2 out of 3 Americans say they would take a pay cut to work remotely full time:
Americans are desperate to continue working remotely well beyond the pandemic.
To work from home full-time, they’d be willing to make some serious sacrifices, according to a recent survey from insurance company Breeze. The survey included 1,000 American adults who were either employed at a job – or looking for one – that could be performed completely remotely.
Of the respondents, 65% said they’d be willing to take a 5% pay cut in order to have the option to work remotely full-time. Some remained unfazed with the prospect of an even larger pay cut, with one in seven saying they’d give up 25% of their salaries to be able to work from home forever.
The surveyed Americans also said they’d be willing to clock more time at work if they could do it from home.
Fifty-three percent of them said they’d put in an extra 10 hours every week at the office if the office was their home. Nearly half of them said they’d concede 25% of their paid time off in exchange for a full-time remote work option. One in seven said they’d give up all of their PTO for remote work.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @12:44AM
Number one crime. I'd just like to have everyone's wages paid fairly.
Put the real criminals in jail.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:00AM (8 children)
A lot of commuters leave the lot of their hard earned in public transport fares and fuel/car maintenance to drag their asses to work every day. Even with a pay cut, they'll probably come out ahead.
For people like me, it's a net loss though: I cycle 15 miles to work every day. It costs me nothing and I need the time on my bike to stay healthy. Not to mention, I need to time away from home, and the clear separation between free time and work time. But I know if I had to spend hours in traffic or onboard train or buses, I'd want to work from home too, and I'd probably accept a pay cut too.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:43AM (7 children)
Most people care about their smell, wetness level, and comfort. They do not want to ride a bike in the cold, in the heat, and in the rain. Either you live in the perfect climate where it also somehow never rains, or you show up to the office wet, sweaty, and looking and smelling like shit. Or, much more likely, you're simply full of shit, and don't actually come in every day.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @06:18AM (2 children)
Funny thing about being on a bike, you aren't obligated to sweat in order to get where you're going. And, you're allowed to wear a jacket if it's cold! Or not, if it's not.
We get it. You spent too much money on your vehicle, and have to justify the debt by insulting anyone who's made demonstrably better decisions in that regard than you have.
Boring straw man is boring.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @02:53PM (1 child)
GP probably went into debt to get that vehicle too instead of saving up ahead of time and buying with cash. Those who do not understand compound interest are destined to remain prolecels.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @09:11PM
Why would the proles be celibate? That is a serious problem for the functioning of a capitalist society.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:08PM (3 children)
Also cyclist here (but more like 7 mile commute one way).
> smell
We have showers at work.
> comfort
Far rather ride my bike through the rain for 60 mins than sit in traffic for 60 mins. I keep a change of clothes at work (and have a decent waterproof bag on my bike).
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @06:41PM (2 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @09:04PM
lol hark the elite cyclist. Real Americans sit in traffic and eat Wendys out of the bag by themselves, loser.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday August 09 2021, @06:31AM
Which is precisely one reason why people want to work from home - and you have completely missed the point.
Does your workplace provide toilet facilities? How about a wash basin so that you can wash your hands after using the toilet? If it didn't, would you still work there? If you are prepared to work someplace that doesn't provide basic hygiene facilities that is your choice. So why should a shower be any different?
At one place where i worked when much younger I had to arrive at my workplace about 20 minutes before start time in order to take my shower - so it wasn't cutting into my employers working day - but even that long ago (1960s-1970s) many places provided such facilities. Some employees would take a run or do some other form of exercise at lunchtime and follow that with a shower. It kept them fit and healthy, and more awake during the afternoon.
OK, so things wont change overnight, but if workers start epecting certain facilities then perhaps the better employers will begin to change.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:02AM (3 children)
And 80% of people say they are above average drivers.
