Slashdot Mirror


Work From Home People Earn More, Quit Less, and Are Happier Than Their Office-bound Counterparts (qz.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Working from home gets a bad rap. Google the phrase and examine the results -- you'll see scams or low-level jobs, followed by links calling out "legitimate" virtual jobs. But Stanford Graduate School of Business professor Nicholas Bloom says requiring employees to be in the office is an outdated work tradition, set up during the Industrial Revolution. Such inflexibility ignores today's sophisticated communications methods and long commutes, and actually hurts firms and employees. "Working from home is a future-looking technology," Bloom told an audience during a conference, which took place in April. "I think it has enormous potential." To test his claim, Bloom studied China's largest travel agency, Ctrip. Headquartered in Shanghai, the company has 20,000 employees and a market capitalization of about $20 billion. The company's leaders -- conscious of how expensive real estate is in Shanghai -- were interested in the impact of working from home. Could they continue to grow while avoiding exorbitant office space costs? They solicited worker volunteers for a study in which half worked from home for nine months, coming into the office one day a week, and half worked only from the office. Bloom tracked these two groups for about two years. The results? "We found massive, massive improvement in performance -- a 13% improvement in performance from people working at home," Bloom says.

217 comments

  1. Maybe for a travel agency by sunking2 · · Score: 1

    Try it in any sort of collaborative job. I'm not saying it can't or doesn't work across the board. But blanket statements like this article tries to make are ridiculous.

    1. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Ogive17 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Exactly! We had a new policy put in place around 1 year ago that allows employees to work from home 2 days per month. While that doesn't seem like much, it's very annoying when you need something from that person. There is nothing that can replace face-to-face discussions.

      I have worked from home twice, both times because I had someone coming to fix something at my house. While I was able to keep up with my emails much easier, I was unable to push the needle on any projects.

      If your job already revolves around being on the phone/computer all day without the need of input for others, working from home makes sense. For anyone else, get thee to the office!

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    2. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by robcfg · · Score: 2

      It wouldn't also work if you need dev kits or another pieces of special equipment. Just imagine having to buy more dev kits as you wouldn't be able to share them and the logistics of sending it to your employees back and forth...

    3. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not to mention, working from home as a introvert, fantastic, working from home as an extrovert, sure way to go nuts. I worked from home and enjoyed roasting a chicken for lunch, only takes a few minutes to set up at morning smoko and then set the timer and work. You check every time you stop work for your always favourite coffee and snack, always there. Then at lunch out comes the fresh roast chicken and you enjoy a great repast as you have an extended relaxing lunch whilst watching a movie and than back to work. All done in your shorts because you started work as soon as you woke up, no time lost doing anything else, except for a morning cuppa and relieving yourself as necessary. You can get a huge amount of work done by more than enough by 3 oclock even with a long lunch, stop there or work into the early evening and take the whole afternoon off tomorrow.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Try it in any sort of collaborative job.

      I think you'll find that a lot of people here have tried it in a collaborative job (programming). It works very well. I mean, have you completely missed how successful open-source projects distributed all over the world have been?

    5. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have actually found that in management positions you need to be in the office a majority of the time. However the low level people doing the work, have been more productive when they can work from home more often. Especially when you have fewer people in offices, and more people in bullpen areas.

    6. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow have you heard of Slack, Webex, Skype, Trello, phones, and video conferencing? They allow easy quick communication over long distances. You might want to try them.

    7. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by hattig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well communications issues are easily solved, but the company needs to put a solution in place. They're far more efficient than wandering around looking for the person you want.

      As regards productivity, you don't do it enough for it to become second nature. Two or three times a week and you will find you get more done.

      The main downside is the hot desking on the days you go into work, especially if everybody decides to come in that day.

      Obviously WfH works best for people who in the main work individually. Programmers, brilliant.

    8. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some jobs are necessarily collaborative, but a lot of jobs are collaborative because people are lazy. I find this is true in a lot of hardware and software jobs that are being labelled as 'inherently collaborative' in companies I have worked for that are on the long fail-boat to nowhere.

      The best places I have worked have done exactly the same jobs without collaboration and there really wasn't any need: you go to the docs (in the old days on a disk somewhere, today on a webserver). Everyone implements according to the docs, if it is suspected they are wrong, or if the implementation they beget is not optimum, or does not meet spec for the product then you call a meeting where no one actually has to physically co-exist (often we could not anyway). Issue is debated, if the conclusion isn't obvious then someone makes a judgement call and we move on.

      It doesn't work everywhere, I have no idea what the "brocoder" lifestyle at places like facebook and whatever are, or whether they are like they are by necessity, choice or insanity. But occasionally this tries to leak on to the kinds of work I'm involved in, and insanity ensues until someone can amputate the infection.

    9. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      For the past approx. 5+ years, I've been working on a contract gig, large federal govt. agency.....from home.

      Everyone on the teams, work remotely, all across the US, and there is NO problem in getting things done.

      This is all IT work. Servers are in data centers we hit remotely, we have teleconferences for meetings...IM for screen shares if needed.

      It works great. No problems her, and yet...most of the folks I work with, I have no idea what they look like, or anything about them other than their voices.

      Frankly, I LOVE this work mode. I do my job, I'm home for package deliveries (no more getting stolen off porch)...you can be doing things around the house even while on conference calls (yay for headsets)....

      And my commute is a blistering walk across the hall from my bedroom to my office.

      Frankly, I get MUCH more done at home these days, than I did in the office....and doing it as a contractor is great as that I get to bill for all hours worked.

      Sure, I'm available more often...but I always get paid for it too.

      Reminds, me, I need to check with my CPA to see if I can write off boxer shorts and t-shirts as work attire.

      :)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    10. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

      Maybe that is true for jobs that require daily face-to-face interactions. But in a lot of jobs there is plenty of work that requires concentration and no direct interaction. Dealing with email. Producing documents and reports. Reviews and analysis. Research. And in most cases you don't want to be interrupted by others when you're dealing with that. If it's necessary, in many cases phone calls or IMs are good enough.

      The one thing that may be a bit hard to do remotely is direct and constant supervision of others. But if the team requires that, you seriously need to review your work practices.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    11. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except programmers *don't* work in the main individually. That's the point.

      They need to discuss designs, they need to rubber duck off each other, they need to work on what the requirements are actually meant to be with each other, and with other disciplines in the team.

      Sure, getting pulled into 3 meetings a day is frustrating when you just want to fix that damn bug that's plaguing your mind, but it's important, and part of the job.

    12. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd actually argue that the work-from-home like behavior, is exactly why many open source projects fail, or fail to become good.

      Many open source projects suffer from the issue that there's no unifying vision of where they're going. That results in hundreds of little features being added on in all kinds of different directions, which is great if what you want is a feature checklist filled out, but it's terrible if you want a good user experience.

    13. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, working from home as a introvert, fantastic, working from home as an extrovert, sure way to go nuts. I worked from home and enjoyed roasting a chicken for lunch, only takes a few minutes to set up at morning smoko and then set the timer and work. You check every time you stop work for your always favourite coffee and snack, always there. Then at lunch out comes the fresh roast chicken and you enjoy a great repast as you have an extended relaxing lunch whilst watching a movie and than back to work. All done in your shorts because you started work as soon as you woke up, no time lost doing anything else, except for a morning cuppa and relieving yourself as necessary. You can get a huge amount of work done by more than enough by 3 oclock even with a long lunch, stop there or work into the early evening and take the whole afternoon off tomorrow.

      Ditto!!

      My eating habits are GREAT working from home...I have time to take something out to thaw in mornings if I want....I've also fired up my smoker in mornings, or rotisserie on ceramic grill for lunches...it is nice to have time and full kitchen to cook and eat good meals.

      And if I'm low on food, I take my "lunch break" to run up the road to grab some veggies or whatever and bring it home to cook.

      I find the main problem with this...is having to make sure I hit MUTE on the phone on teleconferences if I"m eating something crunchy!!!

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    14. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? I work mostly from the office but our team is scattered across the country and about half work from home 100 per cent of the time. We have no more collaboration issues than any other team I've worked on.

    15. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, as someone who works form home 4 days a week, I've found a couple of easy solutions to this:

      * Corporate IM. Require all remote employees to keep it running. You find that you're able to reach employees *more* this way, since strolling up to a desk often ends with the employee out to lunch, in a meeting room, off to get coffee, taking a dump, etc. With IM, if they're at the desk (or in many cases such as HipChat, have their phone on them), you can reach 'em. As a bonus, many of these applications (most, really) allow for impromptu 3-way or n-way conversations as well.

      * Collaboration software (e.g. webex, GoToMeeting, etc): regular mandatory standups using this software means everyone is in one virtual spot, you can interact just like you can if everyone was in one room, etc. As a bonus, you don;t have to dork around with a cranky projector (instead you just share your screen.)

      --
      Now as a manager, you need to get your ass into the office - daily. Politics and all that BS requires face-to-face. On my part (technical/architectural lead, non-management), I use the one day a week on-site to stack my meetings. Everyone (that I care about) knows I'm onsite that day as well, which actually makes scheduling things with me much, much easier.

      Now managing remote workers is a bit different, but if you're having a hard time moving the needle on projects remotely? Well, I hate to say it, but one of these factors is the problem:
      * you're not using the right tools
      * your reports are slacking off and lean towards the unprofessional
      * you need help running and structuring meetings
      * the projects are poorly planned/executed
      * you're one of those dreaded micromanagement types.

      Seriously - those are the only reasons I can think of that require you to keep your reports right there where you can bug them whenever you (or circumstance) require.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    16. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Working from home 1 or 2 days a week was the norm at a previous job, and even most of the extroverts took advantage of that policy. For a lot of tasks, not being interrupted helps a lot, plus working from home regularly is a great way to manage your work-life balance, as you can easily slip some personal errands into the day while still getting all of your work done.

      But working from home all the time? I did that for a while, and even being an introvert, that drove me nuts. After a while you do miss the interaction at the office.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    17. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Working from home when you are a software developer is a blessing.

      It's very annoying when you are writing code and are deeply concentrated when some manager comes over to your and interrupts you because they want to see how you are doing.

    18. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by turbidostato · · Score: 2

      "Exactly! We had a new policy put in place around 1 year ago that allows employees to work from home 2 days per month."

      And that exactly what the problem is. There are times when something that is good, when going below a threshold is even worse than nothing.

      You don't have the culture, nor the tools, to support working out from office, so those two days are a nuisance. You should try more or less the other way around: about a day a week in the office, all the others from home. That *is* where the advantages come from.

    19. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by rholtzjr · · Score: 3, Informative

      I see this as not so much as a collaboration issue but a management issue. There should be no reason why they could not contact you with technology that is currently available today to discuss an issue. There are people who must have that face to face interaction in order for them to participate in a project. I never understood that, but they do exist. I have worked on projects that have done both, remote and local, and saw no difference in the outcome. Some people just NEED to physically be there to be happy about the outcome. Me not so much. I find most human interaction distracting when performing my primary job function. I usually ignore them anyway when in the office.

