• mercano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    222
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    At least. If you work an 8 hour day, a 0.5 hour commute each way adds an extra 12.5% to work time commitment each day, and it’s considered unpaid time.

        • Nioxic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          That depends a LOT on the car.

          A small suzuki would be a hell of a lot cheaper than a BMW 7 series… (not in the price tag, but… running costs)

      • Anemervi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        1 year ago
        • You might need to buy additional food
        • Wear and tear of work attire
        • Might need to pay extra for someone to watch pet/child

        Also there are additional costs of time

        • Extra time shaving or similar (if you know you are staying home some things can be delayed a bit)
        • Possibly extra time to prepare food
        • Traffic/weather delays
        • Extra effort for small things easily manage while at home e.g accepting deliveries, watching pets or opening for maintenance workers

        That’s of the top of my head, so 1 hour lost per day is a low estimate.

      • MissJinx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, for me WFH is a lot more than 8% raise. It’s a lot cheaper. We were paying to work and didn’t even realized it

      • edric@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        50
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yup. I have meetings at 8AM. If I had to do them in the office, I’ll have to be up at 6AM to get ready and leave to be able to get to the office in time. If I do it at home, I wake up at 7:50, which gives me almost 2 hours of extra sleep.

        If I leave the office at 5PM, I’ll get home around 6PM. At home, I can log off as soon as the clock strikes 5, and now I have an extra hour of time to do whatever.

        That adds up to around 3 hours a day that I save from not commuting to an office.

      • ikidd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        And for many, half an hour primping in order to be seen in public. I guess if you’re still in vid convos that somewhat still applies, but for others, now you can lay around in your underwear and stink and still get work done.

        • DAVENP0RT@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          My wife was talking about this recently. She used to wake up at 5:30AM everyday, take a shower, blowdry her hair and style it, put on makeup, and prep her lunch by 7AM. Then she’d set out on her 1.5 hour commute to the office.

          Once we started working from home, all of that extra time went to sleeping well and relaxing.

        • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you have complicated health problems that can increase the amount of time done “primping” as well. I generally have to be awake three to four hours before I have to be anywhere and it’s a fucking nightmare.

      • KzadBhat@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        The traveling time I’m saving by working from home, is directly reinvested into having a walk with the lady and the dogs, including sitting on a bench in the sunshine including a coffee, and if the mood is right, we’re staying for my first meeting at 10:00, …

        Money can’t buy this, …

      • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I went from commuting 1-3 hours a day to zero commute. It is unbelievable how much of a quality of life improvement it is.

        I am grateful I worked in a couple offices before switching to fully remote for my next few jobs, because it showed me how much better remote working is for me.

      • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not just the commute even, my “morning routine” is maybe 10 minutes if I’m not going into the office, 30+ if I am. Need to make myself “presentable”, pack some food, make a to go coffee. When I’m able to just snack and make coffee during downtime waiting for replies etc at the office it’s so much easier, I get another hour of sleep if I need it…

    • pastromic@citizensgaming.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Companies forcing people back to the office are a red flag for bad management, so I’m sure that’s another reason they’re seeing people leave.

      My company realized that they can remove office space and use that money for more employees. What a fucking crazy concept.

  • CubitOom@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    146
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Honestly. It’s about more than money.

    If your boss says you must return to the office, after 3 years of WFH. At best, it shows that they do not value or respect you, and are just making an arbitrary decision in a bid to sell more stocks.

    At worst, there might be some insidious reason to make employees physically available. Maybe they are getting a kickback somehow, or selling data that they can only get when you are there, or maybe they are just horny and want to seduce you sexually.

    A remote worker is often happier, more productive, and cost less to employ even if they are paid the same as an on-site worker. Offices do not have to provide parking, seating, HVAC, power, wifi, and will even have less physical security vectors.

    If some people prefer to go into an office, then it should be optional. Not a hybrid model where they force you to come a certain number of days a week.

    At the end of the day unless you are on some kind of probation or evaluation period WFH should be the default when ever possible.