I doubt that so many people really would take that pay cut just for remote work, especially given rising inflation and forfeiting unemployment benefits for just sitting at home instead. What sounds nice during a survey may not feel so nice when you actually have to do it.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:22AM
A pay cut for more time with your family, less transportation cost, and not being thrown into the soylent grinder.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:57PM
It's going to depend entirely on the individuals and their circumstances.
Some, like a commuter I knew in Houston who spend over 600 hours per year in rush hour traffic in nice cars less than 3 years old, he figured out that over 20% of his gross pay was going to depreciation and maintenance on his car. He certainly would take a 10% pay cut if it meant he could drive with his laptop to libraries and coffee shops of his choosing near his home to work.
Some, like a programmer who was stuck in the same office with a raving lunatic, would have taken the pay cut just to get some personal space and not have the lunatic looking over his shoulder at his screen while he tried to work. I was remote to that job and worked in another city, a 3 hour plane ride+car away. I'd come in to the office for one day every 6 weeks or so, and otherwise it was a one hour weekly Skype call. No matter how insane and frustrating this coworker was, I had plenty of time away from him. That company was bought by another and the buyers offered us +6 months' gross pay bonus if we'd stay on for a year. That company also was well aware that the lunatic needed to go and was working on a way to separate everyone else from them within a few months. I, already separated, gladly stuck around for the bonus money. My coworker who had to endure him in the same office left at his earliest opportunity, forsaking a huge bonus in the process.
Some people have huge houses with office workspaces inside. Some only have little desks in a corner but are willing to make it work anyway. Some can't work in their homes and need time and space away to be productive, but even then finding your own quiet workspace can be more attractive than the office. Others genuinely thrive on the office community and I have literally known dozens of people who didn't need the paycheck but came in to work anyway because they loved it - some thinking they might hit some entrepreneurial pot of gold at the end of their (worthless) stock options in lieu of actual money, but many just love the work and workspace.
How that all balances out for willingness to take pay cuts? I guess we're going to find out in the next few years.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @10:46PM
I'm skeptical that so many people could afford to take that kind of a pay cut. That is unless they're already taking a rather long commute and replacing it with some other money making work. I personally don't make much, but I live like 4 blocks from work. But, with the cost of mass transit, it can come out to near 1/3 of what people make at minimum wage.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:15AM
Not included in the specific numbers were the Americans actually willing to make the serious sacrifices themselves, and any detailed breakdown between food, blood, livestock, and human.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:39AM (32 children)
Realize they should be getting a _raise_ for all the personal resources expended and paradoxical total obliteration of work:life boundaries and thus want to take the other 2 out to a field for a beat-down like the malfunctioning printer in Office Space because clearly they are suffering from some sort of indecipherable fatal error.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @02:07AM (4 children)
Join the serf class. You have no choice.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @04:01AM (3 children)
That's just simply not true, unless you mean in the Marxist final analysis. But If you're good at what you do, you'll always find work, and you'll get paid well for your work. I won't ever be a serf. As a comment I remember from the old site put it, "I get paid pretty fookin well to edit fookin XML all fookin day."
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @08:58AM (2 children)
How out of touch is ^ that guy? Very, or incredibly very?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @02:59PM (1 child)
Like totally out of touch, probably alienated from his gattungswesen or some shit. You're just jealous because you don't get paid more money than god to edit fookin XML.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @10:32PM
I'm happy doing more interesting things than data entry, though the occasional mindless task can be a good break.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @03:39AM (24 children)
Why? This costs the employer too. And if the employee doesn't want to put up with that crap, then they shouldn't demand it of the employer.
Employment is an agreement, a two-way street. It's not something that employers deign to give or employees deign to accept. Just because one party chooses to make the employment contract ridiculous through conditions or as above, self-inflicted costs, doesn't mean the other side should or will accept that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @04:07AM (14 children)
Exactly. If you're a prole, you'll take it up the ass because you have student loans or whatever. It's better to be bourgeois, so you'll just balk at a job with BS conditions and go somewhere else.
