Remote working - the future?

Young_gunner

Facebook now allowing Dublin staff to work from other countries in Europe:
"“We’ve learned over the past year that good work can get done anywhere, and I’m even more optimistic that remote work at scale is possible, particularly as remote video presence and virtual reality continue to improve,” Mr Zuckerberg wrote in his email to staff

https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/facebook-to-allow-irish-staff-work-from-other-european-countries-40521728.html

Young_gunner

Young_gunner wrote: »

Facebook now allowing Dublin staff to work from other countries in Europe:
"“We’ve learned over the past year that good work can get done anywhere, and I’m even more optimistic that remote work at scale is possible, particularly as remote video presence and virtual reality continue to improve,” Mr Zuckerberg wrote in his email to staff

https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/facebook-to-allow-irish-staff-work-from-other-european-countries-40521728.html

B...but c-companies are definitely returning to 100% WFO, r-right guys???

floorpie

Deleted User wrote: »

B...but c-companies are definitely returning to 100% WFO, r-right guys???

Facebook have spent many billions in acquisitions of VR and AR companies for remote presence in the last several years, pre-pandemic (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Facebook). If any company is going to promote remote working it's Facebook.

floorpie

floorpie wrote: »

Facebook have spent many billions in acquisitions of VR and AR companies for remote presence in the last several years, pre-pandemic (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Facebook). If any company is going to promote remote working it's Facebook.

A glimpse of the future, then. Nice work, thanks for sharing.

ELM327

This is the way it's going.
Companies that do not adapt will see a brain drain.

floorpie

ELM327 wrote: »

This is the way it's going.
Companies that do not adapt will see a brain drain.

Deleted User wrote: »

A glimpse of the future, then. Nice work, thanks for sharing.

It's a big (wrong imo) assumption that Facebook will be let have such an influence on the tech landscape by its competitors.

floorpie

floorpie wrote: »

It's a big (wrong imo) assumption that Facebook will be let have such an influence on the tech landscape by its competitors.

Well smaller compared to Facebook companies like mine have already transitioned to WFH, cloud solutions, etc.

To not do so is simply leaving money on the table.

Anyway, neither of our opinions matter. The wheels are already in motion.

PhilOssophy

Deleted User wrote: »

B...but c-companies are definitely returning to 100% WFO, r-right guys???

Can you point to 1 post in the previous 20+ pages where somebody said that?

There will be dinasour organisations where that will be the case. But I think most companies are going to some form of mix of hybrid or remote.

I don't think anybody on here thinks the 5 days in the office is the future. And good luck to any company who tries it I'd say - people will vote with their feet.

Unless you can prove to me where somebody in this thread said that 100% WFO was the future?

PhilOssophy

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Can you point to 1 post in the previous 20+ pages where somebody said that?

You do realise he was jokingly mocking some on the thread who seem hell bent on killing WFH.

There will be dinasour organisations where that will be the case. But I think most companies are going to some form of mix of hybrid or remote.

Certainly looks like it

I don't think anybody on here thinks the 5 days in the office is the future. And good luck to any company who tries it I'd say - people will vote with their feet.

Few think it, even fewer are praying for it

Totally agree, personally I'll walk before I go back to working in an office, 100% WFH from now until I retire

ELM327

floorpie wrote: »

It's a big (wrong imo) assumption that Facebook will be let have such an influence on the tech landscape by its competitors.

I dont work in FB but I work in the tech space for an MNC and I am sure our policy as a company will be altered now to be similar to the FB policy where possible.

I see a lot of "alumni" on linked in working for FB from my company so it is clear that their policies before this - as part of the overall remuneration pack -are class leading

PhilOssophy

Deleted User wrote: »

You do realise he was jokingly mocking some on the thread who seem hell bent on killing WFH.



Certainly looks like it



Few think it, even fewer are praying for it

Totally agree, personally I'll walk before I go back to working in an office, 100% WFH from now until I retire

Hardly anybody was trying to kill WFH.....

Mrs OBumble

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Hardly anybody was trying to kill WFH.....

Nobody is trying to kill WFH.

Some of us are pointing out that it has some issues, and so cannot be applied slavishly. Some other people are Very Offended about this.

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Nobody is trying to kill WFH.

Some of us are pointing out that it has some issues, and so cannot be applied slavishly. Some other people are Very Offended about this.

LOL.

Antares35

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Nobody is trying to kill WFH.

Some of us are pointing out that it has some issues, and so cannot be applied slavishly. Some other people are Very Offended about this.

It's ironic that you are critical of an approach that applies anything slavishly given your penchant for the Organisation of Working Time Act.

ineedeuro

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Nobody is trying to kill WFH.

Some of us are pointing out that it has some issues, and so cannot be applied slavishly. Some other people are Very Offended about this.

Wasn't it you shouting about "WFH fanboys"?

It would seem the only person offended was yourself.

Strumms

People who advocate wfh will be disappointed...

It will simply become lfw, live for work...

You’ll be making the spaghetti al forno ricetta 7pm and yapping to the other half kids then some schmuck boss will be ringing just after a ‘quick opinion’ on an email or something that transpired that day... the fûck would I blur that line and give them an ‘IN’ into my personal life, space and that of my loved ones. Fûck em....you won’t be earning a cent more then say 100 quid extra per month for power or internet expenses...

Antares35

Strumms wrote: »

People who advocate wfh will be disappointed...

It will simply become lfw, live for work...

You’ll be making the spaghetti al forno ricetta 7pm and yapping to the other half kids then some schmuck boss will be ringing just after a ‘quick opinion’ on an email or something that transpired that day... the fûck would I blur that line and give them an ‘IN’ into my personal life, space and that of my loved ones. Fûck em....you won’t be earning a cent more then say 100 quid extra per month for power or internet expenses...