    • ramble81@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      82
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Control is another thing. I can’t tell you the amount of execs I’ve heard say “they’re losing control of their company” or “I don’t feel I have the same control over my people”. It’s crazy that they think that. What do they think the past 3 years have been when they’ve gotten record profits “oh, but our profits would be even better if we had people back in the office”. Sadly no amount of data will override the entrepreneurial “it could always be more” what if that they throw out.

      • KzadBhat@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m working in IT and as my last team lead hasn’t had any technical knowledge in my area, and he didn’t had to for his job, he wouldn’t even be able to control what I’m doing, …

        • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          He couldn’t control whether you’re doing your work properly, but he can control that you "pretend* to be controlled by him.

          It’s never about making you a better worker, it’s just about the illusion of control.

          Think about it, when was the last time you had an interaction with your superior that actually had anything to do with your actual job? It’s all just a huge charade.

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, but there will also come a tone when the technical lead is being managed by someone with less technical experience than them.

          At that point, it is less about telling them what to do and more about making sure they stay productive on tasks and projects that are important to the company.

          The last part is important because a lot of the work management does at that level is supposed to be catching all the shit from other departments and setting goals, which does not look like technical work.

      • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Any executive who has “lost control” of their business by allowing their employees to work from home is no more than the ring master of a runaway circus that they never actually controlled to begin with.

        I’ve had the unfortunate displeasure of working for at least one company that made a full time job of keeping their employees under their thumb and I can say this much: the more you micromanage your workforce, the better your workforce becomes at professional time wasting. By that I mean finding creative ways to look very busy while achieving nothing of benefit to the organization.

        But then again, much of the corporate world runs on incompetence so poor business decisions based on some executives feelings, rather than statistics, aren’t exactly rare.

      • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Control sounds insidious, but there are a lot of ways in which being physically present plays into your psychology and manipulates you into working harder/later/ect. Thinking back to the last time I was in an office, usually when someone was fired/they announced layoffs, the anxiety in the space was palpable. You ended up working later voluntarily just because you were afraid of not being seen at your desk and they’d fire you next.

        WFH allows me to be more rational with my employer. They can’t scare me into working harder, and I’m not at all attached to the “office culture” if it suits me better to leave. I think a lot of the “soft power” of the employer-employee relationship comes from physical proximity, which is why you have middle managers not involved with the bottom line profitability rooting for BTO.

      • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The executives are nervous everyone will realize how overpaid and absolutely fucking useless they are. Every good workplace I’ve ever had, was absolutely nothing to do with the VPs/C levels. The best work places those people are barely involved in most of the day to day.

    • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can confirm. I quit my last job because they told us to come back to the office. In 2020, when COVID was still in full swing. And being remote was our company’s entire business model.

      People don’t quit jobs, they quit managers.

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m on my second probationary period entirely WFH, you shouldn’t be required to work in the office unless the job physically requires it. Return to office is very often a big power grab by shitty management that don’t know how to measure outcomes properly and instead prefer to micromanage. It is one of the biggest red flags.

    • PixelPlumber@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with almost everything hog say, and strongly think WFH is the future and worth the costs.

      But I think physical security concerns are a fair one for some companies to hold for WFH, if they handle sensitive data where leaking is a concern.

  • Mrkawfee@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Commuting is also a nightmare. Thats 1-2 hours a day of slog to get to an arbitrary location to do a job that I could do at home. Combine this with school drop offs and pick ups and the ability to do life admin during the week instead of cramming it all on a Saturday with everyone else like pre COVID and WFH is a winner.

    • EricHill78@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I love those benefits. I would be extremely upset if I had to go back to the office. I’m more comfortable at home and I’m able to help my wife care for my son who is special needs. I save on gas and wear and tear on my car. The fact that I can listen to my music while just wearing shorts and a t-shirt was a game changer. IMO people in general suck and it’s nice not to have to interact with them face to face on a daily basis. Some of my coworkers say they miss being in the office. I think they’re nuts.

    • Rolivers@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also for people that can’t WFH. I’m stuck in a traffic jam every day because of office workers that arbitrarily have to go to office.

    • Saneless@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      7 hours a week and I didn’t even have that bad of a drive.

