Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Long term WFH and impact on property

135

Comments

  • #62
    KyussB
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭KyussB


    There are at least two opposing aspects to this
    1: Employers letting people get used to WFH, means most of the management class gets exposed as useless, and they will fight against this. This also means that finance has more difficultiy blowing up property bubbles, by working with businesses to locate everyone in the middle of cities with scarce accommodation.

    2: Employees that WFH are invisible and easy to outsource/replace, can't unionize, and will be losing their jobs within a decade, to workers their employers pay to train up in cheaper countries - this will also create pressure (far too late) for keeping work localized.

    Things will be different, but they'll also be the same. The average worker will get a slightly better deal for a very short time, while unwittingly laying the groundwork for reducing their own bargaining power and for their employers to fuck them over and replace them.

    It's pretty ironic really, because at the same time as this is happening for white collar better paying jobs - we'll be onshoring the shittier jobs that we'd traditionally bring in migrants for.


  • #63
    Mike3287
    Closed Accounts Posts: 379 ✭✭Mike3287


    hello2020 wrote: »
    This. Remote working means Business will move jobs from Dublin to cheaper places like India (not to some counties in Ireland).
    Already large MNCs like IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, Accenture etc have more employees in India than say Ireland or any European countries.
    IBM alone employs some 130,000 in India !

    Yep

    If we are lucky they might keep them in the EU and go to Poland etc

    Know an accountant who worked for Sony financial services in London earning reasonable money 60k+ and his job went to Gdansk in Poland for less than half his salary

    If your not physcially needed, someone else can do it elsewhere, work in IT myself and always make myself available to be on site, without that my job gone


  • #64
    whippet
    Registered Users Posts: 7,668 ✭✭✭whippet


    hello2020 wrote: »
    This. Remote working means Business will move jobs from Dublin to cheaper places like India (not to some counties in Ireland).
    Already large MNCs like IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, Accenture etc have more employees in India than say Ireland or any European countries.
    IBM alone employs some 130,000 in India !

    Where it is feasible it is already been done in large multinationals - Covid has no impact on this business case for them.

    The vast majority of people employed in Ireland are employed with SMEs and I don't see how many of these could even look at or think about outsourcing normal jobs abroad - we actually have call centres here who are outsourcing for MNs !!

    What will change is business owners looking at the costs for rent, insurance, rates, light, heat, security and support staff for physical buildings. No need to worry about car parking, traffic. Sick days reduce, productivity goes up.

    Our company has reduced it's office space by about 60% in the last two years while adding a couple of extra to the headcount. The office is still there - hot desks, meeting rooms etc .. but only used when needed and we have a couple of junior engineers and finance staff based there. Generally it is younger staff who prefer to be in the office as they live in shared accommodation or with their parents and working from home isn't appealing.

    What has become clear is that most business have the bare essentials regarding technology to allow remote working - and what gaps they have are easily filled. The old comms room with air conditioning will become a thing of the past as smaller companies move to AWS / Azure / Sharepoint environments (the cost is reducing by the day to get in to the cloud)


  • #65
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Drifter50 wrote: »
    Surely the larger companies will take this as an opportunity to sideline expensive employees and manage expensive costs off their accounts

    Why have these larger companies been keeping these expensive employees on the books until now if they can just drop them?

    Remember, working remotely (or from home) is an employer thing, not an employee thing (in the main)
    So why havent these larger companies just advertised for these cheaper, remote employees in the past? Why does COVID-19 change that?

    I'm seeing lots of confirmation bias on this thread with nothing to back it up other than more of the same.


  • #66
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Why have these larger companies been keeping these expensive employees on the books until now if they can just drop them?

    Remember, working remotely (or from home) is an employer thing, not an employee thing (in the main)
    So why havent these larger companies just advertised for these cheaper, remote employees in the past? Why does COVID-19 change that?

    I'm seeing lots of confirmation bias on this thread with nothing to back it up other than more of the same.

