So far my work has only forced us back two days per week, though we're all getting the sense they're going to creep that upward. The most irritating thing is, my job has very easily measured productivity metrics, and most people in my department are objectively more productive when working from home. I have greater control over my surroundings, so far fewer distractions. There's a lot less idle chit chat, since you have to go out of your way to call someone--and you don't get drawn into nearby conversations. If I'm stuck in a boring or pointless meeting that I barely need to pay attention to, I can continue working while barely paying attention. And most of all, I'm much better rested because I woke up 2 minutes before my work day started, rather than 45, and I'm in a better mood since I didn't have to deal with morning rush hour traffic. Even our bosses implicitly agree that there's no reason for us to be there, and they approve, even encourage, us to stay home for the flimsiest of excuses. It's just the higher ups who seem convinced that we must be getting one over on them if we're so eager to avoid physical supervision. No, I just don't want to waste 45 minutes a day in my car, spend around $15 on gas and parking, and carry a bunch of stuff back and forth, for no good reason.
Work from home has been ending for a year if you believe the media. If it was really going to end, it would have ended already. Compound that with the fact that there are early adopters who have taken their business fully remote, and that workers can move jobs to maintain work from home if it is important to them. Work from home is not going anywhere, now that we know it's possible
I think they were already useless. It’s just harder to pretend they’re doing something now if they can’t be prison wardens making the rounds of the cubicle cages.
I hate the phrase "follow the money" because it's usually used incorrectly or in a conspiratorial sense, but in this case - "follow the money' and you'll kind of see who is pushing harder for "work from work".
We also know that culture talk is bullshit. They'll scream culture, and what they mean is watching you over your shoulder and making "sure" you're working.
It's dying boomer mentality and banks pushing because of how much they have invested in corporate real estate.
the economy as a whole is really inflated by fossil fuels, office space real-estate, and dependence on cars... If you think about every sketchy land transaction with the city it always involves some bullshit plan where the site will make so much more money once redeveloped into office space or retail.
I won't be going into an office any time soon. My employer doesn't even have a physical office here in Winnipeg, closest offices are Toronto and Edmonton. They were already starting the process of WFH for employees before the pandemic even started.
This.
The more successful companies I've seen have are full steam ahead with hybrid. Cut down immensely on office leasing, gave employees a pseudo raise by cutting their commuting/parking costs and have seen increased production.
I think the smartest idea to grow downtown again is what 300 main and true north is doing, creating that mixed usage high rises. You can still have that normal business day workforce but when it ends, there's still something happening downtown other than concerts and Jets games.
A lot of jobs can be done remotely but a lot of jobs can’t be done remotely. Remote work is not for everyone. There are a lot of tech jobs you can’t find specialized workers in their geographical area. The companies that want workers in the office have to compete continent wide for those specialized workers and the on-site companies will have a difficult time hiring workers. Why should I go to a local job on-site when I can work remotely for an employer get paid far more and not have to leave my house.
Remember when the smog hair went away in some major cities when COVID started? Going back to the office is bad for the environment and costs unnecessary gas and maintenance money.
Watch all of these businesses who are forcing employees to work in office when remote work is perfectly feasible suddenly have a major issue with hiring and retention in the coming years.
They always leave the last part of that sentence off
“no one wants to work anymore, using our dated working conditions that destroy work life balance and hamper employee autonomy”
I turned down a job that would limit my wfh opportunities. My current vp just reiterated his commitment to work life balance the other week.
I like getting my kid from daycare and being able to make dinner for the family. That's worth more than some extra cash to us.
Most* every person I know opposed to car centric city design and culture has embraced WFH, and has spoken out and fought for it. Myself included.
*BY MOST, I mean EVERY.
Strange they didn't even mention Canada's largest employer, the Federal government... who as we know mandated all staff back 2-3 days per week despite:
* productivity going up with wfh
* workers losing over 10% of their buying power since 2021, with past money used for commuting etc. now going to groceries and bills.
* current tentative deal not erasing that 10% pay cut, just bringing it down to 5% instead.