    20. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what a PM is for, and most OSS doesn't have a PM - remote work is not to blame.

    21. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I do that kind of work in Skype all the time.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    22. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many open source projects are done in the developers' free time, or to support the developing companies internal use cases. So their priorities may be different, and the way that feedback is incorporated into the planning process (if any) is likely to be different from a commercial product.

    23. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by rholtzjr · · Score: 3, Informative

      You are more than likely an extrovert. You require that physical face to face to feel that you accomplished something. There is NOTHING that can not be done locally that can not also be done remotely (physical labor excluded). Everything you described in your comments CAN and ARE accomplished remotely just as well as when you are physically located in an office building.

      Frustrating is not the word that you should be using for your 3 meeting pull ins. That is disruption from your primary task (also called chaos).

    24. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah I don't understand these people.

      I work in a position where I have to constantly talk to others. I just Skype or hipchat then. Or email them if it isn't time sensitive.

      Sounds like they're just shitty at their jobs and need to feel the thrill of hovering over shoulders all day.

      Or maybe they're terrified that communication tools cut out the need for some sniveling go-between? I dunno.

    25. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      That is not the fault of the location in which the project is being created, that is the management of the project that is lacking.

    26. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by swillden · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But working from home all the time? I did that for a while, and even being an introvert, that drove me nuts. After a while you do miss the interaction at the office.

      I work from home full time, have been doing it for years. I don't have the option of spending some days each week in the office, because the office is a thousand miles from me (I live in UT, the office is the Googleplex in Mountain View, CA).

      I've tried a couple of solutions to the office interaction problem. I agree that you do miss it. The best one (not currently set up for issues of space and layout in the office) was an always-on video conference. We set up a VC station at an unused desk and just kept it logged in 24x7. I had another in my home office which I logged into when I started work in the morning and logged out of at the end of the day.

      Most of the time I kept my side muted so they didn't have to hear the noises in my house, and I kept the volume low to reduce distraction, but I could still catch bits of interesting office conversations and join in, etc. I also waved hello to people when I noticed them walking by, etc. It worked quite well. I will get that set up again when conditions in the office permit. I still have the VC system in my office because that's how I do all of my meetings (all the conference rooms in the offices have VC setups).

      My other method is occasional visits. I try to get to CA about every other month, usually for a week. My weeks there end up being wall to wall meetings, a fair number of them not with any specific agenda but just to hang out with various people for a while to see what's on their mind, and to share what I'm thinking about. Lots of lunch meetings, too. I also often socialize with my co-workers in the evenings. I've had dinner at several of their houses, with their families. One co-worker is interested in guns so we went shooting one afternoon. Another likes SCUBA, so we took a day and went down to Monterrey. And so on. All of this helps to build good personal relationships for when stuff gets stressful.

      I find my on-site time draining because it's so much interaction. But I do it anyway because it does help.

      One other thing I do is to carry on a lot of "water cooler" conversations via IM and, to a lesser extent, email, about both personal and professional topics. My first grandchild was born early this week, so I IM'd several of them and emailed the whole team. When I get frustrated or annoyed or unusually impressed by some bit of code or design work, I vent/celebrate via IM with one or two of them. Occasionally we rant about politics, etc.

      I think this all works out great. I get to live where I want, have the flexibility that working from home provides (e.g. on Wednesday I skipped out for the afternoon to go see the new Spiderman movie with my sons), and I can use technology to satisfy my need for interaction with my colleagues. Not that I need that much interaction; I'm an introvert.

      I'm a big fan of working from home. I actually did it for most of a decade at my previous employer (IBM) as well. You have to figure out how to make it work, but it's awesome. Work/life balance can be tricky for some people. Personally, I just don't draw a sharp line between "working" and "not working" but instead go back and forth between work and personal stuff throughout the day. Others do need that sharp division and have to set strict schedules for themselves. It works if you work it.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    27. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by Tool+Man · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ditto here. I work for a telecom company that has become quite remote-friendly the past few years. I do spend a lot of time on the phone / laptop, meeting virtually with others across multiple time zones. The difference I find is that the company has adopted it as an approved way of working (depending on role).

      I sit on my little coastal island, manager's three TZs away, and things get done. What's not to like?

    28. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by pr0fessor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have worked from my home office for about 7 years there are a lot of advantages.

      I get payed the same as those that work in the office although I don't have two 30-45 minute commutes so I save a lot on gas but even more because I only have one car. I would need second vehicle if I worked in an office. I'm probably saving at least $6,000/year in gas, wear and tear, insurance, and a payment on a second car.

      I don't need to wear a tie and or dress business and I don't shave everyday either because you can't see me over the phone or voip. I don't buy a lot of new clothes like I did when I worked in the office I wear a lot of sweats or shorts and t-shirt.I don't eat out any where near as much because I can grab breakfast in the kitchen and eat it at my desk while going over my email first thing in the morning. I save probably 2.25 hours a day between time spent driving, and waiting to get breakfast from pick a place.

      The spare bedroom I turned into my office is larger than most of the offices I've had in an actual office some where just cubicles, though it does mean I don't have a spare bedroom in the house.

      I do have to pay for internet but honestly I would have it anyway... it used to be the largest account offered in my area 100mbps they offer 300mbps in my area now but I haven't felt the need to upgrade yet.

    29. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure this is "msmash" trying to convince her boss that she's productive.
      "But neither you nor BeauHD have posted a worthwhile article in months."
      "Doesn't matter, this says we're more productive."

    30. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why does any of that need to be face to face?

      And 3 meetings a day? Generally a waste. I've never been in a meeting where everyone needed to be there, staring intently at the product manager or architect as he or she ummed and uhhed their way through a presentation of minimal importance to nearly everyone involved.

      Plus, no easy way to recall that information, so it all gets sent out as an email after the meeting anyway.

    31. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Likewise. Spent 10 years in management, the suit, the pay-level, all the trappings. Oh, and a three and half-hour commute.

      Spent the last 4 years working from home, back writing code, interacting daily with other team members all around the world. I'm home when my kids get home. Never been happier.

      Companies I've worked for in the past have had a strict no-working-from-home policy, with the explicit argument being that people can't be productive at home (and the implicit argument that management didn't trust the workers). The experience so far has been the exact opposite: personally I've never been more productive, and I'm more accountable to the business - in real time - through peer reviews, being available on chat. There's no hiding, even if you are coding in your underwear.

    32. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what you're saying is that you don't actually do anything and you just pester (push the needle) people who do?

      You're probably a useless sack of shit but you think you do things.

    33. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      At one job I was paired with a coworker, and as former college classmates, we got along smashingly well. His wife ended up getting shipped half-way across the country, so he went with her and worked remotely. Not only did it drive him insane, but it really was bad for me as well. To keep him sane I often ended up in a windowless conference room skyping with him. That meant I was missing out on our normal office socialization, and also being his emotional anchor as he dealt with a quiet, empty house.
       
      He got 2x as much done as me and would get frustrated when he ran out of stuff to do. Often he'd push ahead on things that weren't decided yet, and end up going in a direction that we didn't ultimately take. I point-blank told him, "Dude, just work 9-3.", but he insisted on working 8 hrs per day. Company definitely got their money out of him.
       
      When I left he ended up getting entirely disconnected from the company, as they assigned nobody to be his partner. He ended up doing less and less regular work, with nobody willing to pay attention to him. He'd try to set up meetings, and people would cancel because facetime meetings were more important. It got to the point where he was just doing work as requested a few days per week, while looking for other jobs and walking the dog. Once he found an office job, he was done. I'm not sure if I would have kept that up longer or not. They were willing to pay him for doing nothing half the time, and there's a definite benefit in that. I can think of a lot of things I'd like to explore if I had that sort of a gig.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    34. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      I wonder how much "push the needle" means appearing busier than you are. I've worked for people like that. They'd literally sit around pushing icons on their desktop when they couldn't grab someone else's phone or hover over a worker. It not only annoyed the workers, customers would beg to be left alone as well in one of the worst cases. The person in question was universally acknowledged an expert in the field, but disliked for being incredibly intrusive. A literal busybody.

      Unless you are interacting with some massive piece of machinery that's unsuitable for home installation, there's precious little that actually needs you to be in a certain place at a certain time. Yes, maybe staring people down or displaying your bone-crushing handshake appeals to you, but an effective manager doesn't really need that - having control over subordinates' remuneration and job future is generally more than enough to keep most minions toiling.

      Of course, you could be one of those fortunate "managers" who have all the responsibility but none of the power, but that rarely lasts. Or you could be the kind of person who annoys your staff so much that the only time they'll do anything is when you're directly wielding the whip. Or, I suppose that you could be so lacking in motivation yourself that the only way you can make yourself work is to see fellow-sufferers allegedly working.

      But for most other people these days, geography is secondary.

    35. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Three meetings a day would make me worry, if I managed you. For developers, my experience is rarely more than one intra-departmental meeting a week. The only weekly meeting I regularly attended was the one where we reviewed what would be acceptable to go live that week. Nor was it uncommon for people to phone into that one.

      Meetings are infamously a waste of time and they are one area where quality is infinitely preferable to quantity.

      I exchanged information and ideas with people on 3 different continents today. No one's complaining. They're all repeat customers, in fact.

    36. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, working from home as a introvert, fantastic, working from home as an extrovert, sure way to go nuts. I worked from home and enjoyed roasting a chicken for lunch, only takes a few minutes to set up at morning smoko and then set the timer and work. You check every time you stop work for your always favourite coffee and snack, always there. Then at lunch out comes the fresh roast chicken and you enjoy a great repast as you have an extended relaxing lunch whilst watching a movie and than back to work. All done in your shorts because you started work as soon as you woke up, no time lost doing anything else, except for a morning cuppa and relieving yourself as necessary. You can get a huge amount of work done by more than enough by 3 oclock even with a long lunch, stop there or work into the early evening and take the whole afternoon off tomorrow.

      I love you.

    37. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you can't work remotely, you have a serious communication problem. Working in-person can be a very effective crutch. So effective that it easily hides problems that you won't know about until it's too late.

      If your team can't survive working remotely, it definitely can't survive people being unexpectedly unavailable, for example.

    38. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a needy fuckwit.

    39. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have actually found that in management positions you need to be in the office a majority of the time.

      And I found that, as a manager, the only reason I need to be in office is because my manager, or my manager's manager, refused to use technology to communicate and insist on meeting face-to-face, even for the most trivial communication ("do X for me, get back to me within today").

      Plus, they like to catch their subordinates to give a few instructions any time whenever some thought hits them, that's why we were constantly needed in the office.

      For my actual work, I can do 90% of them remotely. Going to office a day or two (those 10% don't necessarily concentrate on one day) is sufficient.