    Certain industries will require Irish based employees specifically. Then other tax arrangements will be called into question in Irish based employees are not used. Irish tax benefits would be lost as substance criteria is not filled.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    hello2020 wrote: »
    This. Remote working means Business will move jobs from Dublin to cheaper places like India (not to some counties in Ireland).
    Already large MNCs like IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, Accenture etc have more employees in India than say Ireland or any European countries.
    IBM alone employs some 130,000 in India !

    There are always more people at the bottom of the food chain than at the top.

    If this is so amazing and trouble free, why isnt everyone up to CEO in India?


  • #68
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    smurgen wrote: »
    Certain industries will require Irish based employees specifically. Then other tax arrangements will be called into question in Irish based employees are not used. Irish tax benefits would be lost as substance criteria is not filled.

    And significant money will be lost (or not saved) by these companies if they move out of Ireland, IDA grants for example, not just corp tax.

    It also means that these companies have to establish themselves offshore (lets say India) unless they are moving to a 100% contractor work force, when never works out well longterm.
    If you have employees in India then your company pays corporation tax in India and not necessarily just for the Indian entity.


  • #69
    Snow Garden
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,126 ✭✭✭Snow Garden


    hello2020 wrote: »
    This. Remote working means Business will move jobs from Dublin to cheaper places like India (not to some counties in Ireland).
    Already large MNCs like IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, Accenture etc have more employees in India than say Ireland or any European countries.
    IBM alone employs some 130,000 in India !

    IBM is a good example. It is a company once deemed as American as apple pie. In 2017 IBM reached a point where it had more Indian employees than American employees. That trend has continued apace and the new CEO of IBM is from India. I think Covid will accelerate the IT move to India where resource and graduate skills are improving year on year.


  • #70
    hello2020
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭hello2020


    GreeBo wrote: »
    There are always more people at the bottom of the food chain than at the top.

    If this is so amazing and trouble free, why isn't everyone up to CEO in India?

    The top level exec. and marketing team remains in US/Europe as that's the market they are catering to.
    But VPs and layers below are moving overseas.
    Also even at the bottom most layer, IT jobs are paid better than other sectors.
    So i will say its a big loss to economy unless some laws are created to protect local workforce.


  • #71
    hello2020
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭hello2020


    whippet wrote: »
    Where it is feasible it is already been done in large multinationals - Covid has no impact on this business case for them.

    some new sectors which are at risk of outsourcing are teachers and Doctors (like skin specialist)..
    already people are questioning 50K+ student fees when courses are taught online.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    There's still an assumption that the office is where people will normally be, and some people will choose to WFH occasionally.

    I suspect by the time people return to offices, that assumption will be reversed. A lot of people are struggling at home, but a lot more are becoming very accustomed to it.


  • #73
    storker
    Registered Users Posts: 5,644 ✭✭✭storker


    hmmm wrote: »
    There's still an assumption that the office is where people will normally be, and some people will choose to WFH occasionally.

    I suspect by the time people return to offices, that assumption will be reversed. A lot of people are struggling at home, but a lot more are becoming very accustomed to it.

    It appears that many employers are too. I can't remember the source, but I saw a report that said many employers have been pleasantly surprised at how well the transition to working from home has gone, and how productivity has not been affected. The mass slacking-off doesn't appear to have happened.


    .


  • #74
    krissovo
    Registered Users Posts: 2,645 ✭✭✭krissovo


    In my 10 years of working from home Irish managers have been the biggest blocker to working from home. They have always overcomplicated the perceived negatives and most Irish managers I know have used work from home as an excuse to recover from a hangover and that is what they naturally think employees would do.

    US, German and UK managers don't have the same issue I have found in my experience. They tend to have complete trust until they prove otherwise rather than starting at zero and building it up.

