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

[Edge-]

Might sound like a dream but anyone who has managed remote teams and has done mostly digital meetings the past 2-3 years knows it's absolute hell.

Really? All the teams I'm on (I'm mid-level on them so over a few folks I largely oversee) all work fine. The occasional issue arises, but work gets done and is of the quality expected. Maybe you have bad teams?

These kind of policies are the dream for sociopath gaming neckbeards who get flustered whenever they have to talk to someone face to face but are really brave on online message boards with their 72.000 posts. Holy shit, 72.000. An average of 16 posts per day for 12 full years. No wonder you push propaganda for aggressive socialism and anti-work policies like this.

This is not an argument. This is an ad-homenim attack on a poster rather than even an attempt to refute his argument.

To his point: Literally nothing I did in my normal day-to-day job required me to be there in-person before covid hit. I still do everything I used to do, just now from my home rather than needing to commute an hour each way to do it in an office with like a dozen other folks. I miss them, I actually like my coworkers, but literally nothing requires me to be physically present in the office.

[Belize]

Another socialist keyboard warrior with 7.500 gaming forum posts. Keep on proving my point.

You parasites have no idea how the real world works. You're stuck in your socialist Utopia VR dream world where you can pretend that you're not a lousy sack of shit. And when you finally go outside all that's left for you is to politely nod and say "yes sir, certainly sir, tomorrow 8am your desk sir" to people like me, while making minimum wage from the day you leave community college with 6 figures of debt to the day you die sad, alone and confused why socialism never solved all your problems.

This reads awfully like a boomer that never managed to adapt to remote work.

I manage a team of 8, that has transitioned from all working at the same site, to being spread across 4 different sites across 3 timezones including Europe, and moving everything to digital management has made things much easier than when we were all together.

Regular team meetings, transparent task assignment and expectations, and cross training of roles so that multiple team members can pick up the work depending on resource availability makes remote work a breeze.

You or your team just have failed to adapt to the new reality, and instead of improving your workflow you decided to blame "socialism" whatever that means.

[Aucald]

I've been working from home since well before the pandemic, due to an issue I had years ago where I didn't have a car and didn't have an easy means to acquire another (as we were already paying off two others due to unrelated reasons). When the pandemic hit the majority of my office transitioned to remote work, and for the most part, performance and output have actually never been higher. I know for me personally, it's been quite liberating to be able to keep my own schedule and not have micro-managing supervisors trying to "help" in my work, which is largely specialized programming and development that only my immediate peers are going to understand in the first place. It's not uncommon for me to be working on a complex issue and decided I'm at an impasse, get up and do something around the house (or even take a break and play some PS/5), then have a eureka moment about my code and come back to the project for another hours-long round of programming and commits.

I know some older managers fear change and most especially fear the lack of control of their workforce due to their lack of a physical presence, but I'd say the lion's share of times it's probably for the best. Now, we have had some employees who just don't work (no pun intended) in a remote work scenario - but since they're the same kinds of people who'd probably be likely to coast on the bare minimum even in a traditional workplace, it becomes very easy to see them (not) at work and get rid of them quickly. And some employees prefer the office environment as their home environment may be too hectic or have too many distractions to serve, and in those cases, I think the hybrid set-up is really the best one for the widest cross-section of employees.

[Ghost of Cow]

which is largely specialized programming and development that only my immediate peers are going to understand in the first place

That's just it, though. I think the people on this forum lean heavily toward that sort of job and don't really understand that like 90% of positions aren't anything like that. None of my direct reports could work from home, for example. Even my position which is IT related, I couldn't work from home 100% of the time.

If people can work from home, great. We should do that. But to claim that someone is just a "troglodyte manager" when they say that it doesn't work for everyone is a bit silly, too.

Also, I think I touched on this earlier, but some work from home initiatives have actually been pretty bad for morale across the organization. Mostly because the people pushing the WFH initiatives are all the highly paid office workers with all the perks to begin with, so it just looks like they're making their lives even easier while all our field crews and customer service and other roles are just left with nothing. It's not really a reason to NOT do WFH, but it has been a shame.

[Edge-]

That's just it, though. I think the people on this forum lean heavily toward that sort of job and don't really understand that like 90% of positions aren't anything like that. None of my direct reports could work from home, for example. Even my position which is IT related, I couldn't work from home 100% of the time.

I think most folks here are well aware that many jobs still require folks to be there in-person. And that for a great many that can do work remotely, that there will still be times when being in the office (or on location) in-person is necessary. Nobody is complaining/criticizing that. We're criticizing the "return to the office just to be in the office because being in the office inherently promotes teamwork for some reason we'll never define."