    40. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The main downside is the hot desking on the days you go into work, especially if everybody decides to come in that day.

      A simple booking system would have solved it for 90% of the time. You don't even need sophisticate ones that actually book a desk.

      You only need one that (1) people could quickly input "I plan to go to this office today/tomorrow" and (2) show how many people have planned to go to which office and the desk capacity there. You can then choose not to go if too many people planned to be there.

    41. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Sounds almost exactly like my own work-at-home story from the last 12 years or so.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    42. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

      Good for your marriage, too--I sometimes think the chief reason my wife hasn't divorced me yet is the fact that she has dinner waiting for her when she gets home from the office every night.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    43. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      * Corporate IM. Require all remote employees to keep it running.
      * Collaboration software (e.g. webex, GoToMeeting, etc):

      Hah. Of course remote workers need this to communicate. The problem is us non-WFH types must now attend to yet another comm channel.

      As if face-to-face meetings, email, phone, mobile, 'enterprise social' (yammer and friends), noticeboards and paper circulars dropped off at your desk weren't quite enough. Now we must attend to ICQ's modern descendants going 'uh-oh' as well.

    44. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
      Amen!

      If a boss requires his livestock to be within sight all day long, he is incompetent because he cannot effectively measure work output.

    45. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      This.

    46. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      At Cisco three meetings is a *light* day.

    47. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Why would a manager need to go into some office? When his/her peers and execs are also scattered around the continent?

      Only for 3 out of the last 18 years has my manager lived in the same state as "the office".

      Telecommuting isn't just about saving a half hour drive. It's also about not spending tens of thousands every few years to move to whatever crappy place HQ insists on being in

    48. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      Mh, i think its the only way forward for any kind of office work, if you cant handle it in a virtual confrence, then why would you face to face. You lose less hours in transit, you can spend more hours on the job if you are willing and they are willing to pay. You dont arrive already stressed out after 2 or 3 hours on five different trains of which four were late AND the company doesnt need any kind of infrastructure while the job you do remains exactly the same and if anything goes as i remember it : if you dont do it right, you get fired pretty fast. I think its all about lower management nurds in need of control who need to see their little army where they can whip them i can find zero logical reasons to not let people work from home in the current age. Communications would be a very bad counter-argument. Logistics, cost of infrastructure. My last retard job i spent 11 hours a day away from home to get paid four . Working on dopamine, after three weeks from home, three months later ... still "not good enough" so i put it on the table : "im good enough to do the exact same shit for hours on end talking to the exact same people on the exact same subjects following the exact same script (yea they're like still stuck in the pre-research era when scripted (another piece of control-freakery and not trusting your employees, if you think they cant manage why do you hire them ???)
      so i says :"i can do the same from home but twice the amount, what gives ?"
      never heard from them again, they're constantly "hiring" but actually not ... its no wonder Dentsu sold them off lol
      as TFA says : its usually a scam , but i think thats just because of lower management control freaks and distrust and im gonna repeat myself : "if you dont think your employee can cut it or isnt pro enough to do so without pampers and you holding his or her hand, why on earth did you hire them in the first place ?"
      look around ... living in Hellgium theres about 60.000 unemployed (registered, not counting elderly or disabled or on leave or sick or in jail or ...) so its not like theres no choice ?
      tsk ... WILL WORK FROM HOME FOR LESS ? i dont care even if you're chinese or russian ? who got me a gig hahah :p

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
    49. Re: Maybe for a travel agency by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      thousand times now i talk to myself forgetting something after clicking yes im sure that was all i have to say ... off-topic but ... as scams go, there was a girl from charleroi, the french part of the country (not far by american standards but here 30km is far you see) who actually staid in that city in a pension as if the place were china with cheap dorms since she couldnt get one where she lived and was hoping to get "at least something to put on her resumé". This is belgium, allright, capital of europe ... fresh-from-school early 20s girl ... the worst part is they actually let her do that. Lodging doesnt come at €10 a night here ... but never mind b/c this has nothing to do with the original article my apologies

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
    50. Re:Maybe for a travel agency by nhat11 · · Score: 1

      "Exactly! We had a new policy put in place around 1 year ago that allows employees to work from home 2 days per month. While that doesn't seem like much, it's very annoying when you need something from that person. There is nothing that can replace face-to-face discussions."

      Wtf? You seriously can't pickup a phone and talk to the person? This is simply being stubborn to change

  2. I need interaction by Lucas123 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At my job, I can work from home whenever I want, and several other co-workers do, but I choose to go into the office because the atmosphere is more conducive to getting work done. I can bounce ideas off the people around me, I'm not distracted by household events or pets and there's more of a sense of urgency for completing tasks, which helps me focus better.

    1. Re:I need interaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yet your co-workers may want you to work from home so that you quit distracting them.

    2. Re:I need interaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's my reasoning too. That and my apartment doesn't have space for a dedicated office area, so if I do it too much it ends up feeling like I'm just home. I get distracted and end up making up work late into the night. Or just losing track of time and working late anyway.

      Though the main reason our devs limit our WFH to one or two days a week is that my employer has concerns about timekeeping. From candid discussions our managers are apprehensive about work from home becoming "work" from home, like having someone in a cube makes them more honest about their spreadsheet. But they don't want to give up their Fridays at home either.

    3. Re:I need interaction by rholtzjr · · Score: 2

      Might be conducive to you, but you are distracting others from their work when you interrupt them with your "bouncing".

    4. Re:I need interaction by fluffernutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I"d mod this up but I already commented. Guys like this are exactly why I like to work from home. Some people are the ones that have to go to other people, and some people are the ones that do the work and help others do their work at the same time. I'm the latter, so the more people must go through instant messaging to get to me, the more control I have over my day.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    5. Re:I need interaction by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      TBH I think both are right. We need interaction - sometimes, and we also need the opportunity to hide and avoid distractions when we're working on something specific. I'd like to see businesses move to a more hybrid model, with say one day a week at the office, three days working-from-home.

      (If anyone is saying "Surely four days working-from-home", well, I'd also like to see a four day week. And I can see this model actually helping with that - less travel means more time to work, and the balance can probably be attributed to increased productivity due to better working conditions.)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    6. Re:I need interaction by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      Agreed, but the method in which you interact is key. I have also interrupted said "bouncer" stating "Could I get back to you" as well as participated when interrupted. It depends on the circumstance.

      I used to work for a company that had a 4 day work week back in late 1990's, it kind of went like this:

      Old CEO: "We need new talent, offer a four day work week"

      New Employees: YAY!

      New CEO: "Where is everyone on a Friday morning?"

      Old Employees: "Four day work week"

      You see where this is going?

    7. Re:I need interaction by asylumx · · Score: 1

      They why wouldn't *they* work from home?

    8. Re:I need interaction by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Depends on the type of work. Work from home is a great idea if you work on isolated tasks. Few problems are like that and if they are a regular part of your work I suggest you reskill as you'll be next to be replaced by someone speaking Panjabi.

    9. Re:I need interaction by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Indeed. These "idea-bouncers" are incredibly annoying. Sure, occasionally you can do a meeting especially for this, but otherwise this is just a disruption. I avoid working at customer sites whenever possible, and when I am not there, I work from home. I think the 13% productivity increase is on the low side. For the work I do (IT Security Consulting and some related engineering), it is more like 100% more productivity, and I am not the only one at my company that makes that experience. Of course, we have all highly qualified and motivated people that require no supervision and the only way anybody is judged is by results. That is certainly not a model that will appeal to people that basically can only be compensated by time worked, because result quality is really bad. But for anybody result-oriented, defining your own work-environment is _obviously_ massively superior. It is interesting to see that it seems to even bring some improvement for the others.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    10. Re: I need interaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked from home for 3 years. I was happier and made more money. I also fucked around, worked about 50% of the clock, and got less shit done.

    11. Re:I need interaction by PJ6 · · Score: 1

      Yet your co-workers may want you to work from home so that you quit distracting them.

      I'm sure there are people out there who can't read social cues, but in my experience most offices develop a very pleasant rhythm of work/break. Everyone needs to stop for a few minutes now and then, and if you like the people you work with, the interactions make coming to work a treat.

      It's the one thing I miss the most since I exchanged a daily commute for a home office.

    12. Re: I need interaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does he rape them in their asshole?

  3. Kids by KiloByte · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having kids or a nagging wife means you'd want to waste that 1h30m commuting, sit in a cubicle then waste another 1h30m coming back. For the rest of us, though, extra three hours of productivity or leisure makes such a massive difference that it's hard to find enough downsides.

    Some of us go way over the edge -- especially if you can train your boss that's it ok to call you at 4am rather than at the crack of noon; those of us do work hard to maintain the public opinion on programmers :).

    But if you require being on the clock, the employeer can get the best of both worlds for any child-less employee.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    1. Re:Kids by bogaboga · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Having kids or a nagging wife means you'd want to waste that 1h30m commuting, sit in a cubicle then waste another 1h30m coming back.

      ...bold mine.

      Why is "wife" associated with "nagging" more often than not? In my case, I find that I associate "wife" with the words "loving & caring."

      I guess I am lucky, no?

    2. Re:Kids by knightghost · · Score: 2

      You mentioned something extremely important - how many hours do we work? Do companies now expect 12 hours a day now that some people no longer have a long commute?

    3. Re:Kids by iggymanz · · Score: 2

      if she truly cared about you she'd nag you sometimes, because you have shortcomings that need external pushing

    4. Re:Kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you can't set up an interruption-free working area at home, and if someone else cannot respect that, you've got bigger problems.

      Yes, children are a pain but they get used to it in the end.

      You really should not be having issues with the wife regarding WfH. There's something wrong there. She wants you to go to work. Why?

    5. Re:Kids by KiloByte · · Score: 2

      Why is "wife" associated with "nagging" more often than not? In my case, I find that I associate "wife" with the words "loving & caring."

      Just wait a few months (or years if you're really lucky), and then you'll see.

      And with kids, the wait time is negative.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    6. Re:Kids by cayenne8 · · Score: 0

      Why is "wife" associated with "nagging" more often than not? In my case, I find that I associate "wife" with the words "loving & caring."

      I suppose you could just substitute "woman" for wife and have it a bit more generic.

      It just happens...it is in their DNA.

      :)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    7. Re:Kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're gay, and your wife is a man.

    8. Re:Kids by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Just wait a few months (or years if you're really lucky), and then you'll see.

      How long precisely is one supposed to wait before it becomes apparent? A few years? Does 20 count as a few?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    9. Re:Kids by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      That's different from it being the primary attribute.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    10. Re:Kids by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      This. If I didn't want my wife and family around I wouldn't have married my wife and start a family.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    11. Re:Kids by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It sounds like you're in a bad relationship. This is not normal, it is not normal to think "Nagging" when you think of your spouse. I'm not going to suggest you immediately leave her, but you probably need to sit down with her and discuss where your relationship is going.