      $50 in gas. $50 in food minimum. That’s happiness lost + costs increased.

      I had 2 offers and one was not only a 15k bump vs the other, but the lower one was in the office 2 days a week. That was a pretty easy decision

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I have not read the article yet but the headline saying “equivalent to an 8% raise” does not just have to mean some kind of soft value. I have to drive 50 km each way to my office. I am much more likely to eat out while at work ( or to hit a drive-thru on the way home ). Given the price of gas where I live, going to the office probably costs me $50 a day more than staying home. That is $50 after tax so you can simplistically double that in terms of salary that it consumes. If I have two jobs to choose from, from a purely financial stand-point, my current job and a fully remote one that pays me $100 less per day are equivalent in terms of the value they bring to my family.

      Crap. I have been a “want to be in the office some of the time” guy but making me actually type this out has made me question that. I think I need to start shopping my CV.

  • wesley@yall.theatl.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can’t go back to working in an office full time anymore. It would be a really difficult adjustment especially losing the time to commuting and needing to deal with child care. Plus we found that we no longer needed a second car anymore since we were both at home so we sold one. Our life is built around not having to commute anymore.

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The push has nothing to do with anything but getting money back into real estate. The majority of wealthy people’s money is tied up in either oil or real estate. Billion dollar office buildings going unused is unexplainable to the oligarchy. And I don’t use the word Oligarchy lightly. Combined with less oil being used moving people around, and you have the most powerful people in the western world yelling at business executives to get their workers back in the office or they’ll be unable to barrow money from the 0.0001% small companies don’t have a lot of debt from the Oligarchy so they don’t have to listen to them. But if you know anything, wealthy people don’t like it when the poors don’t filter their money upwards so this fight is long from over.

      • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t forget micromanaging bosses who can’t stand not being able to watch their employees at all times.

      • Saneless@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s pressure from real estate and also managers who do nothing but hover and stare. So multiple sides.

        The only people I feel bad for are restaurant/coffee shop workers who definitely aren’t getting nearly as much money

      • NebLem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not like the land wouldn’t be viable for high end housing if the corps could push for rezoning. It doesn’t have to stay only office space.

        • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Conversion would cost billions for most of those buildings. And many of those areas can’t support a population increase on the level of hundreds of thousands of people. It’s do able but these people are not willing to do anything that improves humanity.

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If Zoom is trying to get people back into offices, it may not be a real estate issue.

        After all, are you going to argue that companies that are more than happy to outsource and offshore work overseas and sell off industrial assets are suddenly going to care about keeping their 4-year leases?

        • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Zoom is beholden to the same investors trying to force everyone back to the office. They are likely required to use office space owned by one of their investors… That or poor leadership that hasn’t adapted to the new environment

          • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Unless I’m invested in commercial real estate, why would I, as an investor, want to pay for commercial real estate?

            What makes commercial real estate so precious compared to other capital investments?

        • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          After all, are you going to argue that companies that are more than happy to outsource and offshore work overseas and sell off industrial assets are suddenly going to care about keeping their 4-year leases?

          Yes

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m right there with you. It’s just incompatible with how I want to live my life and the cost savings and time savings are unbelievable.

  • drekly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    1 year ago

    8% seems extremely low. You could double my pay and I don’t think I’d stop working from home

    • szczuroarturo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      It might be the average. Some pepole like working from office beacuse they feel lonely at home or they want to separate their work space from their home space.

      • PizzasDontWearCapes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or don’t have the space at home, especially if it’s two or more people at a time

        I’m lucky because I have room in the house for desks for me and my wife that are in different rooms, and not in our bedroom

        That’s a luxury many people don’t have

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s what I’m saying. Unless they talk about hybrid then yeah it’s equivalent to 8%, but if we’re talking full remote try more like 800% raise to get me back into an office. lol

  • miraclerandy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep in mind this does not just apply to ‘top talent’.

    Anyone who is confident they can find something elsewhere and have a good enough resume to land a hybrid/WFH job will do so, if pushed.