As opposed to the 10 hours of sitting in traffic every week getting to and from the office

Finished up work at 4 today because it was a nice evening. Took the baby for an ice cream and a nice walk with the dog. Then after she went down for the night I had an hour to myself to finish off a few reports for next week. Love that flexibility

Sunny Disposition

Antares35 wrote: »

As opposed to the 10 hours of sitting in traffic every week getting to and from the office

Finished up work at 4 today because it was a nice evening. Took the baby for an ice cream and a nice walk with the dog. Then after she went down for the night I had an hour to myself to finish off a few reports for next week. Love that flexibility

Ten hours a week is a lot, another working day and more. I’d think a lot of people would give up some income to make that kind of time saving.
In good times companies that don’t introduce remote working now will be under pressure to keep staff, and in bad times cutting out the expense of running an office will be very high on the agenda.
It’s inevitable this is the future, and is hope there’s enough support to help employees and companies transition. WFH is great for most people, but people who live alone need to be minded a bit. I’ve a couple of employees like this and am encouraging them to look after this side of things, go to the local, join an exercise group, something like that, but try not to be alone all the time.

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Nobody is trying to kill WFH.

Really, because I've yet to see a positive thing from you regarding the topic

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Some of us are pointing out that it has some issues, and so cannot be applied slavishly.

Nobody.....

Anywhere.....

Has said that WFH works for everyone, in fact it has been repeated ad nauseum that WFH does not work for everyone or every role, but for a lot of people and a lot of roles, it does work, and works well in terms of productivity and work/life balance

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Some other people are Very Offended about this.

Across 3 WFH threads on 2 different forums you have consistently trolled, lied and made up rubbish excuses why WFH is a bad thing. People are just tired of your nonsense at this stage

Being called out on your antics is not the same as being offended by your antics. Someone with your vast experience should understand the difference

Strumms wrote: »

People who advocate wfh will be disappointed...

It will simply become lfw, live for work...

You’ll be making the spaghetti al forno ricetta 7pm and yapping to the other half kids then some schmuck boss will be ringing just after a ‘quick opinion’ on an email or something that transpired that day... the fûck would I blur that line and give them an ‘IN’ into my personal life, space and that of my loved ones. Fûck em....you won’t be earning a cent more then say 100 quid extra per month for power or internet expenses...

Dont answer the phone

Mrs OBumble

Deleted User wrote: »

Across 3 WFH threads on 2 different forums you have consistently trolled, lied and made up rubbish excuses why WFH is a bad thing.

That's a very interesting claim.

Please name, specifically, a lie I have told.

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

That's a very interesting claim.

Please name, specifically, a lie I have told.

Unreal...

The_Honeybadger

Are people seriously letting managers invade their downtime, taking calls in the evenings etc where they weren’t before WFH? I don’t see why WFH would necessitate this, unless the manager in question is disorganised.

Flinty997

The_Honeybadger wrote: »

Are people seriously letting managers invade their downtime, taking calls in the evenings etc where they weren’t before WFH? I don’t see why WFH would necessitate this, unless the manager in question is disorganised.

Unless both parties are disorganized,

Strumms

Antares35 wrote: »

As opposed to the 10 hours of sitting in traffic every week getting to and from the office

Finished up work at 4 today because it was a nice evening. Took the baby for an ice cream and a nice walk with the dog. Then after she went down for the night I had an hour to myself to finish off a few reports for next week. Love that flexibility

Well, personally I’ve never had a week that involved 10 hours travel. I don’t know many, actually apart from one guy who’d spend an hour getting to work and back, it’s a pretty rare example...he thought it was going to be good for his finances going and buying a cheaper fix me upper with land in Leitrim.. 5 years later, 5 days of Edgesworthstown to Santry was raping his pocket, in an 05/06 Camry if my memory is right...

Raping his pockets, his time with family and sleep / wellbeing...

My last gig was on average 50 minutes total traveling per day and no motorways...

Strumms

Deleted User wrote: »

Dont answer the phone

It’s a tactic I certainly employed, but in reality, in a family set up ? Really ? So they are gonna force you and your family to start screening calls ? Looking at numbers ? Don’t think so... too much stress and invasiveness. Fûck that.

Not answering the phone is not a complicated process

Jim2007

Strumms wrote: »

It’s a tactic I certainly employed, but in reality, in a family set up ? Really ? So they are gonna force you and your family to start screening calls ? Looking at numbers ? Don’t think so... too much stress and invasiveness. Fûck that.

Deleted User wrote: »

Not answering the phone is not a complicated process

I do not give out my private number. My work phone goes on at 8:00 and off at 17:00. Outside of those hours to leave the phone on requires a picket fee and an appropriate hour rate should I have to respond to a call.

The more you do, the more that is expected!

Antares35

Strumms wrote: »

Well, personally I’ve never had a week that involved 10 hours travel. I don’t know many, actually apart from one guy who’d spend an hour getting to work and back, it’s a pretty rare example.

Ten hours a week is an hour to work and an hour home, not that rare at all.

Interested Observer

Strumms wrote: »

It’s a tactic I certainly employed, but in reality, in a family set up ? Really ? So they are gonna force you and your family to start screening calls ? Looking at numbers ? Don’t think so... too much stress and invasiveness. Fûck that.

Force you? Screen calls? What? This is a scenario you've effectively made up, and you seem to be looking for problems that don't really exist.

fits

I don’t have work email on my personal phone and I don’t give my number out. If they want me to have both set up they can give me a phone - which would be left in locked home office outside working hours.