      I'm sorry you're in such a horrible relationship and I hope you can both take the steps needed to make it work.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    12. Re:Kids by Quirkz · · Score: 2

      I think you're pushing a false dichotomy here. One can want the family around *some* of the time, but not *all* of the time. Or want them around most of the time, but not when you're working or really trying to focus. I can both love my kids and also state factually that they're not conducive to concentrating on a project.

    13. Re:Kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...bold mine.

      Why is "wife" associated with "nagging" more often than not? In my case, I find that I associate "wife" with the words "loving & caring."

      I guess I am lucky, no?

      Yes. Likely, you, like me, are more turned on by brains than giant boobs and thereby create our "luck." Seriously, you still-dating nerds out there, consider "is this a woman I want to interact with for the next 50-70 years?" It's easy to find women you want to bang, not so easy to find ones you want to meaningfully talk to.

    14. Re:Kids by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Why is "wife" associated with "nagging" more often than not? In my case, I find that I associate "wife" with the words "loving & caring."
      I guess I am lucky, no?

      You're lucky. There's a good reason so many people associate "wife" with "nagging". It's probably also not a coincidence that the divorce rate is higher than ever and the marriage rate continues to drop.

      If you personally associate "wife" with "loving & caring" because of ongoing personal experience, count your lucky stars.

      Also, to be fair, it's not just women that are awful. Go talk to single women and ask them about their dating experiences; there's no shortage of stories about "man-children" (men with very poor emotional maturity), men still living in their parents' basement after age 30, misogynistic men, abusive men, etc. I estimate that roughly 75% of the population, in both sexes, has little to offer to a relationship and would make a very poor relationship partner. The only reason the marriage rate was so much higher in decades past (and the divorce rate lower) was because of social pressure, as it was necessary for continued growth and survival of the society. The cost was that countless people were trapped in loveless, unfulfilling, or even downright abusive or miserable marriages. These days, people are refusing to make that sacrifice more and more, and the cost is more singledom, more loneliness, and fewer children which is causing a demographic crisis. What's the answer to this? I'm not sure, but I'm guessing something to do with androids. Or perhaps the society illustrated by Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" where there's no marriage or natural childbirth, and children are both created and raised by the state.

    15. Re:Kids by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Yes, children are a pain but they get used to it in the end.

      Not necessarily. I have a single-female friend with a son who seems to be completely out of control every time I see him. I can't imagine trying to get any work done with him around; he simply will not listen when he's told to sit down and be quiet because the adults are talking. With so many kids like this having ADHD these days, I don't see how their parents could possible work from home effectively unless they're in school or an institution or something.

    16. Re: Kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I don't have "bigger problems."
      What I have is a 2 bedroom apartment. If I owned a house where I could setup a private office area, or a larger apartment, then it wouldn't be an issue.
      I might regain 2 hours of time by skipping a commute but I'm salaried so I'm not making any extra money. I'm not saving enough in gas to make up for the cost of getting a larger place.

    17. Re:Kids by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      This. If I didn't want my wife and family around I wouldn't have married my wife and start a family.

      - well, you don't really know what you are getting into. You don't know what you are getting into when you are born, you don't know what you are getting into when you get married, you don't know what you are getting into in quite a few situations, without experience in those matters you don't really know and you cannot get experienced without trying it.

      Some people are luckier than others, some people have it worse or better than others, as we know YMMV.

    18. Re:Kids by bogaboga · · Score: 1

      ...The only reason the marriage rate was so much higher in decades past (and the divorce rate lower) was because of social pressure

      I beg to differ on this.

      As an individual that has visited many parts of the world, I find that many in the so called 3rd world see a union between a man and a woman differently.

      Whereas cash is an incentive, there's more "real" love for a partner. It isn't the "me...me" and "stuff" attitude I have seen in the west.

      A man may have very little but the woman will stick around. She will do chores "for him", including cooking, washing, bearing kids and so much. This includes "respecting" in-laws.

      In the west, money rules. In most cases, it's "war" between the wife and in-laws and there's general lack of respect.

      Women [and men] yell, swear and do all despicable things in front of their kids.

      It's sad...

      Divorce lawyers are always more than happy to carry out their trade.

      The way we're handling ourselves in the west will lead to our extinction. Immigrants will come from the 3rd world to fill the void we'll have created. Someone needs to do something about it.

      I have done my part...I have a number of kids.

    19. Re:Kids by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Personally I just go into a room, close the door, and tell them to leave me alone. It's still nicer knowing they are close by and I can take my breaks with them etc.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    20. Re: Kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The kids don't have adhd. Well, some do. The vast majority, however, just have shitty parents who don't know how to put boundaries on their children's behavior, or feed them a steady stream of sugar and starches, or stick them in front of a screen for 6 hours and wonder why the kid just won't stay still, or some combination of the above.

    21. Re: Kids by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      You don't have anywhere you can put a computer? Even a rodent dorm room has space for that.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    22. Re:Kids by edx93 · · Score: 1

      ...bold mine.

      Why is "wife" associated with "nagging" more often than not? In my case, I find that I associate "wife" with the words "loving & caring."

      I guess I am lucky, no?

      Based on my experience I'd say yes, you are. I have personally observed MANY women constantly nag at their significant others for something (not doing the dishes, not preparing the meal well, screwing up an appointment etc). I have yet to see ONE guy do the same thing to their wife/girlfriend when they fuck up. When a male friend of mine would complain that his gf does X, I would often suggest for him to say something and complain. This is often met with a "why bother?"

      Scold a man for not doing the dishes? Good for you for not letting him be a lazy ass! Scold a woman for not doing the dishes? ... good luck. Let me know what happens.

      Of course, I could be surrounded by a shitty, biased sample, but that's definitely my observation.

      Preparing for being modded as troll by SJWs in 3...2...1..

    23. Re:Kids by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      That's not "real love", that's subservience. What you're describing is more primitive cultures where women were 2nd-class citizens and without a husband, basically couldn't survive, or at least would be social outcasts. That's the cost of what you advocate: a miserable existence for half the population. It works out OK for some lucky women who manage to find a decent husband, but for those who get stuck with an abusive one, an uncaring one, or just an incompatible one, it's hell. That's why the divorce rate is high now: women in western nations are no longer content to be subservient slaves, so if things aren't working out, they leave. The problem is, it's just too hard to find people who are really that compatible with you, for such a long time. Even people who start out compatible in their 20s end up changing so they're no longer compatible in their 40s. Back in the "old days", this wasn't a problem since people were lucky if they lived to 50 anyway. Now, 40 is barely considered middle-aged.

    24. Re:Kids by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      Personally I just go into a room, close the door, and tell them to leave me alone.

      That starts being possible only once the kids go into late teens, and usually not even then.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    25. Re:Kids by tigersha · · Score: 1

      Who, me?

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    26. Re:Kids by tigersha · · Score: 1

      Maybe you have weird kids but playing with my children beats the hell out of the nagging b1tch3s at work!

      I will take a shorter commute BECAUSE i have kids any day

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    27. Re:Kids by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      It's surprisingly common. A woman seems nice and true, and then you marry her. After she has children, her whole worldview changes. Things that weren't important to her before, suddenly become super-important. She can't get them herself, so she begins urging her husband to get them for her. When he can't or won't, she begins requesting again and again. This will never stop. This is one of the reasons that slapping a woman used to be socially acceptable, because it would bring an end to this. Of course, we don't do that any more, and under the Duluth Model all men are automatically assumed guilty in any domestic abuse case. Progress!

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    28. Re:Kids by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Having kids or a nagging wife means you'd want to waste that 1h30m commuting, sit in a cubicle then waste another 1h30m coming back. For the rest of us, though, extra three hours of productivity or leisure makes such a massive difference that it's hard to find enough downsides.

      Some of us go way over the edge -- especially if you can train your boss that's it ok to call you at 4am rather than at the crack of noon; those of us do work hard to maintain the public opinion on programmers :).

      But if you require being on the clock, the employeer can get the best of both worlds for any child-less employee.

      Working from home is only great when it's running your own business or...
      Your wife goes to work and you look after the kids while on the keyboard or phone.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  4. So IBM, HP, Yahoo! and the rest are wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Please make it so.
    I worked from home for the last 12 years (until I retired last year). I was far more productive not having to commute 40 miles up the M3/M25 (UK Motorways near London) every day. That's around 4 hours a day that I could never get back.
    My Quality of Life was far better, didn't spend on commuting (apart from once every 2 weeks), my health was better.
    Yes, I worked in a team. We used modern technology to keep in touch.
    What's not to like eh?

    1. Re: So IBM, HP, Yahoo! and the rest are wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So true, mine was 6 hours round trip. I didn't mind 10 hour days because I was way more productive, and I could just leave the home office by turning out the light and closing the door. Face-to-face is usually less productive the more frequently those meetings occur.

    2. Re:So IBM, HP, Yahoo! and the rest are wrong? by rholtzjr · · Score: 2

      Yes, HP, Yahoo, IBM and the rest ARE WRONG. The management needs to find another method to justify spending multi-million dollar lease agreements for their corner offices.

    3. Re:So IBM, HP, Yahoo! and the rest are wrong? by fear025 · · Score: 1

      IBM, at least, is using it as a way to get rid of older, higher paid workers in the USA. By making an employee come back to the office and/or move to a regional office, they are able to force people out without running into those pesky layoff laws.

    4. Re:So IBM, HP, Yahoo! and the rest are wrong? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Understandable, since there is hardly anybody competent left at IBM, at least in the consulting area. They seem to have really gotten rid of anybody with actual experience ans skill. On the plus side, their daily rates are now down to what anybody else gets and they have lost their nimbus of infallibility, making people see the arrogance and incompetence clearly. They are basically dead, but it will take them a few more years until they die. By then, those responsible will all have activated their golden parachutes.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  5. I wonder why most companies still hate that. by bistromath007 · · Score: 2

    It's almost like they're mainly interested in exploiting workers into replacement as fast as possible. Weird.

    1. Re:I wonder why most companies still hate that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple - it's because it only works when you're doing something non-collaborative.

      As soon as you need to collaborate, having people remote turns out to be a disaster.

    2. Re:I wonder why most companies still hate that. by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A lot of companies go through a cycle of allowing or prohibiting work at home. I think that the only real reason they do it is so they can get people to quit so they don't need to fire them and pay any severance. If you eventually need to downsize a division, institute a work from home and then retract it in two years and you'll probably get at least a third to leave since they've built their life around working from home and don't want to change.

    3. Re:I wonder why most companies still hate that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Managers hate it because they're still stuck in the office.

    4. Re:I wonder why most companies still hate that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong, wrong, wrong! That might be the case if you can't be bothered to use one of the many video conferencing products available or perhaps if you're really lazy and non-self motivating but for the rest of us working from home works great in a collaborative project. I'm not saying the odd meeting shouldn't be held face to face but everything else benefits hugely from WfH.