If people can work from home, great. We should do that. But to claim that someone is just a "troglodyte manager" when they say that it doesn't work for everyone is a bit silly, too.

Insults aside, I think that poster is wrong in their argument that remote team management is not effective to begin with. Because for many of us, we've been in situations that prove that sentiment painfully wrong for years. And the broader set of data we have similarly rejects that notion.

Also, I think I touched on this earlier, but some work from home initiatives have actually been pretty bad for morale across the organization. Mostly because the people pushing the WFH initiatives are all the highly paid office workers with all the perks to begin with, so it just looks like they're making their lives even easier while all our field crews and customer service and other roles are just left with nothing. It's not really a reason to NOT do WFH, but it has been a shame.

I mean...how is a field crew worker supposed to WFH? Why can't customer service WFH given that their job is on the phone/computer mostly and they can remain in direct contact with supervisors/managers for escalating?

This seems like an argument against WFH simply because not every job can enjoy that benefit. That's a terrible, weak argument. I think you'd find little opposition here for folks at companies where part of the workforce can WFH and part of them needs to be on-site/traveling for work, and the part that need to continue commuting receive additional compensation for their time/mileage and inability to WFH. Need help with their morale? The company has every tool to give it to them unless it's financially underwater.

[Ghost of Cow]

This seems like an argument against WFH simply because not every job can enjoy that benefit.

Well you just bolded the part where I said it's NOT really an argument against WFH... :P

[Aucald]

That's just it, though. I think the people on this forum lean heavily toward that sort of job and don't really understand that like 90% of positions aren't anything like that. None of my direct reports could work from home, for example. Even my position which is IT related, I couldn't work from home 100% of the time.

If people can work from home, great. We should do that. But to claim that someone is just a "troglodyte manager" when they say that it doesn't work for everyone is a bit silly, too.

Also, I think I touched on this earlier, but some work from home initiatives have actually been pretty bad for morale across the organization. Mostly because the people pushing the WFH initiatives are all the highly paid office workers with all the perks to begin with, so it just looks like they're making their lives even easier while all our field crews and customer service and other roles are just left with nothing. It's not really a reason to NOT do WFH, but it has been a shame.

I have a hard time imagining an IT position where you'd absolutely need to be in the office every day. I mean even our server techs don't come in every day - they'll usually drop in 1-2 days a week to perform necessary maintenance, and obviously stay on-call for emergency issues should they arise. That's not to say you're misrepresenting your work environment, I have no idea what it is you or your reports do, but at least in the IT ecosystem where I've worked the majority of my life I can't see many scenarios that don't support WFH if the infrastructure is available for it (e.g. VPN, broadband, etc.)

Obviously, positions like manufacturing and field service can't be WFH due to the very nature - if you're building a car or running cable across poles you sort of have to be onsite due to specialized equipment needs or because the work is itself an on-site deal. But if your job is banging out reports, crunching numbers, doing documentation, or like me doing development work with remote project mgmt. via DevOps and Git, there's no real call to have to schlep to an office to do it. If my team needs to huddle to discuss an ongoing issues, we're all just a Teams call away.

[Forogil]

Never said there was a problem, just that some of the previous discussion devolved into, "You're all corporate bootlicking micromanagers!" or something whenever someone pointed out that working from home isn't a magical panacea that works for everyone.

Yup, it's amazing how many fail to realize that.

- - - Updated - - -

If the "introverted gamer working in an IT-related field" wants to work from home and can do so effectively...what's the problem?

Nothing, if effectively is understood in the right context.

A lot of work in IT-related fields (including software development) require interactions with others. Sometimes that can be done effectively remotely - sometimes not. It doesn't matter whether you are an introvert or not - (some of) those interactions are still needed.

So, if the team is effective if the person works from home it doesn't matter.

- - - Updated - - -

An interesting point that no-one seems to have mentioned is that there's another thing that some have found difficult to organize remotely: Unions.

[unfilteredJW]

Another socialist keyboard warrior with 7.500 gaming forum posts. Keep on proving my point.

You parasites have no idea how the real world works. You're stuck in your socialist Utopia VR dream world where you can pretend that you're not a lousy sack of shit. And when you finally go outside all that's left for you is to politely nod and say "yes sir, certainly sir, tomorrow 8am your desk sir" to people like me, while making minimum wage from the day you leave community college with 6 figures of debt to the day you die sad, alone and confused why socialism never solved all your problems.

Looks like I nailed it.

[Edge-]

Looks like I nailed it.