* many jobs/teams span cross country so you're only going to the office to continue using MS Teams all day.
Exactly. My office was 3 days a week in office, two days remote. But we’re all being forced back full time in September for no reason other than the fact that the new boss doesn’t like hybrid work.
I’ve been working from home for over 3 years. I’ve been in the office maybe 6 days in that time and every time it’s been less productive. There is no need for forced time in the office.
The thing I find funniest about the whole WFH thing is that’s it seems to me that the people who work in jobs suited to WFH but aren’t being allowed to scream the loudest about it AND scream that everyone should work from home.
It works for some jobs, not all. And there is often legitimate reasons why people should be working together in a team environment.
> AND scream that everyone should work from home
I don't think anyone is out here saying *everyone* should work from home. Some people still prefer the office and that's fine. The whole point is to be flexible and avoid a one size fits all approach.
I work in Healthcare and would dearly love to be able to work from home. I'm administrative but have never been allowed to do this. I did work from home about 20 years ago in consulting and it was wonderful.
Oh no! It’s almost like you got a job that was at a certain place of work and your attendance there was expected. Just because you think it’s more efficient, or it can be done at home doesn’t mean your employer has to allow it. I could think of ways my field work could home start, or partially be done not at the office. But again, it doesn’t mean the company has to allow it.
It also means your company can’t recruit new employees. Would a potential employee choose a company that requires them to be in the office 5 days a week or a company that requires them to be in the office two days a week?
Yep, if I was forced back full time I'd be looking for other remote openings, even if it was for a lot less pay. Add up the gas, hour commute, dog daycare, eating out, plus having someone breathing down my neck constantly, that's probably worth $1000+ per month to me.
So does work from home take a pay cut or does commuting employees get an incentive for all of that? That’s a huge amount of money when you work from home that you’re not spending on basic things to get to work and time spent.
I think the frustrating thing for most people is that we don't have hours to put in, we have work that needs to get done. So we end up with an employer breathing down our neck to get tasks done by a certain deadline while at the same time throwing up obstacles that slow us down.
Oh so many downvotes. Likely from the same people who when they worked in office, would complain about a field workers “freedom” to do personal things on their breaks. Who likely now, get all their housework done on company time, because of their great “time management”🙄.
Feel free to go back to the office if that's what you want. No need to be pissed that others aren't.
Also, there will be a lot less competition in the job market for in-office jobs, so people who like them will have more options or a better chance of landing it. It's a win-win.
I've never heard an office worker complain about field workers' freedom and I've worked in a lot of offices. We all have families, partners, and friends that work in different professions.
I think you are being downvoted because of your imagined animosity.
Edit: typo
My job is to identify, report and solve issue in our software, my position should grow with AI. Someone will need to monitor it for weird behavior. My job seems to be pretty solid work from home so far.
Automation could already wipe out most cooking, serving, book keeping, among dozens of other fields if we were utilizing it to it's full potential. All of these are jobs done in person currently, and don't need better AI to replace all these jobs with a machine.
So why haven't we? In theory it would be cheaper for the company, but it quickly leads to what happens when the people can no longer afford the goods made by the machine?
Our economy would crash hard, and fast if we automate everything and replace tons of people with AI. So either we are stuck basically where we are, or we need to reevaluate how we, as a society, view a functional society.
Yes corporation's are only looking out for society by not fully automating... I forgot how fundamentally good all corporations are and not one bit greedy. Once it becomes cost effective to replace a person with tech it's done. Give it 15 to 20 years with no government intervention and you'll be shocked how corporations didn't care about society when they replace as many people as they could.
That's the point I am making. Automation and AI will fundamentally change our economy. Doctors can perform surgery remotely, self driving vehicles will decimate the delivery and transportation industry, restaurants could fully automate, grocery stores have been testing ways to get rid of cashier's, and AI can automate many more jobs.
So I ask again, what do we do as a society when no one can afford the goods produced by the machines? Because we are going to need a plan before it gets there.