    5. Re: I wonder why most companies still hate that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, it actually fosters new ways of accomplishing the same thing in a different way with the byproduct being happier workers. I think it's called innovation.

    6. Re: I wonder why most companies still hate that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. I do work for clients I have not seen face to face for years. Once the trust is built, the need for face time drops.

    7. Re:I wonder why most companies still hate that. by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

      Sounded like Melissa Mayer uncovered that remote workers don't do much.

      Were her findings overstated or what exactly?

    8. Re:I wonder why most companies still hate that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What an utter crock of shit.

      I've worked in technology for nearly 20 years now and I have never worked with a solely on shore team. How many people actually do? There's always some off shore component, whether it's an office in another location or a vendor in another country. Working with virtual teams is a reality of all but the most basic in house technology teams and as such working from home can be worked around trivially.

      Are you one of those shit employees who overly relies on their colleagues to pull them through the day and then calls it "collaboration"?

    9. Re:I wonder why most companies still hate that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't buy this at all.

      The real reason companies move to remote working is simple - money. It costs tens of thousands per person per year, if not more, in office space. Even if remote working resulted in a decrease in productivity it would still be worthwhile, except of course their have been many studies showing it improves productivity so there really is no loss to the company.

      If you have really seen the behaviour you described, I'd suggest you work in a shit hole and should move.

      PS. I know you're American. You guys always seem to get shitty about remote working.

    10. Re:I wonder why most companies still hate that. by gweihir · · Score: 1

      At that time, anybody competent had already left Yahoo, so her observations are not worth much. Her measures then made Yahoo lose the semi-competent workers left for an uniform landscape of incompetence. She did fit nicely into that though.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    11. Re: I wonder why most companies still hate that. by bistromath007 · · Score: 1

      He's probably a boss trying to justify his irresponsible and classist use of labor.

    12. Re: I wonder why most companies still hate that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lmfao, this shit is hilarious. Who comes up with this?

      What are you collaborating on that you can't do through IM, email, or conference calls/screen shares?

      Interpretive dance? Competitive fellatio?

  6. Depends on where by spaceman375 · · Score: 2

    This has got to be very culturally sensitive. There's lots of social pressures in china that take time and energy away from just plain working. These go away somewhat when you can relax in your own home. Other countries with a more lax work ethic won't fare so well. I'm sure many people will try to game their employers in places with higher rates of corruption in general.
          I also doubt this will work as well in places like Brazil, where work is very much a social experience. Being socially active with your co-workers is more than just prevalent; it's the norm. Many people won't give up that interaction. Not to mention an air-conditioned office beats an uncooled home.

    --
    On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
    1. Re:Depends on where by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention an air-conditioned office beats an uncooled home.

      Err...why would you not have A/C in your home?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Depends on where by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Not to mention an air-conditioned office beats an uncooled home.

      Err...why would you not have A/C in your home?

      A lot of homes in Europe don't have air conditioning. The house I grew up in in England was well over 100 years old and it didn't have any air-conditioning. In truth, it only really would have been useful a few weeks out of the year. Of course, summers are warmer in England than they were in the 80's now so the number of weeks it would be useful have surely gone up.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:Depends on where by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Not to mention an air-conditioned office beats an uncooled home.

      Err...why would you not have A/C in your home?

      My previous house didn't have central A/C. The 100 y/o furnace wasn't compatible with it, and it would have cost big $$$$ to rip it out and replace with something newer.

      OTOH, lack of A/C is a significant reason that that house is "previous".

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    4. Re:Depends on where by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      Err...why would you not have A/C in your home?

      Colorado weather, for one. It can get hot during the day, but it always cools off at night. Why spend all day paying to keep a house cool if you're going to get it for free as soon as the sun sets? My experience is most of the houses in the state don't have it.

      Of course it makes more sense because I'm out of the house for a majority of the warmest hours. If I worked from home all the time, I'd have to reconsider cooling.

    5. Re:Depends on where by spaceman375 · · Score: 1

      Plenty of people who have a job are still too poor to afford a/c. Many can't afford the electricity for a fan either. American, and even just plain affluent, ethnocentrism born of ignorance is a sad thing.

      --
      On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
    6. Re:Depends on where by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Because it's Brazil; didn't you read his post?

      Air-conditioned homes aren't that common outside the US.

    7. Re:Depends on where by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Just writing this message to say that I like your .sig

      On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    8. Re:Depends on where by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      My previous house didn't have central A/C.

      There's something just awesome about that statement and your nick...

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    9. Re:Depends on where by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      My experience is most of the houses in the state don't have it.

      Wow..I've never lived in a house that didn't have it...even OLD 100+ year old houses, had window units put in.

      Then again, I've lived primarily in the south of the US or out in Arizona....neither place is really livable without AC.

      I can't sleep very well in a place warmer than 71F at night...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    10. Re:Depends on where by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      I agree, in most of the south, it would be unliveable without AC. Mountain air is different, though. It's 90 outside right now, but it will be 75 just after sunset and 54 by midnight. The dry, thin air cools off very quickly. Usually all you need is a fan.

    11. Re:Depends on where by ahodgson · · Score: 1

      Pacific Northwest, here. Not many homes have or need A/C. I have it now just because the heat pump comes with the function for free, but it only get used the rare muggy evening.

    12. Re:Depends on where by hazardPPP · · Score: 1

      Air-conditioned homes aren't that common outside the US.

      Also, humongous homes aren't that common in many countries. There are countries which are quite wealthy, but where the average dwelling is very small (think Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong) or at least significantly smaller than in the US (think Europe). Americans have, on average, large homes where they can afford to dedicate one room to a home office. In many other countries this is not an option for most people - they just don't have the space.

  7. Not for me by houghi · · Score: 1

    I would hate to work from home. I like having a clear divide between work and home.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:Not for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would hate to work from home. I like having a clear divide between work and home.

      so how do you pay for your home if you keep it clearly separate from your work? how do the funds cross the line?

    2. Re:Not for me by hattig · · Score: 2

      Work from the local pub instead then.

    3. Re:Not for me by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      Now that is an interesting idea. I have done that from a Starbucks, but a pub sounds more pleasant.

    4. Re:Not for me by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Personally, I agree. That said, there are some things you can do.

      If you have space, set up a home office. You might need to figure out how much of an office you need--I know some people who have set aside a room for work, others who have a particular area in the living room or bedroom where they work, and others who are fine with just a particular computer (this is the "work" computer and nothing but "work" happens on it). I've also seen advertisements for "home offices" that people can build in their backyards.

      If you don't have space at home (or you feel you need more than you have), rent an office. The company I work for is 3000 miles from where I live, which is a pretty long commute. I rent a small office because I like having the separation. It's not horribly expensive, though I'll agree that's money I could put into having a bigger space at home. See what you can find that's convenient--my office is about 4 miles from home, so I can drive, bike, take the bus, heck--I can walk if I want to.

      When I started looking, I found various options--from expensive office-tower arrangements with shared office equipment (copiers, printers, etc.), fancy coffee machines, and people who will professionally answer the phone for you to reasonably priced office space with Internet and A/C to WorkBar-type arrangements where they'll give you a spot to hook up your laptop and that's about it.

      YMMV, of course, depending on where you live.

    5. Re:Not for me by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Basically what my boss (he is the CEO) did when he got children. Works very well for him.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  8. As long as the work is getting done... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...my boss doesn't care. And it's a god send because with more and more people living by themselves... the extra time you have to take care of errands is just so, so helpful. At least in my case.... because it's such a pain leaving after a long day at the office and realizing "damnit... I still need groceries... gotta go to the gym... my car needs an inspection". It's just nice to get that sh!t outta the way and still be able to get your work done.

    I hope more companies review the benefits.

  9. Working from home is the WORST by wardrich86 · · Score: 0

    I've tried it. It sucks. So many things around you to keep you distracted. Plus your wife and kids forgetting that you're supposed to be working. Also, throw in the fact that if you work from home you now never get away from your work. Then there's the fact that you don't actually get to shoot the shit with anybody - who are you going to water cooler talk with? Yourself? I find it hard to believe that anybody can appreciate working from home.

    1. Re:Working from home is the WORST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been working at home for a couple of years. I have four kids, but the door locks and they know Daddy's not home.
      IM keeps the team in contact, for both work and social stuff. It's completely ideal.

    2. Re:Working from home is the WORST by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Then there's the fact that you don't actually get to shoot the shit with anybody - who are you going to water cooler talk with? Yourself?

      That's what internet forums like this are for. I work with a bunch of engineers and even here, I rarely get any quality conversation. People would rather talk about fishing boats than topics I have any interest in. On the internet, I can easily zero in on conversations I'm interested in, and it's far faster and more efficient, because talking is so damn slow and I read very quickly.

      So many things around you to keep you distracted. Plus your wife and kids forgetting that you're supposed to be working

      Not everyone has a wife and kids. Fewer and fewer people (esp. educated ones) are having kids at all these days.

      I wish I had a work-from-home job. My house is generally quiet and peaceful. There's cats, but they usually sleep most of the day anyway. By contrast, work is chaotic and noisy, thanks to the open-plan offices that are all the rage these days. I can barely concentrate at all, and my work output is poor until late afternoon or evening when everyone finally goes home and I can finally get something done, until I'm too hungry and tired and want to leave. If I could, I'd probably set up a small office in my basement for the summertime since it's cool down there, and very quiet. Unfortunately, for my specialty (embedded), WfH jobs are ridiculously rare AFAICT. I guess I should have gone into web development because there seem to be tons of them in that sector.

    3. Re:Working from home is the WORST by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      There are people who just lack the discipline to wfh. You appear to be one of them, and likely also have issues at work if someone's not keeping their eye on you (too much time at the water cooler for wardrich86, time to have a chat ....)

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    4. Re:Working from home is the WORST by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      Not at all the case. I've just made myself some scripts so I can do my shit more efficiently than others to give me more down time.

    5. Re:Working from home is the WORST by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      Even if I didn't have a wife and kids, I'd still prefer an office. The change of scenery is nice, as is the ability to have a separate working and living space.

    6. Re:Working from home is the WORST by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I understand that in theory, but in practice, working in an office is sheer misery for me, and I'd much rather work at home. At home, it's very quiet, and I can always set aside a separate room just for my main job and make that my "office". At normal offices, it's just so ridiculously loud and noisy and chaotic, that it's extremely hard for me to concentrate and actually get anything done. Noise-cancelling headphones don't work well either: they get rid of annoying drones like fan noise or A/C noise pretty well, but then I can hear people's stupid conversations even better, which isn't helpful to me at all. Worse, people will sneak up behind me and startle me when I'm wearing them. Also, having so much activity and movement in my field of view all the time is distracting, and it's extremely uncomfortable having people right behind me constantly too. I don't have any of these factors at home, where I can control my environment.