    The argument of moving workforce to lower cost countries is there and of course with outsourcing a lot has happened already however what is left behind are the well paid management, highly technical or local sales roles that lower cost counties cannot do. Most of the multi-nationals in this country have already done this.


  • #75
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    hmmm wrote: »
    A lot of people are struggling at home, but a lot more are becoming very accustomed to it.

    What do you base that on?


  • #76
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    hmmm wrote: »
    There's still an assumption that the office is where people will normally be, and some people will choose to WFH occasionally.

    I suspect by the time people return to offices, that assumption will be reversed. A lot of people are struggling at home, but a lot more are becoming very accustomed to it.

    To be fair you are replacing one assumption with another here.
    Its all supposition, on everyones part.


  • #77
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭hometruths


    I presume the boss of Deutsche Bank is not dealing in assumptions and suppositions.
    Deutsche Bank is also seizing the opportunity to press on with its cost-cutting drive by pivoting to working from home.

    At the bank’s virtual AGM, boss Christian Sewing said: “If 60 per cent of employees worldwide can work away from their offices and still deliver excellent services to our clients, then of course we have to ask ourselves: can we give our staff additional flexibility to work from home if they want to?”

    https://www.cityam.com/square-mile-lockdown-city-firms-plot-staffs-return-to-work/


  • #78
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    GreeBo wrote: »
    To be fair you are replacing one assumption with another here.
    Its all supposition, on everyones part.
    True, but that's why it's called a discussion board ;)

    I can only go on what I'm seeing both in my workplace and in the others I know of. I'd say there is a 40/60 split between those who love working at home (40) and those who are not liking it (60). The 60 percent are particularly struggling because they are trying to mind kids, or are in poor home situations, or are trying to work off the kitchen table. The impression I get however is that people are beginning to see this is going to last a while, and are beginning to make an investment in their home office setups - Ikea desks will be out the door for a while.

    My opinion is that the 40% will be higher towards the end of the year/beginning of 2021 which I think is the earliest we will see many offices even think of bringing large amounts of staff back into the office. Are people going to give up their improved home working areas to get back on a bus/train, and lose 2 or 3 hours a day to go into an office?


  • #79
    Saudades
    Registered Users Posts: 378 ✭✭Saudades


    storker wrote: »
    I saw a report that said many employers have been pleasantly surprised at how well the transition to working from home has gone, and how productivity has not been affected. The mass slacking-off doesn't appear to have happened.

    It's only been a couple of months, the novelty is new for most people, so that report has too small a sample size date range to really judge yet.

    Plus the country has been in lockdown, people can't go outside anyway so if you're stuck at home you might as well be working.


  • #80
    c.p.w.g.w
    Registered Users Posts: 4,994 ✭✭✭c.p.w.g.w


    The one thing that will potentially slow down WFH will be some union, inevitably looking for the staff to get paid more due to costs being reduced by the employer...I'd imagine the removal of commutes, planning lunches, getting the kids to crèche/school before work, paying for crèche, paying for lunches out, won't be factored in by the union.

    Have heard of one such place where WFH is in place until January 21, and the shop steward has been trying to get people on board to get paid more due to costs the company are saving...


  • #81
    legrand
    Registered Users Posts: 678 ✭✭✭legrand


    I've been WFH for 15 years. On average 30 percent work from home full time. Large multinational (60k employees). Today 99 percent are WFH (our IT infrastructure can support that). Global Real Estate and leadership now looking at this as new normal. Many real estate programs being deferred (obviously) and many others now under review.

    If course there will be need for office based staff (new hires, managers who need to work with their teams directly etc) but I can imagine corporate finance seeing huge cost savings potential if our Facility portfolio reduced.

