doesn't work reliably in all jurisdictions, as it can be misused (especially as most of the equipment can be used for non-work purposes) - similarly as the company lending people a car can be seen as a taxable benefit.

All company equipment can always be used for non-work purposes. This is already actively handled by employers, and this isn't a new problem. These issues, as above, are already currently fixed, so I don't know why you're raising them as concerns.

So everyone would use seat-belts and hard-hats if no-one checked them?

Most of us do, y'know. Because I'd prefer to keep my brain inside my skull.

And the "checking" here is the same oversight that already exists. Most people are fully capable of doing their jobs properly without being monitored the whole time. Construction sites don't have a guy running around making sure everyone's got their hard hat on. They just yell at anyone they notice not wearing one.

Note that in some jurisdictions companies are is liable if the employees get hurt while teleworking (seems like a good idea), and thus companies, of course, want to avoid that. Additionally EU-OHSA state that the managers shouldn't just send out a memo but be more proactive, whereas it may be less clear in the US.

And? You keep raising these as concerns, and I keep not seeing anything remotely concerning.

[Forogil]

...the exact same equipment they'd supply if you worked in the office?

Which is far from optimal in most cases.

Do you have someone sitting in everyone's car on the way to and from work to ensure that they wear their seatbelts? Or do you just kind of assume that grown-ass adults can follow simple instructions?

Neither. You have people that actually check that for all drivers - you know, the police. And the cars are regularly checked so that the seat-belts actually work. Some cars also attach the seat-belt automatically for the front seats, and most have signals when people fail to follow the rules.

You can, of course, also use telematics to verify it.

On construction sites the employer is responsible for ensuring that the employees wear hard-hats when appropriate - OHSA does not allow employers to just "assume that grown-ass adults can follow simple instructions", since people regularly fail to do just that.

Have you actually been on Earth? Met a human?

- - - Updated - - -

All company equipment can always be used for non-work purposes. This is already actively handled by employers, and this isn't a new problem.

But it isn't handled for the tax authorities in all jurisdictions.

[Kaleredar]

Which is far from optimal in most cases.

Then that sounds like the company's problem, not a "work from home" problem. And if that were the case, people would probably be doing better at home because at least some of them would feel empowered to buy their own proper equipment and set things up adequately in their own space.

Neither. You have people that actually check that for all drivers - you know, the police. And the cars are regularly checked so that the seat-belts actually work. Some cars also attach the seat-belt automatically for the front seats, and most have signals when people fail to follow the rules.

You can, of course, also use telematics to verify it.

On construction sites the employer is responsible for ensuring that the employees wear hard-hats when appropriate - OHSA does not allow employers to just "assume that grown-ass adults can follow simple instructions", since people regularly fail to do just that.

Have you actually been on Earth? Met a human?

And you can put software on work computers that monitor their activity to ensure compliance if you don't trust your employees. As I noted, were you that concerned about the long-term affects of carpal tunnel, you could ensure that employees set up proper spaces within their homes.

Again, you're making a lot of excuses for problems that thousands of companies have solved, to fight back against a work model that more and more people are expecting to become the norm and will expect to be the norm at the very least as an option.

[callipygoustp]

I'm beginning to think there is one poster in this thread that works in an HR department.

[Endus]

But it isn't handled for the tax authorities in all jurisdictions.

I'm really not interested in vague hand-waves about remote possibilities. I'm unaware of many places which don't have tax breaks for business expenses. And even if they exist, that lack is the problem, not remote-working.

[Ghost of Cow]

On one hand, I have enjoyed working from home and have been just as - if not more - productive. One thing that is key though is keeping in a "work" mindset and not a "home" mindset, because it's easy to slip into slacking off a bit when at home, even when you don't mean to.

On the other hand, a lot of my job is stuff in the physical realm, so we can't all just be at home all the time. There's still a lot that needs doing in the workplace, still customers that need service, and so on. So it's a lot of back and forth. It also feels like a lot of people are just "better" at in-person meetings, where our remote meetings seem to be just a lot of dead air for some reason.

One thing that has been a total shitshow - at least in my experience - are call center workers being at home. I've had so many situations where the person taking my call has a baby screaming into the phone, or a dog barking into it, or they're just paying zero attention to what I'm saying.

[Forogil]

Then that sounds like the company's problem, not a "work from home" problem. And if that were the case, people would probably be doing better at home because at least some of them would feel empowered to buy their own proper equipment and set things up adequately in their own space.

Except that the empowerment meshes with tax laws in some places (and then there's the additional issue to figure out the applicable tax laws if work and home are in different jurisdictions). Having employees live somewhere else is easy, but having business there can be messier - and the world hasn't really caught up with that yet.

Again, you're making a lot of excuses for problems that thousands of companies have solved, to fight back against a work model that more and more people are expecting to become the norm and will expect to be the norm at the very least as an option.

No, I'm stating that there are problems to overcome, and just saying as some have done "just take home a laptop" isn't a solution.
The surest way to ensure that something will fail is to ignore the problems.

And also that there are currently benefits of having people at the office, at least in some cases (introducing new employees; so both the new ones and the mentors - some meetings). Perhaps someone can figure out how to do that better in the future. And also that many prefer being at the office, at least some time.

[unfilteredJW]

I'm beginning to think there is one poster in this thread that works in an HR department.

The pedant definitely strikes me as a middle management goon that doesn't have a future with people working happily from home.

"Who's gonna follow the rules if no one is watching?!?!" is a telling stance to take. Says a lot about the person taking said stance.