      How other programmers manage to perform in the conditions I listed above, I really have no idea.

    7. Re:Working from home is the WORST by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's fair. I work in with a team of fellow geeks, so it's normal for us all to be engaging in random off-topic banter. I'd say work is also my social life so it works for me.

  10. Depends on the job by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The viability of working from home depends a lot on the job, and on the particular phase of that job.

    Taking my situation as an example: This week, I attended two physical meetings, but otherwise worked from home all week, because (aside from those two meetings), my current work is preparation that I am doing alone. This is great while it lasts, but it will stop in September, it will stop, because I'll be working with other people.

    Some maybe general observations:

    - Complex coordination - working out new ideas, or meeting with several people - just does not work well remotely. Face-to-face is a lot more efficient. In work-at-home phases, I still have 2-3 meetings a week.

    - Even as a total introvert, I recognize that face-time with people is important. I sometimes go into the office for an afternoon "just because".

    - If you are working remotely, it is essential to have appropriate messaging technology. The phone should only be used for urgent stuff, since it interrupts. I get maybe one or two calls per month. Email is king for anything non-urgent. Some sort of simple messaging fits comfortably in the middle: IRC or even SMS.

    - Working from home takes a certain amount of discipline, and sometimes it still doesn't work. Yesterday morning was a disaster: I was interrupted for non-work things a zillion times, and basically lost the entire morning. The flexibility to mix in private things is nice, but sometimes it also sucks - I'll be working on the weekend to make up the lost time.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Depends on the job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IRC? What do you think this is? The 1990s? Slack. LOL.

      (I used to be like you. Trying to push people to use IRC because it was here first and it still served a function. Then I realized that 99% of the rest of the world was already on Slack and it was too late.)

    2. Re:Depends on the job by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      We get that you're oh-so-trendy. Thanks for playing.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  11. I'm less productive at home by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

    I'm less productive at home.

    Yes, I have the wife and kids- but also at work I have a nice large office that I can keep clean and clutter free- and that really helps me focus and concentrate.

    At home I don't have a proper room set up as an office- we don't have any room spare. So the desk is just in a corner. It's a dumping ground for all sorts of junk. It's cluttered- and because my wife passes through it's not clean (I swear that woman just goes around dropping trash everywhere all day long- I do love her though lol).

    So whereas I'm welcome to work from home occasionally, my house is too small and there's no comfortable spot for me to set up. Also, remote desktop to the office is slow as crap (yes I know other places have better solutions than remote desktop). The office for me is simply more comfortable. When I win the lottery (or the wife finishes college and starts working) and we can get a bigger house I may be able to claim a room that is just for me- and then I may work from home.

    Right now- I hate working from home.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:I'm less productive at home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is entirely your problem, the lack of organization and separation. It was mine too (wife, 3 kids, farm) so I bought a $110/mo house to use for storage and work. It easily pays for itself and its just a few blocks from where i sleep.

    2. Re:I'm less productive at home by coofercat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right now I'm in a room we didn't get around to refurbishing yet. My desk is a mess, the wallpaper is horrible, and it's generally a bit of a dumping ground in here. I'm fine with it though - when I'm facing the computer, all that stuff behind me doesn't phase me at all.

      However, when we were renovating other bits of the house this room wasn't available, so I used to work in a shared work space in town (maybe 15-20 minutes walk from here). That had all the features you mention - clear, empty, quiet, etc. It also had a kitchenette to go to if you wanted a cuppa (so a handy mental break from your desk). That place cost £25/day for an ad-hoc 'turn up when you like' sort of arrangement. I could have negotiated a lower rate if I committed time. Contrast to £32 return train ticket (which then also consumes another 2 additional hours of travel time, on top of the 20 to get to town), and it's actually a pretty good deal.

      The thing I most appreciate about home working is the lack of commute. Not having to do that saves me time which means I get time to have breakfast and some playtime before bed with the kids. It also saves me a good deal of stress. Not walking to and fro does mean I need to get exercise in other ways though, which can be one of those things you never get around to without some self-discipline.

    3. Re:I'm less productive at home by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      That is entirely your problem, the lack of organization and separation. It was mine too (wife, 3 kids, farm) so I bought a $110/mo house to use for storage and work. It easily pays for itself and its just a few blocks from where i sleep.

      Indeed it is a problem. Not something I can avoid though, and I suspect there are plenty of other people who can't avoid it too. If we could afford more space we would get more space. If I were single it wouldn't be an issue- but having a family means private space is at a premium.

      Your $110/mo would be 10 times that price here for a cheap house, especially after I hooked up electricity and internet to the place. Cheapest broadband around here is about $70/month, or about 2/3rds the cost of your work-house.

      It would be cheaper to live in a bigger house with a spare office- or a house in a neighbourhood that allowed me to install an office-studio in the back yard. Then it would to buy/rent a separate place.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    4. Re:I'm less productive at home by supremebob · · Score: 1

      Depending on what I'm doing, my work from home productivity is about the same at home as it is at work.

      The pluses for being in the office are easier access to the rest of the development team (I can go ask them questions without using something like Skype or e-mail), and faster network connectivity to my servers that are in the office. The minuses for being in the office are the constant interruptions (the development team and helpless desk asking me constant questions, far more than I what I ask them), the shitty commute, and having to listen to people whine about things like politics and their personal lives. For the cloud hosted stuff, it's pretty much a wash whether or not I work from home since I need to VPN into it anyway.

      Sadly, the biggest problem with working from home is that your managers are assuming that you're goofing off when they can't see you. Even in this modern era where we have project tracking tools like JIRA and Salesforce that can pretty much track your productivity to the minute, they just get a warm and fuzzy feeling knowing that you in the office.

    5. Re:I'm less productive at home by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I'm less productive at home.

      Yes, I have the wife and kids- but also at work I have a nice large office that I can keep clean and clutter free- and that really helps me focus and concentrate.

      That's entirely your own fault. My situation is the exact opposite: I have no wife or kids, and my house is quiet. At work, it's a chaotic, noisy mess. I have no control over my workplace at work since I'm not the boss (and even my boss and his boss have no control over this stuff either, sadly). I'd be far more productive at home.

    6. Re:I'm less productive at home by Wulfson · · Score: 1

      I have similar issues; not enough room, no good place set up, all that...so I definitely believe that the potential top-end of my productivity is lower at home than it is in the office. But! my company bought into the whole open-office thing, and the distractions in the office are non-stop. So, my "realized" productivity at home is actually quite a bit higher than when I'm in the office, despite non-ideal conditions.

    7. Re:I'm less productive at home by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      One of my favourite places to work quick turned into one of my least favourite. I had been their 3 years, loved my job, then the director of IT got promoted to VP and was replaced by this obnoxious Texan whose favourite phrase was "fucking retard" (he would call all the staff that, not me, he seemed to like me, but it made me cringe hearing him calling my coworkers that).

      He changed the plan from a cube farm to an "open bull pen", no walls or privacy between staff. I couldn't stay- I had to get a new job. I refused to stay in an open floor setup like that. Seemed inhuman.

      Of course, there were other factors, like him asking me to spy on my coworkers for him because he thought they weren't working properly.- but the open floor plan was enough for me to want to get out.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  12. Survival bias by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Work from home jobs are top tier. That's because you have to be self managed. It's not surprising the do better. They're already in a better position.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Survival bias by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Well, yes. It also means that you lose top-tier people when you do not offer the option.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  13. Can confirm by pak9rabid · · Score: 2

    Been working entirely from home for the past 3ish years, and I absolutely love it. No daily commute, so I don't start the work day already in a bad mood, not to mention the amount of money I save not having to buy gas all the time. Then there's the savings from eating lunch at home every day. It'd take a lot to convince me to go back into the office.

    1. Re:Can confirm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would take EXACTLY this much convincing: "Show up 0700 on Monday or you're fired."

    2. Re:Can confirm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that I'm one of about 5 native speakers of English on the planet with the domain expertise that I possess, that's something I'm very very unlikely ever to hear. :-)

  14. Well, by Kierthos · · Score: 1

    It's an interesting general statement, but a lot of it is going to depend on the people involved. I mean, I'm hardly the most responsible person in the world, and when I've worked from home in the past, I think I actually get less done. Sure, I'm not distracted by other people coming into the programmers' pen (keycard access to even get in to see the programmers here), but there's definitely a lot more in the way of distractions when I'm at home.

    That being said, we can't work from home any more except in extreme cases, because one of the managers here got a giant case of the chapped ass when one of the programmers wasn't instantly available for whatever his demand du jour was.

    --
    Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
  15. you are an IDIOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    yeah first you complain that home has too many distractions and then you complain because there aren't enough distractions at home

    take your meds

  16. Work from home gives so many benefits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would save roughly $4000 of my salary that I currently waste on fuel and parking (not to mention my precious time on earth), be able to handle little chores around the house during the work day (running things properly means I have LOTS of idle time), no pain in the ass annoying open floor plan cube farm where I have to listen to 3 different people on 3 different sides of me all on the same conference call (sometimes on speakerphone), no one interrupting me because they can just walk up to me whenever I'm busy with their ridiculous problems, the list goes on an on.

  17. Doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Working from home is dead. Telecommuting is dead. Everybody is rolling it back. You will go back to the offices or you won't work at all. :)

    1. Re:Doesn't matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi hi, Marissa!! ;P

    2. Re:Doesn't matter by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      If that's what makes you feel better. Been working from home since 2011 and my company is increasing it, not going back.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  18. Sometimes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You really can't take this as an indicator. There are many relevant factors to discuss, it wouldn't be possible to apply a blanket statement. Most of the people in the study probably work for companies that pay well regardless, and the Bay is a *terrible* object lesson for the rest of the world, it isn't realistic (and likely won't last, either).

  19. WFH isn't future-looking, it's been here forever by adosch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There's a lot of legitimacy ITFA. I agree WFH get's slandered in quite a few workplaces, but it's definitely NOT future looking technology. I really think a lot of the arguments of working-from-home-again topic revolves around that workplace's culture where it just hasn't caught up and views production, productivity and being productive can only happen behind the 4-walls of the brick-and-mortar.

    Doing 100% WFH I think can be disastrous over time; there are not a plethora of people who are that motivated, self-starters and can prioritize and maintain their own tasks. I have seen a lot of folks just completely abuse WFH and it becomes untouchable privilege, and I think that's partly why the culture reverts back to being seen == getting work done. I hate to say it, but I will say a lot of people who want to WFH aren't viewing that as 'working-from-home' but as part of this entitled errand day or a 'relaxing day off' by doing just enough not to get fired. That's where it goes wrong IMHO. And WFH shouldn't be assumed, it should be earned because it is a privilege; you're not working for you, you're working for your company.