    In the near to medium term we have to consider how people will get back to (office) work e.g. 1 in 6 to maintain social distance etc. All businesses will be looking at this now.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    hmmm wrote: »
    True, but that's why it's called a discussion board ;)
    Dont disagree, just seem people are painting things they disagree with as "assumptions" and things they agree with as "facts"...
    I can only go on what I'm seeing both in my workplace and in the others I know of. I'd say there is a 40/60 split between those who love working at home (40) and those who are not liking it (60). The 60 percent are particularly struggling because they are trying to mind kids, or are in poor home situations, or are trying to work off the kitchen table. The impression I get however is that people are beginning to see this is going to last a while, and are beginning to make an investment in their home office setups - Ikea desks will be out the door for a while.
    There arent too many people in houses that can accommodate 2 office spaces though.
    You also start to get into awkward conversations like ergonomics and so called "desktop" support, not to mention "Hey, where did my canteen go?"
    My opinion is that the 40% will be higher towards the end of the year/beginning of 2021 which I think is the earliest we will see many offices even think of bringing large amounts of staff back into the office. Are people going to give up their improved home working areas to get back on a bus/train, and lose 2 or 3 hours a day to go into an office?

    will companies allow them to stay at home long term though?
    Employees have wishes, employers have demands!


  • #83
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    c.p.w.g.w wrote: »
    The one thing that will potentially slow down WFH will be some union, inevitably looking for the staff to get paid more due to costs being reduced by the employer...I'd imagine the removal of commutes, planning lunches, getting the kids to crèche/school before work, paying for crèche, paying for lunches out, won't be factored in by the union.

    Have heard of one such place where WFH is in place until January 21, and the shop steward has been trying to get people on board to get paid more due to costs the company are saving...

    Well to be fair costs for the employees have potentially increased.
    Broadband, heating, lighting, food, electricity.
    These have all increased due to wokring from home, typically the house would be empty with no heat on or electricity being used from 9-5.
    In my own case I would be eating 2-3 of my meals in the office, now Im eating all 7 of them at home ;)


  • #84
    hometruths
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭hometruths


    GreeBo wrote: »
    There arent too many people in houses that can accommodate 2 office spaces though.

    Not in Dublin, true.


  • #85
    c.p.w.g.w
    Registered Users Posts: 4,994 ✭✭✭c.p.w.g.w


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Well to be fair costs for the employees have potentially increased.
    Broadband, heating, lighting, food, electricity.
    These have all increased due to wokring from home, typically the house would be empty with no heat on or electricity being used from 9-5.
    In my own case I would be eating 2-3 of my meals in the office, now Im eating all 7 of them at home ;)

    My buddy was working out how much he was saving with WFH and it was 80€ a week roughly...

    He is making lunch at home, and it's something that doesn't need to kept in a lunch box, so he finds it much easier, also no petrol money for his journey to & from work...and his not having 4 star bucks a week now.

    My misses worked from home last week, and our food shopping bill was much smaller the preceding week...lunches and breakfast are much easier when WFH...unless your workplace has a kitchen that is


  • #86
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    A large move towards working from home is something I have been calling for for a long time. It solves so many issues both on a personal, community and national level that it really is crazy that it’s not much more popular.

    It allows people live where they want (in their home areas, near family for example or cheaper area, people can buy rather than rent, smaller mortgages, bigger houses etc etc), eliminates commute (or reduces the number of them per week) which has big benefits, reduces traffic for those who have to travel and all the benefits from that, it opens up vast areas of the country for people to live in again and the boost that gives to the local economy, reduces childcare costs (not suggesting minding kids while working but it allows pick ups, drops off and older kids who still need someone in the house after school etc but can entertain themselves won’t need after school etc).

    I think the benefits to local towns and the local economy is big. I work from home quite often anyway but I still take a spin to town at lunch to get a roll (obviously not at the moment but once things are back to normal I’d be back doing it). So that keeps money in the local economy.

    Personally I still think there is value in face to face meetings etc and I do hands on stuff at times in the lab but overall I’d like something like an 80% wfh 20% in the office. I was probably on about 50/50 on average prior to covid.
    GreeBo wrote: »
    There arent too many people in houses that can accommodate 2 office spaces though.
    You also start to get into awkward conversations like ergonomics and so called "desktop" support, not to mention "Hey, where did my canteen go?"