    • Someonelol@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      My parent company issued an RTO for everyone stating the typical corporate talking points (we did great during COVID but now we need to all come back within a month because we all work better together, blah, blah, blah). A half hour later an HR rep had to clarify it was meant to apply only for the parent company. I imagine the parent company is doing poorly and is trying to shake off some workers to cut down on its payroll. The only reason I can think of why they can’t force my smaller company is because we’re actually making them a lot of money so far.

  • CodeBlooded@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Holy smokes, working from home is not a “raise.” You should be compensated for the value you bring, not where you’re sitting when you bring value.

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      1 year ago

      I spend $400 a month on gas because of my long commute. Work from home is definitely a raise in my situation. Gas bill goes down to $100 a month. Works out directly to a 5% raise just in gas alone. Car insurance can be switched to leisure only saving money further. Gain an extra two hours a day which were unpaid before, so my workday is now only 8 hours instead of 10, that is another equivalent to 25% on an hourly rate indirectly.

      Then there is all the other benefits such as just being happier and more productive.

    • ElectricCattleman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it’s basically saying companies need to pay more if they want people in-office. Which makes sense to me. If you want someone to spend time and money to commute they need to compensate for that. You can’t ask someone who has been WFH to start coming in without some incentive or else you’re basically cutting their pay.

      That said, many people won’t switch from WFH to in-office for any amount of money.

    • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It could be considered a raise in terms of the amount of time you dedicate to work and the amount you get paid for it.

      8 hour shift plus 1 hour commute both ways means you effectively dedicate 10 hours to your job. Replace the commute with a 30 second walk from your bed to your desk and you are now making more money for your time.

      Mind you, I still agree that remote work should never be actively viewed as a raise or a perk. It should be the default for jobs that are compatible, which is a ton of them.

    • EssentialCoffee@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      In terms of time returned, gas, wear & tear, etc., I would consider being told to go back to the office as a pay cut.

      If I’m being asked to sit somewhere else, then I would definitely want to be compensated for that.

    • Saneless@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well, financially it can be a raise

      But emotionally, it has no equivalent and is like losing a toxic work element

      I get paid about $200 (miles, after gas) to go to work so even any office work is extra money for me

    • TheSaneWriter@lemmy.thesanewriter.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      I view it as a benefit, and I’m willing to make concessions on salary for additional or better benefits. Arguably you could have both, but I think unionization is required for that and I’m in a low unionization industry.

    • fidodo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It is in the sense that commute time is not paid so compared to commuting jobs your effective hourly wage goes up. Also, commuting time is actually a negative wage.

    • triclops6@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Especially galling since if I were to move to a cheaper region my company would want to pay me less. It’s “we only pay you for the value you bring” when cost of living goes up, but “we want some of those lifestyle savings” if I can get my costs down.

      How convenient.

    • RandomException@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Many people also seem to forget that not everyone has a dedicated room or otherwise extra space to work in. Sure, if you live alone it doesn’t matter but with other people living in the same apartment/house and perhaps them also working remotely, you suddenly need extra space just for good working conditions. Working space has a cost, be it in an office building or at employees’ homes. Also good ergonomics means one needs a good desk and a great office chair which are not cheap to buy. Sure, I wouldn’t necessarily demand more pay just for WFH, but I would never ever ever take a lower compensation in exchange either.

      That said, I love working remotely from home and wouldn’t go back to office. It’s just that even if you save time and money in commutes, there are other costs in place that wouldn’t otherwise necessarily exist.

    • pingveno@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Holy smokes, working from home is not a “raise.”

      Sure it’s not a raise, but that’s not really the question. The question is the hidden cost that companies are imposing on themselves by demanding that employees come into an office. If employers are going to demand that out of their employees, they should do that with the expectation that employees will ask to be compensated or will leave.

    • joneskind@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Before the pandemic I was spending almost 2 hours a day on my commute to office, while being on site for 9 hours with an unpaid one hour lunch break. That’s 20% of my working hours.

      I can use this time for entertainment and side projects

      There’s not enough money in the world to pay for the time I save.