    At the end of the day, I wouldn't go do 100% WFH anymore because I still believe that out of sight == out of mind. And you can have all the tech in the world (e.g. Skype, video/phone conference, yada yada) but it doesn't beat face-to-face relationships over time in the workforce. Let's not forget that there is a human element to all of this; I don't want to be devalued to a e-mail bit bucket who replies "done" back to requests and is nothing more than a chat alias name in a window.

  20. About that performance improvement by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

    "We found massive, massive improvement in performance -- a 13% improvement in performance from people working at home"

    At my wife's company, the work-from-home employees have a higher productivity requirement than the office workers. It's a pain because the kind of work she does probably doesn't lend itself as well to the performance gains seen at other places. She's personally so much more productive than average that it doesn't matter to her, but other employees have struggled with it. She's also a total introvert so the arrangement works out perfectly for her.

    1. Re:About that performance improvement by gweihir · · Score: 1

      So they require higher productivity in exchange for not having to provide office-space? That is kind of backwards...

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:About that performance improvement by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      It's the same sort of logic that let banks start charging fees for ATM cards as soon as they'd axed all the tellers.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  21. Up to date by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Additionally we have also seen everything on Netflix & HBO.

  22. Earn more is the key to the flaw in this study. by gurps_npc · · Score: 1

    As in, companies usually only let you do this if you are a better employee. Higher level office workers and sales jobs are prime examples, not ditch diggers.

    In other words, they are selected for the people most likely to earn more and be happier.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:Earn more is the key to the flaw in this study. by Athanasius · · Score: 1

      I've read TFA and I can't see where it even says the employees earn more. The closest is this quote:

      The company reported that it made about $2,000 more profit per person at home

  23. Been telecommuting for about 7 years. by Chas · · Score: 2

    Been telecommuting since about 2008.
    Started out one day a week.
    About 2010, went to full-time telecommute.
    I'm the admin for the company's network and have everything set up so that I can do almost everything remotely.
    And, if it comes to the worst, I can drive in for an emergency.

    It's frickin' great!
    The only thing is, you NEED to be able to self-start. Because being at home, there are lots of distractions.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:Been telecommuting for about 7 years. by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

      And if you stay good enough and productive at your job, you will never be offshored.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  24. Old timers love it... for themselves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "old guard" managers and C levels love being able to work from anywhere... they just don't trust their rank and file... I was at Google a few years ago and during a tour we walked past a game room. One of the stuffy guys mouthed off a little loudly "If people are playing games all day, how do you know they are working?"

    The guide (as if waiting for this...) quickly turned around and replied "We know they are working, because our company can buy yours."

  25. creimer cock eggs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Creimer runs a side hustle from his bathroom where he lays genuine creimer cock eggs from his big meaty dick. Buy cock eggs today so creimer can quit his day job as an IT grunt and quit his other side hustle writing poetry so he can concentrate his efforts full-time on working at home laying cock eggs for your rocky pleasure.

    1. Re:creimer cock eggs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got Amazon Dot. Where are my cock eggs?

    2. Re:creimer cock eggs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I knew a guy in 1995 who passed a kidney stone. He said he had gotten it from drinking too much soda pop. He never told me his real name, but he worked with video games, and he introduced me to NetBSD. That guy had a presence, and you always knew when he was in the room. Nice guy, pleasant body odor. I must have met creimer.

  26. snowbirding by eaglesrule · · Score: 1

    I know I would be happier telecommuting if it meant being able to migrate to someplace warm and sunny for the winter months. Being able to enjoy an endless summer would be an immense benefit.

  27. Organization by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    I find that working from home is better than the office if you have very strong organization and communication skills. I do it. My managers do it. It works. If the managers and team leads have good communication skills, anyone under them that don't can be kept in line.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  28. Survivor bias is very high here by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    Lots of people are offered the chance to work from home. Those who are disciplined, and who actually work well and deliver results continue to be employed and allowed to work from home. The slackers get fired, and they find jobs where they need to be monitored constantly. Thus in the end, the sample of people who work from home is biased towards the survivors and it skews the results.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  29. It's not for everyone by erp_consultant · · Score: 2

    Personally I love working from home and do it whenever I can. I find that I have less distractions, I don't have to "dress up", and I don't miss the commute one bit. But I know others that don't care for it. Trying to work from the kitchen table with kids running around is no picnic.

    You've got to have, at a minimum, a dedicated office space where you can close the door if necessary. A spare bedroom works just fine. A good headset for conference calls is a must. There is nothing worse than trying to decipher someone on a conference call with a crappy cellphone where every other word cuts out. And the dog is barking and the kids are screaming. When you're on a call, close the door, put on the headset. You will hear others better and they will hear you better.

    Where I work we use Skype for IM, WebEx for video conferencing, and SharePoint for document collaboration. I'm not a huge SharePoint fan but collectively it works. The biggest issue is trust. The way I explain it to my team is that working from home is a perk. You don't have to partake but if you do there are certain expectations. Log on to Skype during business hours and check your email regularly. If you need to step out that's fine, just let me know where you are. Above all - get your shit done.

    If I see a big drop in productivity or get even the slightest inkling that they are goofing off I have a conversation with them and make it clear that it had better stop. If it happens again, work from home is over for that employee. I haven't had a single team member violate the ground rules and our turnover is very low. When you treat people right they are happy and productive. Simple as that.

  30. 10 years now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been working from home for the same company for 10 years now, and I dread the day I have to go back to an office daily. These days, we meet at our "office", at most, once a week (50-minute commute for me, one-way), but there are times where nobody feels like we need a face-to-face meeting and sometimes we'll be a whole month before getting together. I drive what others would consider a gas guzzler, but a tank of gas lasts me 4-6 weeks.

    Friends/family have all been told that if they wouldn't try to contact me during work hours if I was working in an office, then they should follow that same rule even though I work from home. With very few exceptions (that have been dealt with), that's never been a problem.

    That said, I keep regular hours, and I'm always available between what would be considered "core hours" (9-5). I do NOT leave my desk for minutes at a time to prepare meals that need me to keep an eye on every half hour, and I don't leave the house for grocery shopping and go pick up the mail. That has to be done on my personal time as it has nothing to do with business, and I'd get rather pissed if a coworker who's supposed to make himself available during the same hours I work isn't responding because he's out getting a haircut--even if he makes up for the time outside "regular" hours. In other words, I work from home, but behave as if I was at an office, so coworkers know "where" to find me.

  31. 100% telelcommute for the past two years by mrflash818 · · Score: 1

    Have been 100% telecommute for the past two years.

    I think it has been a win/win for myself and my Employer.

    https://www.linkedin.com/pulse...

    --
    Uh, Linux geek since 1999.
  32. Been working from home for the last 8 years by Zarhan · · Score: 2

    And I love it. My daily commute is 20 meters from bedroom to study. Well, on some mornings I go drop off my daughter to daycare before starting work, depending on whether it's wife's turn or not.

    I work as a consultant, mostly doing network architecture design, UC and similar stuff. Anyway, the company that actually pays me doesn't care about visiting office - I go there every few months to drop off receipts of travel expenses, attend christmas party and that's that. All other travel is to customer premises.

    There is a weird trend. I've noticed that in how much driving my car gets. When I started; I drove just a bit under 40000km a year. Now I can barely reach 10000km. Gotta love it - less time spent behind the wheel.

    The single biggest reason for this? Skype for Business (Microsoft Lync). These days it's pretty much everywhere. It used to be that I worked a lot from customer sites. Then it changes so that I came to first few meetings with the customers. And these days we do entire projects and sometimes never see "face-to-face" except over videoconferencing. Sales guys still go for actual visits to make the case, but after that it seems that fewer and fewer people care about your physical presence. The only actual work that has been done one site for last few projects has been physical hardware installations.

    One other thing caused by Skype: Meetings *always* start on time. It used to be that if you booked a meeting from 2 PM to 4 PM, what happened was that people arrived at the premises at 2 PM. Then you gathered coffee, then tried to usher everyone to the conference room, set up laptops etc. You get to the real stuff starting at 2:30. Now - even when you are on-site there's *always* someone attending the meeting remotely, and he's already gotten the coffee and is ready to start. This causes the folks to be in the conference room and starting the meeting at 2:05 the latest.

    Heck, I once attended a lecture where a guy was trying to give a presentation on a big overhead projector but it was broken. So, end result was that he just shared his presentation on Skype and everyone in the room just watched it on the laptop. Kind of pointless to attend.

    The only exception to this rule is customers that have strict security requirements and provide no Internet access, but that's more or less understandable.

    1. Re:Been working from home for the last 8 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, on some mornings I go drop off my daughter to daycare before starting work, depending on whether it's wife's turn or not

      How sad and telling that a post all about having the exact perfect set up for you involves shuffling your daughter off to be raised by strangers during her most formative years because it would get in the way of you and your wife's self-actualization

    2. Re:Been working from home for the last 8 years by Zarhan · · Score: 1

      Fine, I'll bite even though I really shouldn't bother responding to an AC.

      Working from home means I don't spend 2-3 hours in a commute every day. That's 2-3 hours more of quality family time for every single working day. Unless you were suggesting quitting all working and coasting on welfare until the kid turns 18 (or even reaches school age), I fail to see your point about self-actualization. And if you were serious, I'm sure you will do differently with your own arrangements but this is our chosen approach, thank you.

      And two, what's this thing about strangers? We know all the people that are taking care of her very well, but thank you for your concern. Not to mention that she actually gets to form some friendships with other kids and have social interactions outside the immediate family.

    3. Re:Been working from home for the last 8 years by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      My employer forbade the use of Skype for any company communications shortly after Skype was acquired by Microsoft.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  33. I dig ditches for a living. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do I "work from home" doing that?

    1. Re:I dig ditches for a living. by Wulfson · · Score: 1

      Drones!

  34. I think they got it backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    those in higher paid positions who may stick with a career longer and might take more enjoyment from the task, are in high enough slots to be allowed to work from home. the peons, grunts and lower management types aren't allowed the privilege to work from home while upper management "calls in" from home to avoid coming in.

  35. Happier Than Their Office-bound Counterparts by Fudoka · · Score: 1

    Happier Than Their Office-bound Counterparts! - better stop it now then.

  36. That explains IBMs recent move.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Companies like IBM who mandate remote and home workers come into regional offices are simply doing a reduction in force (layoff) under the radar. They don't care about productivity or contributions, only headcount. Scumbags.

    1. Re:That explains IBMs recent move.. by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      I'm personally grateful for IBM's shenanigans, since they succeeded in driving away a woman we just hired for our team. She's quite competent, and a great fit for our team and work-at-home culture.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  37. age discrimination by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

    Is this a viable path against age discrimination?

    I tell myself sometimes I could toptal it once I turn 40 or so. Some /.'ers tell me remote working is on the decline so it isn't a real option.

    A buddy of mine runs a SW shop and it sounds like his clients just assume he's old and that he'll never want to meet in person.