What are the proles going to do about it? Comrade Stalin was a true genius. Nobody even has the appetite for a measly general strike for single payer healthcare.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @04:59AM (13 children)
A: Become something else, like say that bourgeois category that's so much better. It's amazing how people will whine about imaginary social-economic categories with imaginary dilemmas while ignoring what people actually do.
I'll add that anyone who can work from home, probably isn't anywhere near that prole category.
(Score: -1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:27AM (10 children)
Well then why doesn't everyone bootstrap themselves into the bourgeoisie?
Er, I keep forgetting my position in class society. What I mean to say is, if I did it, anyone must be able to do it, and if they can't, that must mean they've failed morally in some capacity. This proves the correctness of the decadence narrative. The only way to turn the decadance around is with a bold anti-conservative, anti-liberal, and anti-socialist plan. We should base it on CRT.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @12:24PM (9 children)
What makes you think they aren't? Some societies do it better [soylentnews.org] than others, but everyone is bootstrapping themselves into that bourgeoisie. This is a new era. Time to get yourself some new narratives, not some 19th century crap that wasn't true when it was first bandied about, and definitely not true now.
Why would turning decadence around ever be a good idea? First, I find that term gets heavily misused to merely mean people with different moral values than the speaker or people who aren't taking the speaker seriously. Here, you're attempting to use it sarcastically, falsely implying that my argument somehow relies on a faulty opposition to decadence, as an attempt to fluff up your narrative without actually doing any hard work.
My rebuttal here is that not only can anyone bootstrap themselves out of the "prole" imaginary class, they are doing it right now, billions of people at a time.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday August 08 2021, @02:01PM (8 children)
Take a little trip to a bigger city with some urban blight. Spend some quality time in the neighborhoods with 50%+ unemployment, get to know the people who want jobs but can't afford to get employed at a decent one.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:24PM (7 children)
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday August 08 2021, @07:31PM (6 children)
See, you still lack perspective. You have no appreciation of the costs of relocation, distancing from family and friends' support. Moving from a familiar place you can barely afford to an unfamiliar place you can afford. If there is such a thing as bootstrapping up from the bottom, moving just makes it harder.
As often as bootstrapping works for the bottom 2% poor, lotteries are won. There are plenty of examples, but it is not a viable strategy.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @10:24PM (5 children)
I and billions of other people have a pretty good grasp of that. People move because that other stuff never was as valuable as economic opportunity. And your family and friends support network can move too. That was done all the time over the history of the US, for example.
Sounds like you need a better grasp of odds. There are "plenty of examples" because there are orders of magnitude more examples of two-percenters bootstrapping than there are of lottery winners.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @10:30PM (4 children)
Sure pal, very convincing stats you provide. Nice work, top kek.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by khallow on Monday August 09 2021, @03:55AM (3 children)
Compared to what? I provided evidence back here [soylentnews.org]. Are you interested in discussing that at some point?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @08:15PM (2 children)
I don't see any link to the poll that got responses from actual billions of people. Try again, maybe get some reading comprehension? I know, the dreaded L I B E R A L arts!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 09 2021, @10:40PM (1 child)
How about this? 750 million [weforum.org] would like to migrate to another country. 272 million [weforum.org] already have. So for the most extreme sort of move, to another country, a quarter (or more!) of those who would like to do so have already done so. I doubt a move out of urban blight is going to be harder than that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 10 2021, @04:49AM
As usual you move the goal posts, I'll give you a C- for effort and an F for content mastery.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @10:28AM (1 child)
You think that operating a customer service telephone line pays big bucks, do you?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @12:32PM
Because that's the only job out there, amirite? And I see we already have a dearth of imagination here. Customer service can pay a lot better than a lot of the local alternatives for countries like India. And it'll get better. That's the huge thing missed with these narratives about the world getting worse and the poor staying poor. They just aren't true. My take is that we're on track to have more than 90% of the world in developed world status, 2100 not 2020 developed world status. The Marxist narrative of the "prole", bourgeoisie, and elite fail utterly to model what's happening in the world today - the greatest improvement in the human condition ever.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:37PM (1 child)
Citation needed... at least for most office jobs. I’m talking net cost.