      Besides, I save a lot on gas and food, and gain much more comfort (my house, my coffee, my chair, my screens, my toilets)

      To be perfectly clear, if my company wants me back to office they will have to raise me more than 30%.

  • eyy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    But boomer bosses need to physically see their workers sitting in chairs, they need that feeling of power!

    • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s because they need the real estate money, they built a lot of buildings on long term leases which are now expiring. Also, who is going to rent a space for a restaurant when no one is using restaurants for lunch in business districts?

    • shiveyarbles@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      My boss wants me to leave him alone, lol. He trusts me to get my work done so he can focus on his own stuff.

    • jeanma@lemmy.ninja
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      jeez, using boomer at every sauces is so cringe. grow up, little fluid-anime keyboard warrior.

      • Saneless@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        using boomer at every sauces is so cringe

        Finally someone with sense. They’re good for gravy, stews, and broths as well

  • jeanma@lemmy.ninja
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I could trade my WFH for a room with a view and a door. :) fuck openspace and flexdesks!

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly I wouldn’t. I can’t think of anything that would make me work in an office again. I can’t do it.

    • Lesrid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly yeah, having my own door really helps me survive my new job even though it can’t be WFH.

      • jeanma@lemmy.ninja
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, people didn’t get my comment. We don’t have all the choice and luxury to work for a great company or good project. In old Europe, a 1 WFH was an ultimate privilege before COVID. Nowadays, It should be choice, I don’t mind coming 2 days a week but it to be a “mandatory minimal” 2 days is a bit ridiculous. Still, If I have my own or max 4 seats offices, I’ll be okay with it.

  • vagrantprodigy@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    1 year ago

    My coworkers and I figure it at about 20% raise. No need for a second vehicle for the household, less money on food and clothes, plus the extra time.

  • coheedcollapse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Crazy that it’s so low. I’d assume people who commute to work waste like an hour minimum going to and from work, so 1/9th of their work day is just unpaid “work” as far as I’m concerned.

    That’s ignoring all the benefits in comfort at home. I’m surprised it’s just 8%.

  • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not surprised; WFH is a great benefit to workers. The big thing is going to be how companies choose to balance remote and in-person work and it is going to be wildly different across different industries.

  • reddwarf@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    From experience I have seen how employers/government were forced back to the office. My Indian colleagues had to return to their offices because the office buildings were empty and it cost money. Government officials either owned or had friends own office buildings and it made monetary sense for them to force workers back to the offices. It was a play between corrupt officials and businesses, nothing more. Well, that and a profound and deep distrust of their workforce. It was a sad sight to see that happening to them.

    My guess is that this could also occur the same way in the west.

    • Thisisforfun@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The giant multinational corporation that owns the company that owns the company that owns the buildings is the same multinational corporation that owns the company that leases the office space.

      How are they going to surreptitiously pull money out of the country otherwise?

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Government officials either owned or had friends own office buildings and it made monetary sense for them to force workers back to the offices.

      Even that is sunk-cost fallacy. If they own the buildings, that means they’re already paid for. The only money they lose is theoretical and non-existent.

      Edit: In fact, it costs them more money as you have to pay for utilities, maintenance, overhead, etc. when you fill a big building with people 5 days a week.

      • reddwarf@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Some collect rent from sub companies, some have fears of devaluation of buildings if not occupied, etc. Plenty of angles where the lost money.

        • prole@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Right, theoretical money. “Opportunity cost.” They’re not losing anything, they’re missing out on potentially making more.

          Boo hoo

          • reddwarf@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hey, I agree. It is about corrupt officials and businesses who want to make more. I’m not burning a candle for the (perceived) plight of these monsters 😀

        • new_acct_who_dis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s gotta be pressure for offices to open up so employees are forced to spend money on food/coffee/dry cleaning/whatever around the building itself too.

          I feel for those businesses, but not enough to subsidize their existence when I don’t need it.

          • reddwarf@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Spot on. It is so much more than just ‘already owned a building’. There was an industry created around offices, inside and out. Powers that be (corrupt and otherwise) wanted to keep the gravy train going and so order people back to offices. Does it make sense for people to do so? Largely not I think bit screw the people right? Despicable.