    Even a box room without a bed fitted out correctly can have two people working. Also working from home opens up bigger houses as people can live further away from places like Dublin. I’m about to put in planning for a self build and I have incomes a big office, big enough to kit out to professional office level and will easily accommodate two people working full time from home (probably 4 but that’s not going to happen) if required plus study space for kinds, even a small meeting table etc. You will see more and more people including proper offices in their homes.
    GreeBo wrote: »
    will companies allow them to stay at home long term though?
    Employees have wishes, employers have demands!

    Look at home many companies are keeping wfh going until January and many coming out saying they can see wfh continuing long term for large numbers of staff. It’s small minded old fashioned businesses that are against wfh. It’s just as easy to diss and spend the day online in the office as at home, in fact it’s easier as just being seen in the office gets a lot of people away with doing nothing.


  • #87
    Third_Echelon
    Registered Users Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭Third_Echelon


    I've been working for the same large IT multinational for nearly 17 years now across mostly technical roles and their policy (in the Dublin office) was to allow 2 days per week WFH after you had around 2 years of service with the company. At the time it was a lot of graduates coming out of college that needed to spend time in the office learning the ropes, learning the job and soft skills and gaining knowledge from the senior colleagues. After those first couple of years, they could definitely be trusted to WFH for 2 days. It was only a Tuesday and Thursday allowed and it worked out great.

    The role I have been in for the past 4 years or so is a mix of technical and account management/people management, so there is definitely more focus on face to face relationships with the customer and I only worked from home on a Friday as it was a travel day for most colleagues/contractors (I'm working in the US now with the same company). I thought that it might be a bit more difficult to do the mixed role WFH, but I haven't found it to be too bad at all. I just needed to make sure to schedule time with people and video chat has been really beneficial in helping not to lose that contact.

    The area that i'm living in now to be close to my customer is ridiculously high rent (SF Bay Area), so we are definitely thinking about moving to an area with more bang for the buck. We need a house as we are currently in an apartment with two young kids and we need the space... they're only going to get bigger :D . If I can in the future work 2 or 3 days remote and only come onsite for meetings that really need in person, that would be great. Would make things easier for sure.

    Both my own company and my customer who are also one of the biggest companies in the world, are both very much planning for WFH to be an option in the future. Both are planning for end of 2020 at least for roles that don't need to be physically present to be productive. It has definitely accelerated WFH to become more the norm than it was before in companies that didn't encourage it. In IT it was definitely more prevalent, but other industries it was frowned upon by managers stuck in the old way of thinking.

    We may move back to Ireland in the next few years/medium term and WFH definitely opens up a lot more places as potential places to buy. Buying in Dublin isn't necessarily going to be a must anymore.


  • #88
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,007 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Niko White Spruce wrote: »
    Even a box room without a bed fitted out correctly can have two people working.

    Two people on conference calls in a box room?:cool:


  • #89
    Tork
    Registered Users Posts: 3,252 ✭✭✭Tork


    c.p.w.g.w wrote: »
    The one thing that will potentially slow down WFH will be some union, inevitably looking for the staff to get paid more due to costs being reduced by the employer...


    Has it ever occurred to you that in some workplaces, the unions have been trying to get more people to WFH but management wasn't interested.


  • #90
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    GreeBo wrote: »
    Two people on conference calls in a box room?:cool:

    If both are on headsets it’s not massively different to side by side or back to back with someone in an office. Could also take calls in another room if they are only now and then rather than constant calls all day.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Third_Echelon
    Registered Users Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭Third_Echelon


    Niko White Spruce wrote: »
    If both are on headsets it’s not massively different to side by side or back to back with someone in an office. Could also take calls in another room if they are only now and then rather than constant calls all day.

    Yeah, it would definitely be workable...


Advertisement