Socialists are the Newman of peoples IRL Seinfeld.

[unfilteredJW]

Socialists are the Newman of peoples IRL Seinfeld.

Super weird since I'm a chef by trade. Front line work in Florida.

But most people in management positions like that failed upwards and now lack the self awareness of just how terrible they are at actually managing people. And now, thanks to Covid, they are staring their abject failure in the face and they don't get to look away anymore. That or sadists who now have a harder time making peoples lives miserable day to day chasing an empty power fantasy.

Businesses have to accept that things have changed.

sighs in uber eats noises

[Rasulis]

The best perk of working from home and setting your own hours, according to my wife, is being able to grocery shop mid-week and mid-day. No long checkout lines. No crowded aisles.

[Endus]

The best perk of working from home and setting your own hours, according to my wife, is being able to grocery shop mid-week and mid-day. No long checkout lines. No crowded aisles.

The pandemic and the initial quarantining also caused a measurable dip in CO2 emissions, just from the vast reduction in commuting. Imagine if we designed a society around what was functional for actual people, rather than conveniently exploitative for the corporate machinery.

[babalou1]

Except the ghoulish managers who need to lurk over everyone's shoulders because they only joy they get in life is micromanaging and abusing their staff.

you would be shocked at how many companies micro-manage every single thing from a WFH environment.

[Rasulis]

So we are two years into this work from home thing.

The good & the bad:

Lower gas consumption. Good for our pocketbook and reduced emission. Bad for gas companies and gas station owners.

No driving, no toll. Good for us, bad for for the toll people.

Less wear and tear on the cars. My wife’s car averaged less than 3,000 miles per year. Cars last longer and require less maintenance. The tires last longer also. It actually pays to buy cheaper tires. Cheaper insurance to boot. Good for us. Bad for car dealerships, manufacturers, and repair shops.

Less time on the road. Compared to when I was going to the office every day, I saved around 80 minutes per day. More time to shit post.

More quality time with the wife and cats. Bad if you hate your wife and cats. Lucky me, I adore my wife and cats.

With so many people at home during daytime, the community is safer. Lots more eyes watching the neighborhood.

Increased sense of neighborhood community. Increased foot traffic. People get to see their neighbors more often. People share lunch breaks with the neighbors that also work from home. We are on first name basis with every single neighbor whose home shares the private alley behind our house. I doubt that would have happened if not for work from home.

Good for local businesses. Instead of spending money downtown, people are frequenting local eateries and businesses during lunch hours.

Bad for public transportation. BART/Muni ridership is way down.

The ferry is especially bad. We used the services quite often and there were times that we + our bicycles were the only cargo on the ferry. I don’t think my $9.00 and my wife’s $4.50 one-way fare pay for the trip.

Downtown economy is the worst. Commercial real estate is way down. Small businesses are suffering.

South of Market and Mission Districts’ real estate slow down shows that even in San Francisco, now that people can work from home, the majority prefers detached homes with yards over high-rise residences. The Redfin map below tells the story of San Francisco real estate market - 1,103 units for sale in the eastern half of the city and 169 in the western half where most of the detached homes with yards are located. The market for detached home with yard is brutal for buyers right now. According to Redfin, our home in Inner Sunset has doubled in value since we bought it at the end of 2020.

[Endus]

So we are two years into this work from home thing.

The good & the bad:

Lower gas consumption. Good for our pocketbook and reduced emission. Bad for gas companies and gas station owners.

No driving, no toll. Good for us, bad for for the toll people.

Less wear and tear on the cars. My wife’s car averaged less than 3,000 miles per year. Cars last longer and require less maintenance. The tires last longer also. It actually pays to buy cheaper tires. Cheaper insurance to boot. Good for us. Bad for car dealerships, manufacturers, and repair shops.

Less time on the road. Compared to when I was going to the office every day, I saved around 80 minutes per day. More time to shit post.

More quality time with the wife and cats. Bad if you hate your wife and cats. Lucky me, I adore my wife and cats.

With so many people at home during daytime, the community is safer. Lots more eyes watching the neighborhood.

Increased sense of neighborhood community. Increased foot traffic. People get to see their neighbors more often. People share lunch breaks with the neighbors that also work from home. We are on first name basis with every single neighbor whose home shares the private alley behind our house. I doubt that would have happened if not for work from home.

Good for local businesses. Instead of spending money downtown, people are frequenting local eateries and businesses during lunch hours.

Bad for public transportation. BART/Muni ridership is way down.

The ferry is especially bad. We used the services quite often and there were times that we + our bicycles were the only cargo on the ferry. I don’t think my $9.00 and my wife’s $4.50 one-way fare pay for the trip.