One of the most expensive things in employer overhead beyond benefits is generally paying for physical office space. Eliminate the need for a physical office, and you save huge amounts of money. Is it unreasonable to suggest some small percent of the savings should then go to support workers who now bear the responsibility often of maintaining their own equipment, etc.?
Also, with workers at home, it often becomes clear that there are generally a level or two of mid-level management that is doing nothing and producing nothing — just wandering around “monitoring” people at the office and calling unnecessary meetings. Firing those people also will save large amounts of money.
You always seem to side with employers, even irrationally. Why? It’s not the right decision for all companies or jobs (or employees), but in the majority of traditional office job cases, working from home will save employers much more money than it saves employees.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:33PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @10:49PM (1 child)
Rent for businesses can be extremely expensive. Especially if it's located someplace central to the area. An arrangement where employees work from home and are paid more would likely still save the company money as they could just rent the space needed for meetings when they couldn't be done online or eliminated.
The bottom line is that bootlickers like you seem to have no idea how things work, the only reason that people aren't being paid is that wealthy kleptocrats were allowed to bribe politicians. Other parts of the world, like much of Europe, doesn't allow it to happen and their economies are still doing just fine without the wage theft.
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Monday August 09 2021, @05:14AM
And yet, here's all these businesses unwilling to do that. There must be another side to that narrative that you're missing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @01:37PM (4 children)
I am not sure why you seem to think this is at odds with “realize they should be getting a raise.” “Getting a raise” is nothing but a renegotiation of the contract based on mutual recognition of changing conditions — even if that change is nothing more than an increment of tenure. In this case, the remote work of the last eighteen months wasn’t really much of a choice by either party, it was an externality thrust upon both. So, as is bleeding obvious from TFA, people are now seeking to renegotiate the terms based on those changed conditions.
I don’t personally “deign” to accept the conditions — they’re actually quite fine as far as I’m concerned. I just think the conditions justify more, not less, money. Why this position fills you with such righteous indignation about some imagined inviolability of some hypothetical original contract is perhaps something you should discuss with a qualified therapist.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 09 2021, @01:54PM (3 children)
Your "think" is just a desire for more. In a vacuum where you're the only side to the employment equation, that would be sufficient for a raise or whatever you desire. But in the real world, there's at least one other party to that agreement. And well, they're not just going to agree with a raise just because you have think on the matter.
I don't have a problem with people wanting more. I have a problem with people who think that just because they want more, they should get more.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @03:09PM (2 children)
I’ve already received it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 09 2021, @03:15PM (1 child)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @04:11PM
No shit, bro. Great flex, though.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:56AM (1 child)
If we're gonna track it like that I should mention i pay less for lunch but do buy snacks, i am having a serious conversation with my wife about selling the car, laundry's cheaper... i mean i wear sweats every day. Not meaning to argue or support your point, just bringing up that the complexities are numerous.
While I personally am not keen on a paycut (we've proven our productivity) i would consider it if we could negotiate a little on how many days a week off i have. Id seriously consider a small paycut if they'd let work the same number of hours per week, but compressed into 4 instead of 5. I could take on freelance work, if needed, with that extra day off but otherwise I could do more stuff with my family. Work wrecks my day whether i work 8 hours or 10 but an extra day off has me daydreaming about ordering a raspberry pi.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @09:28PM
'laundry's cheaper...'
What makes laundry even cheaper is retiring.
When I had to go into the office, it was a different shirt every day.
Now during retirement, I can wear the same shirt all week, even longer if it still passes the sniff test.