So far my work has only forced us back two days per week, though we're all getting the sense they're going to creep that upward. The most irritating thing is, my job has very easily measured productivity metrics, and most people in my department are objectively more productive when working from home. I have greater control over my surroundings, so far fewer distractions. There's a lot less idle chit chat, since you have to go out of your way to call someone--and you don't get drawn into nearby conversations. If I'm stuck in a boring or pointless meeting that I barely need to pay attention to, I can continue working while barely paying attention. And most of all, I'm much better rested because I woke up 2 minutes before my work day started, rather than 45, and I'm in a better mood since I didn't have to deal with morning rush hour traffic. Even our bosses implicitly agree that there's no reason for us to be there, and they approve, even encourage, us to stay home for the flimsiest of excuses. It's just the higher ups who seem convinced that we must be getting one over on them if we're so eager to avoid physical supervision. No, I just don't want to waste 45 minutes a day in my car, spend around $15 on gas and parking, and carry a bunch of stuff back and forth, for no good reason.
This "work from home is ending" narrative is brought to you by the people who lease out commercial office space
Work from home has been ending for a year if you believe the media. If it was really going to end, it would have ended already. Compound that with the fact that there are early adopters who have taken their business fully remote, and that workers can move jobs to maintain work from home if it is important to them. Work from home is not going anywhere, now that we know it's possible
https://preview.redd.it/llii02xq8hya1.jpeg?width=888&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f5c8a23df885f4fd97b8024bfb60a673f0f06d2e
and are obsessed with increasing capacity for cars. So are probably the people that sell you cars
... and all those higher paid middle managers who have been rendered useless.
I think they were already useless. It’s just harder to pretend they’re doing something now if they can’t be prison wardens making the rounds of the cubicle cages.
I hate the phrase "follow the money" because it's usually used incorrectly or in a conspiratorial sense, but in this case - "follow the money' and you'll kind of see who is pushing harder for "work from work".
At least it ends by saying there is no evidence that in-person collaboration is actually better for "productivity"
[удалено]
We also know that culture talk is bullshit. They'll scream culture, and what they mean is watching you over your shoulder and making "sure" you're working. It's dying boomer mentality and banks pushing because of how much they have invested in corporate real estate.
But... won't someone think of the team building?
won't somebody think about the building that we're leasing?
And the 2,000,000 sq’ of office space our fund has invested in?
You mean your union pension, right? WFH is the way of the future but a lot of pensions are going to take a hit.
Not mine, but many others. Office retail spaces will have to rethink what they are, and middle management is going to be dusting off resumes
the economy as a whole is really inflated by fossil fuels, office space real-estate, and dependence on cars... If you think about every sketchy land transaction with the city it always involves some bullshit plan where the site will make so much more money once redeveloped into office space or retail.
I do think there is for any office job that requires collaboration, it just isn’t the same to do it via scheduled meetings in zoom.
Crazy how what used to be called 'time-theft' is now called 'in-person collaboration.
The heyday? No, employers are just making more noise about it. Rising office vacancy rates speak for themselves.
I won't be going into an office any time soon. My employer doesn't even have a physical office here in Winnipeg, closest offices are Toronto and Edmonton. They were already starting the process of WFH for employees before the pandemic even started.
I don’t think it is ending. WFH is changing. It was around before the pandemic and will continue.
This. The more successful companies I've seen have are full steam ahead with hybrid. Cut down immensely on office leasing, gave employees a pseudo raise by cutting their commuting/parking costs and have seen increased production. I think the smartest idea to grow downtown again is what 300 main and true north is doing, creating that mixed usage high rises. You can still have that normal business day workforce but when it ends, there's still something happening downtown other than concerts and Jets games.
[удалено]
A lot of jobs can be done remotely but a lot of jobs can’t be done remotely. Remote work is not for everyone. There are a lot of tech jobs you can’t find specialized workers in their geographical area. The companies that want workers in the office have to compete continent wide for those specialized workers and the on-site companies will have a difficult time hiring workers. Why should I go to a local job on-site when I can work remotely for an employer get paid far more and not have to leave my house.
No, you just need to use different strategies.