Downtown economy is the worst. Commercial real estate is way down. Small businesses are suffering.

South of Market and Mission Districts’ real estate slow down shows that even in San Francisco, now that people can work from home, the majority prefers detached homes with yards over high-rise residences. The Redfin map below tells the story of San Francisco real estate market - 1,103 units for sale in the eastern half of the city and 169 in the western half where most of the detached homes with yards are located. The market for detached home with yard is brutal for buyers right now. According to Redfin, our home in Inner Sunset has doubled in value since we bought it at the end of 2020.

What this basically boils down to is stuff city planners have been saying for decades; that living in small diversely-zoned communities (so there's local commercial locations within walking distance to homes and office spaces, basically) is far better for people, overall. The pandemic just forced a reform, and now's the time to question if going back to the "old way" is even desirable in the first place, or if we're better off as a society recentering around a new paradigm.

Toll roads suffer, but tolls are meant to pay for upkeep, and wear and tear is reduced along with the reduction in traffic, so that's kind of a break-even.
Public transpo is meant to serve the community and often isn't meant to be a profit engine; you usually hope at best it can be revenue-neutral but that's often a pipe dream. A reduction of demand means there's less need overall, and that's a positive.

Is there gonna be an impact on downtowns? Sure. But there should be. It'll also lower property values in that downtown core, which will make downtown living more affordable, and that will in turn lead to a revitalization as the downtown shifts gears towards being an urban center adapted for residents of that center, rather than a business hub for the entire city.

The reality is we've built cities badly for decades, particularly in the Americas (Europe having the advantage of many of their major cities being built for foot traffic from the outset, because there weren't alternatives).

Technologically, we've moved past the point where a downtown core makes sense. There's no need for commercial interests to be that close; you don't benefit from faster courier deliveries of documentation when you can e-mail or otherwise digitally transfer said documents near-instantly, or collaborate with colleagues in other cities or even countries in working with and editing the same document together, live, while chatting the whole time. It's a legacy of a bygone era, and we're seeing the last gasps as the dinosaurs who don't want to adapt resist any efforts to change the paradigm. Their roars of complaint shouldn't be given much credence, though.

[Rasulis]

What this basically boils down to is stuff city planners have been saying for decades; that living in small diversely-zoned communities (so there's local commercial locations within walking distance to homes and office spaces, basically) is far better for people, overall. The pandemic just forced a reform, and now's the time to question if going back to the "old way" is even desirable in the first place, or if we're better off as a society recentering around a new paradigm.

Toll roads suffer, but tolls are meant to pay for upkeep, and wear and tear is reduced along with the reduction in traffic, so that's kind of a break-even.
Public transpo is meant to serve the community and often isn't meant to be a profit engine; you usually hope at best it can be revenue-neutral but that's often a pipe dream. A reduction of demand means there's less need overall, and that's a positive.

Is there gonna be an impact on downtowns? Sure. But there should be. It'll also lower property values in that downtown core, which will make downtown living more affordable, and that will in turn lead to a revitalization as the downtown shifts gears towards being an urban center adapted for residents of that center, rather than a business hub for the entire city.

The reality is we've built cities badly for decades, particularly in the Americas (Europe having the advantage of many of their major cities being built for foot traffic from the outset, because there weren't alternatives).

Technologically, we've moved past the point where a downtown core makes sense. There's no need for commercial interests to be that close; you don't benefit from faster courier deliveries of documentation when you can e-mail or otherwise digitally transfer said documents near-instantly, or collaborate with colleagues in other cities or even countries in working with and editing the same document together, live, while chatting the whole time. It's a legacy of a bygone era, and we're seeing the last gasps as the dinosaurs who don't want to adapt resist any efforts to change the paradigm. Their roars of complaint shouldn't be given much credence, though.

One of the hardest to accommodate aspect of designing 15-minute communities is providing workplaces within a 15-minute radius of people’s homes. Work from home removes that from the planning equation. Not 100%, but at least for those that can. The rest, such as schools, healthcare, shops, restaurants, leisure facilities, entertainment and parks, are much easier to accommodate. It makes the urban planning for 15-minute communities much simpler. Imagine the kind of communities that could be built when we don’t have to worry about motor vehicle access.


Macondray Lane, San Francisco (the inspiration for Barbary Lane from Armistead Maupin's "Tales of the City.")

[ReVnX]

I have been working from home since the pandemic hit and even got a new job with a 100% WFH model indefinitely.

Now I wouldn't even consider a job without WFH even if it paid better.