Doing laundry one every coupe months now instead of every two weeks.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @02:07AM (6 children)
I've been working from home since the 1980s, tiny family engineering business. It will be interesting to see how many will start down this path if their jobs demand they return to an office.
No doubt I've traded off significant income for this choice of independence. While the usual comment is, "Oh you are lucky, you get to set your own schedule", the reality is that you wind up working all the time. If the business starts out as a hobby, be prepared because all the usual mechanics of running a business take away from the fun stuff.
One big plus was getting through 2020 with almost no change. Shopping less and wearing a mask were minor adjustments to make. I was very lucky that my customers pretty much held steady, I give thanks for that every morning.
One tip for anyone considering working for themselves--reputation is everything. Reading about other small companies and also my own experience says that the first five years are the tough ones.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @02:25AM (5 children)
The frustration and expense of government made it a wash for me. Unless I charged at least $100/hour, I was actually paying out of my savings to work.
Don't get me started on the paperwork and liabilities for trying to create jobs.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @02:53AM (4 children)
How long did you last? Did you get past five years??
Also, creating jobs isn't in the cards for tiny business, even back in the 1980s we didn try that. I have only contractors and they work from their own homes, set their own hours. Unlike poorly paid gig workers, these are experienced people who can manage their own time and are well paid.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:04AM (3 children)
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:39AM (2 children)
Finding out that autism makes you a nonviable male would hopefully be making you purchase a black rubber doll to give your asian rubber doll a break for five days. Even the rubber pussy you paid for don't want it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @12:25PM (1 child)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @04:29PM
-- off topic --
...Your karma crater again, FF?
You may be correct, but I think this is a wannabe, not the actual dryhump39. Doesn't follow his pattern of something that may appear sensible (at least on the surface), followed by cringe-worthy abuse.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @02:45AM (10 children)
If you can do your job remotely, the managers will start to ask why Indians can't do your job remotely from India.
5% pay cut? You're looking at 80% and a move to a whole-other lifestyle.
Or are you saying you're really in the top 5% best in your field and deserve the same rate less commuting expense? (Does your manager know that?)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:13AM
This, sadly, is a very realistic possibility. The prior jobs that could easily be done remotely (phone boiler room) have already been outsourced to Indians in India for an 80% reduction in cost vs. having American employees.
Unless your job has a "national security" aspect that mandates that it must be done in the US, proving that it can be done remotely is also proving that it can be off-shored to India.
--
'Zumi often mods "actual interesting, germane, and relevant point" as troll.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @12:37PM
Even when I went to the office, management asked why an Indian couldn't do my job. Three failed projects later and now only Malaysia gets projects. You're 10-15 years out of date if you're still talking about offshoring to India
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:46PM (3 children)
Because outsourcing already showed that it works so well that you get crappier work for crappier pay. Companies finally wisened up to it and the outsourcing craze is fizzling out.
If anything, outsource the middle management to India. Sitting around doing nothing productive can be done abroad just as well as here.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:56PM (2 children)
While a good idea, I doubt management would ever do such a thing, because:
a few voyeurs would enjoy Lording over the peasants via camera, for most of the control/power hungry managerial types it would not have the same feeling/feedback as being able to walk around Lording over the peasants.
And this Lording over need might be just what keeps a bunch of the jobs from being outsourced, and is likely the reason for so much pressure to "return to the office". The Feudal Lords (i.e. manager's) have not been able to properly Lord over their peasants for about a year and a half now, and they are all probably having delirium tremors from the effects of the withdraw they are experience from the Lording over drug they became so accustomed to consuming.
--
'Zumi often mods "actual interesting, germane, and relevant point" as troll.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Monday August 09 2021, @12:45AM
Then why not get rid of them altogether? I mean, if anything, that last 12-18 months showed that we don't really have any use for them.
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Monday August 09 2021, @06:56PM
I remember hearing in the 1970's about IBM's promotion policies.