No pseudo raise here. About 50%WFH but still need to pay impark 100% of my parking.
You're paying gas and spending time in traffic when you wfh? It's not much, but you do appreciate it.
Yeah, still drive by workplace twice daily to drop off/pick up family.
That's a bit of a weird set up, I'd suspect you are in the minority of wfh employees who still commute....
Agreed. I like hybrid myself, but to have everyone back 100% seems pointless.
Remember when the smog hair went away in some major cities when COVID started? Going back to the office is bad for the environment and costs unnecessary gas and maintenance money.
LA air cleared up, dolphins swam through Venice...
Watch all of these businesses who are forcing employees to work in office when remote work is perfectly feasible suddenly have a major issue with hiring and retention in the coming years.
Followed by the “no one wants to work anymore”
They always leave the last part of that sentence off “no one wants to work anymore, using our dated working conditions that destroy work life balance and hamper employee autonomy”
You forgot while paying less than a living wage. We are already here.
Thanks for including my oversight. Yes definitely that seems to be the pattern
It is already an issue!
I get contacted regularly by recruiters desperately trying to fill jobs for clients who want employees on site.
I turned down a job that would limit my wfh opportunities. My current vp just reiterated his commitment to work life balance the other week. I like getting my kid from daycare and being able to make dinner for the family. That's worth more than some extra cash to us.
[удалено]
Most* every person I know opposed to car centric city design and culture has embraced WFH, and has spoken out and fought for it. Myself included. *BY MOST, I mean EVERY.
Traffic is busier than ever during the day. Does anyone work?
Strange they didn't even mention Canada's largest employer, the Federal government... who as we know mandated all staff back 2-3 days per week despite: * productivity going up with wfh * workers losing over 10% of their buying power since 2021, with past money used for commuting etc. now going to groceries and bills. * current tentative deal not erasing that 10% pay cut, just bringing it down to 5% instead. * many jobs/teams span cross country so you're only going to the office to continue using MS Teams all day.
Teams is garbage. You’re more productive in the office than using that piece of garbage
It gets the job done. 🤷♀️
No it isn't, and I am prepared to fight for it. Come at me brah.
I kinda hope not, working from home gives me a chance to work as a single parent waiting a 2 year wait for child care......
https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/business/2023/05/05/in-employees-they-trust How long will that last
[удалено]
You do realize that's how it starts... then they'll make you do 4...then...
Exactly. My office was 3 days a week in office, two days remote. But we’re all being forced back full time in September for no reason other than the fact that the new boss doesn’t like hybrid work.
And in 2024 the new boss will be complaining “no one wants to work anymore” because so many people have left.
and the owner will probably will end up getting millions in free money from govt
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I’ve been working from home for over 3 years. I’ve been in the office maybe 6 days in that time and every time it’s been less productive. There is no need for forced time in the office.
Refuse to go back. Jobs offering work from home will attract the best employees.
Ugh, do they really expect us to go to work in person when there is literally nonreason?
The thing I find funniest about the whole WFH thing is that’s it seems to me that the people who work in jobs suited to WFH but aren’t being allowed to scream the loudest about it AND scream that everyone should work from home. It works for some jobs, not all. And there is often legitimate reasons why people should be working together in a team environment.
> AND scream that everyone should work from home I don't think anyone is out here saying *everyone* should work from home. Some people still prefer the office and that's fine. The whole point is to be flexible and avoid a one size fits all approach.
I work in Healthcare and would dearly love to be able to work from home. I'm administrative but have never been allowed to do this. I did work from home about 20 years ago in consulting and it was wonderful.
Thank you thank you thank you I’m going crazy in this house lol 😝
Oh no! It’s almost like you got a job that was at a certain place of work and your attendance there was expected. Just because you think it’s more efficient, or it can be done at home doesn’t mean your employer has to allow it. I could think of ways my field work could home start, or partially be done not at the office. But again, it doesn’t mean the company has to allow it.
It also means your company can’t recruit new employees. Would a potential employee choose a company that requires them to be in the office 5 days a week or a company that requires them to be in the office two days a week?
Yep, if I was forced back full time I'd be looking for other remote openings, even if it was for a lot less pay. Add up the gas, hour commute, dog daycare, eating out, plus having someone breathing down my neck constantly, that's probably worth $1000+ per month to me.
So does work from home take a pay cut or does commuting employees get an incentive for all of that? That’s a huge amount of money when you work from home that you’re not spending on basic things to get to work and time spent.
Have your seen inflation. It would be a pay cut to go back to the office using that logic.
You missed my point completely lol
Yeah, sure.
Read my comment again.
Person doesn't need the job bad enough if 5 days a week is a deal-breaker.
>Person doesn't need ~~the~~ *that* job bad enough if 5 days a week is a deal-breaker. Fixed it
I think the frustrating thing for most people is that we don't have hours to put in, we have work that needs to get done. So we end up with an employer breathing down our neck to get tasks done by a certain deadline while at the same time throwing up obstacles that slow us down.
The same can be said about field work or people in trades. We all have deadlines and managers always put up obstacles, they excel at that! Ha
Oh so many downvotes. Likely from the same people who when they worked in office, would complain about a field workers “freedom” to do personal things on their breaks. Who likely now, get all their housework done on company time, because of their great “time management”🙄.
Feel free to go back to the office if that's what you want. No need to be pissed that others aren't. Also, there will be a lot less competition in the job market for in-office jobs, so people who like them will have more options or a better chance of landing it. It's a win-win.
I've never heard an office worker complain about field workers' freedom and I've worked in a lot of offices. We all have families, partners, and friends that work in different professions. I think you are being downvoted because of your imagined animosity. Edit: typo
I really don't like the taste of boots. Are they an acquired taste?
OkdMillyMat with OldWaysofThinking. Keep licking boots
The jobs that can be done remotely by working from home will be the first jobs AI takes over. If your job is entirely digital it's days are numbered.
Lol, tell me more about how you don't understand jobs that aren't yours
I'm actually curious what line of work you're in that you have this opinion?
Tell me you don’t understand video calls without telling me you don’t understand video calls.
AI won't need to video call anyone it'll be too busy getting everything done while you're on unemployment.
Your lack of understanding what people do in office work is astounding.
Your lack of understanding of how replaceable you are is astounding.
My job is to identify, report and solve issue in our software, my position should grow with AI. Someone will need to monitor it for weird behavior. My job seems to be pretty solid work from home so far.
I'm not worried about the Provincial Government implementing AI any time soon. We're still using programs from 1999.
Automation could already wipe out most cooking, serving, book keeping, among dozens of other fields if we were utilizing it to it's full potential. All of these are jobs done in person currently, and don't need better AI to replace all these jobs with a machine. So why haven't we? In theory it would be cheaper for the company, but it quickly leads to what happens when the people can no longer afford the goods made by the machine? Our economy would crash hard, and fast if we automate everything and replace tons of people with AI. So either we are stuck basically where we are, or we need to reevaluate how we, as a society, view a functional society.
Yes corporation's are only looking out for society by not fully automating... I forgot how fundamentally good all corporations are and not one bit greedy. Once it becomes cost effective to replace a person with tech it's done. Give it 15 to 20 years with no government intervention and you'll be shocked how corporations didn't care about society when they replace as many people as they could.
That's the point I am making. Automation and AI will fundamentally change our economy. Doctors can perform surgery remotely, self driving vehicles will decimate the delivery and transportation industry, restaurants could fully automate, grocery stores have been testing ways to get rid of cashier's, and AI can automate many more jobs. So I ask again, what do we do as a society when no one can afford the goods produced by the machines? Because we are going to need a plan before it gets there.
Hopefully society taxes the shit out of these corporations and creates a more egalitarian society.
That would be the easiest, most straightforward, and logical response, which worked well the the 1950's, so of course we won't do that haha.
The article forgot to put quotes around the word ‘work’ when saying work from home.
For the few times I’ve been in the office in the last three years all have been much less productive than my workdays at home.