They had to promotion tracks -- one technical one, and one management one.
Promotions were made between tracks -- if you got promoted from a technical job, you ended up in management; if you got promoted from a management job, you ended up with a technical job.
People needed both technical and management competence to get ahead.
And as a result, the managers had a clue what their techicians were doing and vice versa.
-- hendrik
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:56PM (1 child)
I've worked for several companies that have outsourced their entire software development efforts. Every one of those projects failed miserably. The only strategy that I've seen work is to hire local (American) software developers to do all the hard and interesting work, and limit the outsourced developers to routine grunt work. Now, if you are only capable of doing routine grunt work, you should feel threatened by outsourced workers. But if you are only capable of doing routine grunt work, what makes you think you're worth any more than them?
Also, don't underestimate the problems caused by things like the local culture and the time differences. One company I worked for abandoned their in-house software development and replaced it with a company in Brazil. I got a good laugh when, just as they were about to roll out a major release, the entire company disappeared for over a week because they were all out celebrating Carnival. (I would note that the company has brought their software development back in-house.)
In other cases, having India being completely out of sync with America caused every question or decision to have at least a 24-hour turnaround. You can easlily waste a week trying to resolve an issue that could be solved in an hour with local (and competent) developers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @04:36PM
... Every one of those projects failed miserably.
I know at least one counter example, this is a medium sized aerospace supplier. They moved software to India, but kept it in-house by starting a division in India, near one of the big IIT campuses. While the wages are lower than US, they pay very well and are able to hire good software developers. They also designed serious quality control into the software process from the start, as is common in good aerospace code shops.
This was over 10 years ago and afaik it is still working OK.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @03:00PM
So? I'm working remotely, and right now there's only two people in the US on my team. Most of the rest are in India, but there's also some in Chile. For the other teams we work with, people are spread all over. Canada, UK, France, some of the ex-Soviet block, etc. This has been the actual situation for quite some time now, and frankly is better than one of the companies I used to work for, which is having serious hiring problems because the Director of Engineering is only willing to hire H1Bs. At least the remote work stuff is up-front about it (the DoE guy obviously can't admit that's what he's doing or he'll risk legal issues).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @01:41PM
At this stage of the game, the fact that someone’s job hasn’t been outsourced to India already is proof that it can’t be done to satisfaction remotely from India, QED.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 08 2021, @04:17AM
2 out of 3 Americans talk shit. The remainder talk trash. The people around me have always talked about walking out, or going to a better job, or whatever. But, they mostly keep coming back to work, day after day. I did it myself when I was younger. In fact, I once talked myself into a corner that I didn't like very much. From then on, I never used quitting as some moronic threat - instead I just quit when I was ready to move on.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2) by MIRV888 on Sunday August 08 2021, @07:02AM (7 children)
Not physically commuting saves a ton of money and time. That's great.
The downside is work and home become intermingled in a way that I found invasive and ultimately unacceptable.
That was just my experience and it was a year before the COVID outbreak.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @04:42PM (4 children)
When (in human history) did "work" become something different than "home"? I'm thinking for many it was the industrial revolution, not all that long ago. Before that, perhaps soldiers were the other big category that worked outside their home, or the immediate community near home.
> The downside is work and home become intermingled in a way that I found invasive and ultimately unacceptable.
While I've worked out at customer sites for months at a time (and had a daily commute), I find that I feel much better when working at home--which I've been fortunate to do for nearly all my career.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 08 2021, @05:29PM (2 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @02:55AM (1 child)
> Separating work and life is a sign of wealth.
Really? Do you have some examples or references?
I thought that during the industrial revolution (in England), the owner class often built their grand house next to their factory (or vice-versa)...while the factory workers had to commute (walk, usually) from some other part of the village that was lower class / lower rent.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 09 2021, @05:25AM
Why is physical distance supposed to be a good measure here of separation of work and life? How many hours did each work? How many hours did each commute just to work?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @06:16PM
Pre-industrial revolution most were either farmers (and so work was in the fields, with home right there next to those same fields) or shopkeeps/etc. in town. And most in town shops at the time at retail space on the ground floor for the shop, and living space on the upper floors for the shopkeep. So work and home were in the same building, just separated by height.
Post-industrial revolution saw the advent of factories, which meant work was separated from home by the distance to the factory, which was probably the first real instance of many/most having work being separated afar from home. Office buildings arrived later, once some 'knowledge work' began to appear.
So yes, I'd say the full separation of work and home into two different spheres, with a commute between, likely saw much of its growth due to the industrial revolution.
--
'Zumi often mods "actual interesting, germane, and relevant point" as troll.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @06:28PM (1 child)
My biggest issue with working from home is not the marginal "extra utilities" cost I have to pay.
My biggest issue is the fact that no one who does not also work from home (i.e., wife, elderly mom) understands that "working from home" actually means "I'm not available at any instant to fix whatever thing you have just messed up".
And trying to explain this fact is about as easy as explaining quantum physics to Australian bushmen -- you can explain all you like, they simply still have no frame of reference with which to understand a word you say.
--
'Zumi often mods "actual interesting, germane, and relevant point" as troll.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @03:01AM
We both work from home (totally different jobs) and have that problem with each other. The solution for us is usually pretty easy -- I can look up for just a moment and say, "Sorry, I'm in the middle of something just now". and she does the same when I'm the one with a question. If I'm at the computer, but not deeply focused, then I'm happy to break out for a few minutes to help with her issue--family gets priority over work in most cases.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @10:51AM (2 children)
Are businesses prepping workers for pay cut by posting stupid stories about surveys? They are already vastly underpaying people in my opinion.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @12:40PM
They don't have to cut pay. With 5% inflation, they only have to give no raises.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 10 2021, @12:37AM
Yes
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Opportunist on Sunday August 08 2021, @01:49PM (11 children)
Especially when the company benefits from me handing them my electricity, my office space, my heating, my air conditioning, my plumbing, my parking space, my...?
You expect me to take a pay cut? Be fucking glad I don't charge you extra for this and shut up!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @03:00PM (10 children)
I don't ever shut my computer off. So electricity increase is negligible. My garage either has my car, or is empty, so no cost to me there.
My thermostat is set at a constant temperature, regardless of whether I am home or not, because this is the best setting when you have things like guitars, or pianos, or just high quality furniture in general. In the winter, my body outputs heat, LOWERING my heating bill. In the summer, my body outputs heat, INCREASING my cooling bill. Likely a total wash, year over year, in terms of cost.
I will grant you that increased water usage is probably something to consider. I only live 2 miles from the office, and yet the amount of money I save in gas from working at home, has already overshadowed any increase in costs for any item you listed.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Opportunist on Sunday August 08 2021, @04:50PM (9 children)
Whether I shut my computer off is not the point. The local mall isn't using their parking space on weekends and still you get towed if you park there, so if they use my resources, they pay for it. Whether I would use them if they didn't or not.
It's maybe no cost to me, but it's savings to them. Pay me for it or you don't get it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @06:02PM (3 children)
You make a valid point, and yes, your employer is receiving a net savings from your working from home.
In my case, however, I view it a bit differently. I'm glad to have back the approximately 2hr to 3hrs per day I lost between preparing to go to the office and actually commuting to and fro, so I'm more than willing to ignore that my electricity, gas, water, toilet paper, etc. bills are marginally higher to gain something I am simply unable to purchase at nearly any price: time. I've still got about two years and a piece to go before I'll be able to "purchase time" (i.e., retire) and so the gain in time is, to me, by far more valuable than the marginal utilities/supplies cost increase.
--
'Zumi often mods "actual interesting, germane, and relevant point" as troll.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Monday August 09 2021, @12:48AM (2 children)
The benefit to me is of no concern to my employer, the detriment I had due to traffic and owning and risking a vehicle on the way to and from office beforehand wasn't of any concern to him either, so why should my benefit now be?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @03:44AM (1 child)
Note, I'm not saying your opinion is wrong. It's your opinion and reflects what you value.
I'm just saying I have a different view, and to me, the additional time is worth (to me) far more than all the extra expenses I'm incurring by not sitting in the office.
You are welcome to value things completely differently.
--
'Zumi often mods "actual interesting, germane, and relevant point" as troll.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Monday August 09 2021, @03:45PM
I do agree, the additional time is of value to me.
That still does not change my value to my employer. Yes, I could lower my price, since my production cost for my work went down, but I see no reason to do so. Do you think your employer would sell his goods cheaper just because he somehow managed to lower cost? Or do you think he'd enjoy the higher profit?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @06:14PM (4 children)
They'll be happy to pay for your resources. It will come out of 5% cut you took for working remotely and they'll still be rolling in profits. Not to mention they'll be able to expense your expense, where as you'll have to claim extra income for the amount they allow you. If they do it right, their corporate taxes will be offloaded on to you and you'll wish you had that 5% back. You sound like you have a full grasp of how companies keep track of and manage expenses. Don't quit your remote day job to become an accountant.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Monday August 09 2021, @12:50AM (3 children)
You are working from incorrect premises here. I do not take a 5% pay cut.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @03:47AM (2 children)
Agreed in that case.
If you are worth $X/yr to your employer when you work from the office, then you should be worth $X/yr to your employer when you work remotely.
I.e., they should be paying you not by where you live, but by what your knowledge and skill is worth to the company.
Sadly, all these CEO's talking about pay cuts if people move away/work remotely are just trying to squeeze people to save a buck.
--
'Zumi often mods "actual interesting, germane, and relevant point" as troll.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09 2021, @01:56PM (1 child)
Yes, and “You are worth $X/hr” in corporate accounting does not mean salary = X, it’s closer to .5x, and all the costs associated with having you on-site are most of the other .5x (i.e. your “fully-burdened” salary is about double your paycheck). Some significant percentage of that is being shifted to you if you are working remotely. Certainly not equivalent to doubling your salary, but also certainly some double-digit percentage of it. In my case, the cost, if home office deductions were still a thing, is easily on the order of about $10k/yr, which is about 5x my savings in commuting costs. It’s very little different than if they just decided to start charging rent on your reserved office space in their building. Of course you would change your negotiated rate under those conditions. You’d be a damned fool not to.
(Score: 2) by Opportunist on Monday August 09 2021, @02:17PM
My employer has to gain more out of me than he pays me. That is a given. Else it's more sensible for him to not employ me.
So if he makes X, he will always pay me X-y (with y>0). Your job as an employee is to find out how much X is so you can make y as small as you can get away with.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @02:48PM (1 child)
The best part about working from home is that all of the extroverts who are so happy to prance around the office displaying their latest degenerate behavior no longer have an audience. My theory is that extroverts will become the unhappiest segment at businesses that see a large shift from in-office to at-home based work. My hope is that this leads to more extroverts leaving my company and thus reducing the number of useless meetings we have since the extroverts are the largest drivers to get together and "discuss project direction" or "increase synergy with our customer needs".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 08 2021, @10:26PM
Not just extroverts, anyone who talks at meetings and walks through the cubicles to their fancy window office. They can hire somebody else to provide the audience.
(Score: 2) by ilsa on Monday August 09 2021, @09:26PM
Why would they say something like that? No, I will not take a paycut. You pay me to work, not to commute. Companies are already benefiting because they need less office space, complementary services and resources. Workers meanwhile now have _increased_ costs because they have to make their own coffee, AC/heating in their house, etc.
Companies should be increasing the pay to compensate, not lowering it.