    I've often wondered if that is a large part of what remote working is. When you consider how rare it is for 45+ yr olds to get hired in SW and how weird and uncomfortable directors and hiring managers get about that ...

    I've heard after 50 you can't really get any kind of work in SW. I'm 35, so kind of a 3rd party rooting for the veterans.

  38. Worked for our organization by kevmeister · · Score: 1

    For several years before my retirement we has a widely diverse engineering team. Home base was Berkeley, California, but we had engineers in Seattle, Livermore, CA, Chicago, New York, Washington, D.C. and Iowa. One in each remote metro area except two near Chicago.

    We used modern Internet based teleconferencing equipment and every engineer had a desktop system that showed the rest of the group. All were normally muted, but, if an issue arose that required group discussion (or discussion buy a part of the group), it happened very naturally and we quickly got used to it. We could drop off as needed when we needed to be left alone or had a visitor. It simply worked.

    We designed, built, and managed one of the highest performance networks in the world and won numerous prizes for our efficiency. We built the first trans-continental Gig, N-by-10 Gig and N-by-100 Gig networks with the same team doing the design, implementation, and senior level operational support of the network with a team that grew over the years from 8 to 14 engineers. It might not have worked for larger teams, but for us, it was perfect. We could never have hired the top level talent we had of we had required that they all relocate to Berkeley.

    --
    Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
  39. My experience of working from home (15+ years) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a s/w dev who has been working from home for more than 15 years. I see many, many advantages & only one or two negatives.

    Living in a busy city, with the associated commute issues, means I'm way more productive working from home than not. If I had to fight traffic for 2 hours every day (a) my quality of life would suffer, (b) my work hours would be shorter & (c) the quality of my work would suffer.

    Besides, the team I'm working with is 500 miles from me. I would not relocate if they insisted I came into the office everyday, I'd just work for someone else. So, remote working is allowing my employer to enjoy the privilege of employing my fabulous-self. ;-)

    Working from home means you have to do a BETTER job at communicating than if you were in an office. If everyone is in-office folks can get away with be lazier about things as you can always stroll up to Frank & ask him about the GibbleBlotchit. That's fine for the short term, but when Frank leaves abruptly to follow his dream of being a Alpaca Relationship Counselor in southern Peru things get tricky. If Frank had worked remotely, its much more likely that there'd be an extensive GibbleBlotchit "paper" trail.

    Further, assuming the alpacas didn't all insist on utilizing all the available internet bandwidth streaming The Desperate Alpacas of Lima[imdb.com], Frank would be able to work remotely fulfilling both his GibbleBlotchit & alpaca dreams. Win/win!

    ... which brings me to the negatives...

    Can you tell I don't get out much? :-) Seriously, one of the downsides is that you lose (most of) the social aspect of your workplace. You'll need to cultivate other interests/activities. Of course, this itself has the advantage that your social life - unlike your healthcare - doesn't go away if you move/etc jobs.

    Another downside is that generally you do need someone in an office to handle any system hardware related issues. My boss does that for me.

    Speaking of bosses ... if your company has (nasty) politics then IMO you are pretty much SOL if you work from home. Personally, I don't want to engage in those, so it suits me fine. I'd just move on to another less toxic environment.

    Anyway, whilst I could probably write a book on the subject, I think that's enough for now.

  40. And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And produce less. Most are slackers and of course they are happier when they can do what they do best. No work. Masterbate. Sleep.

    The generation of slackers is here to stay.

    1. Re:And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We found massive, massive improvement in performance -- a 13% improvement in performance from people working at home," Bloom says.

      There, I've read the summary for you. Need me to wipe your ass now? Idiot.

  41. Homeward bound by thunderclees · · Score: 2

    Kraft Foods when it was still called that encouraged staff to work from home at least one day a week. After a few months someone in upper management decided that anyone working from home much not be contributing so they laid them all off.

  42. I loved it! by antdude · · Score: 2

    I did it for 1.5 years as a contractor for Cisco. I have disabilities like impediments, unable to drive, etc. It was perfect for me. I would totally do it again!

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:I loved it! by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      One of our very best support engineers is mostly homebound.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    2. Re:I loved it! by antdude · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I met several of these work from home people at Cisco. :)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  43. Google and WFH by originalgunner · · Score: 1

    I told Google: "My only option is to telecommute..."

    From Google this week:

    "Thanks so much for following up and for the information. Unfortunately, Google is very much an in-office culture with little to no WFH. That's mainly because we invest so much in making Google a desirable place to be. As far as the work being interesting, I'm sure there is something here that would be attractive to you but without knowing your technology interests and career goals, that's hard to dive into. Let me know if you want to set up some time to discuss further or if you have any other questions. If not, feel free to keep my contact information if anything changes on your end. Google is still interested in you!"

  44. State Income Tax - potential savings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I once had a colleague who drove across the state line to get to work. The office was in a state that had a state income tax, while his home was not. On the days he worked at home, he saved money in taxes. He was audited more than once and passed every time.

  45. A 5 year contract gig? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    isn't it about time they hired you on full time? If it's occasional work maybe not, but it sounds like your full time job.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:A 5 year contract gig? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      isn't it about time they hired you on full time? If it's occasional work maybe not, but it sounds like your full time job.

      It's Federal Govt. contracting....they renew the contracts about every 3 years...and you just get picked up on the next contract vehicle, doing the same stuff.

      A little hard to get in, but once you get your foot in the door...no sweat.

      I started out working same contracts, but as a W2 employee of the contracting house....but from there, switched later to 1099 with the prime and secondary to prime contracts.

      There are no questions at all as to wether you are an employee or contractor....and yes, if you are good, can network...it can be a VERY long term gig.

      This is one federal agency recently, but prior to that, was with other agency for almost 11 years, doing basically 3 different things, but same agency and mostly same people.

      Good bill rates too....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:A 5 year contract gig? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is another prime example of conservative hypocrisy. You, yourself, constantly shit on the government and those who you claim are just leeching off the system, and yet here you are suckling at the big government teat yourself. Surprise surprise.

  46. For the same reason 'wife beater' exists by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    relationships are hard and most folks don't have enough money to make it work, so they're at each other's throats a lot. Heck, I've been on this earth 4 decades and every 10 of them like clockwork the asshats that run the show have tanked the economy, gotten off scott free and left the working stiffs high and dry. Given what most folks go through every 10 years it's no wonder they fight.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  47. Just started working from home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work in IT and I started working from home 4 weeks ago. I have a video session going with my office at work where all my other co-workers physically sit. The video session give me a virtual connection to them as if i was working in the office. It works out very well.

  48. Their methodology is so flawed that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    13 percent is swamped by the error and not significant or even believable without some "editing" of the numbers.

  49. My company does it. by aussersterne · · Score: 1

    I'm in senior management at a firm where coming into the office is basically optional. Everyone is welcome and has a desk and a PC, but people more or less manage their own work schedules and location.

    We collaborate via Slack, GotoMeeting, and Altassian products. We exchange files via s3 buckets or, in a pinch, Dropbox. And now and then we also touch base by phone if someone is working somewhere with a slow connection.

    We are very productive and have releases every couple of weeks. We're in SAAS, so there is a personnel and technology fit—naturally it wouldn't work if we were steps in a division of labor to manufacture watch movements or lots of our employees were technology-averse or something—but aside from physical limitations where people actually have to work on a *thing*, I don't see the problem.

    N.B. when I joined the company in 2013 it was already like this. There are lots of co-workers that I know very well and have collaborated very closely with that I have never met face-to-face.

    We often have meetings where half the people on the GotoMeeting are in their cars on speakerphone.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  50. Forgot half the policy. by aussersterne · · Score: 1

    If someone's remote, they need to be available. If they're routinely unavailable, they're gone. Problem solved.

    See my post above—our entire company is routinely half out of the office and it's not that big a deal.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  51. Part of the business cycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Allowing/encouraging working from home, followed by rescinding the policy, followed by downsizing or going out of business is a well-worn track of declining companies.

  52. And I should add— by aussersterne · · Score: 1

    that we have had regular release-process GTM sessions that have gone on for more or less entire workdays with people hopping on and off.

    It works SO MUCH BETTER because everyone can see so-and-so's screen as they run scripts, manage infrastructure, whatever, and can coordinate their own activities on their other monitor.

    In person, all ten people would be standing around so-and-so's monitor stretching their necks to see, or as people popped in and out for lunch or whatever, they'd invariably pull other team members away with them in herd mentality. At the very least, it's disruptive because of social norms—when someone leaves the room or the office, everyone has to wave goodbye to them.

    On a GTM session, someone can just pop a "brb" into the chat window and drop off and nobody has to do anything.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  53. savings, productivity by cas2000 · · Score: 1

    They save a fortune on expensive office space, and get a "massive" 13% improvement in productivity.

    how much of that do they pass on to the workers? do they pay for the office space and equipment the worker provides?

    and, no, the employees saving on travel time and expenses doesn't count as extra pay. That's free time the worker was sacrificing to their job, avoiding that sacrifice isn't a pay rise any more than moving closer to work is a pay rise.

    I've spent a lot of time working from home over the years - most of my jobs for the last few decades have had at least part-time remote work (sysadmin, often at ISPs or similar). I mostly prefer it for several reasons (which are irrelevant here) and there are very few practical issues if your colleagues are capable of effective use of email and chat and other technologies. The biggest problem I found with telecommuting was that it blurs the line between work and non-work hours. If you're not careful, you can find yourself spending almost every waking hour at your desk fixing/tuning servers, writing code or analysing logs or doing system maintenance or whatever - that''s a LOT of unpaid hours.

    1. Re:savings, productivity by ishmaelflood · · Score: 1

      "They save a fortune on expensive office space, and get a "massive" 13% improvement in productivity.

      how much of that do they pass on to the workers? do they pay for the office space and equipment the worker provides?

      and, no, the employees saving on travel time and expenses doesn't count as extra pay"

      That's a pretty miserable attitude. In my book saving 2 hours a day commuting, and getting rid of one car (in theory) are both huge positives. Other significant positives are being able to do quick jobs around the house while waiting for a download etc, and eating nice food instead of canteen food. There are downsides, I pay seven bucks a gig as I'm on wireless internet (my house is truly off grid), and there are a few people at the office I like talking to, and VOIP isn't quite the same. OTOH, no interruptions. I work (and am paid for) 5 hour days, my productivity is indistinguishable from when i spent 8 hours a day at the office. Cue the hilarious jokes...

    2. Re:savings, productivity by cas2000 · · Score: 1

      The point is that from the employer's POV, it's an "external" - not their problem. They don't and won't ever pay for that travel time, so they don't get to claim credit for it as a benefit or compensation they "provide" when it's reduced or eliminated.

      (at best, some employers subsidise fuel or public transport or other commuting expenses but they'll never pay for commute time even though it's time the employee loses for the employer's benefit)

      Which still leaves the matters of the office space and equipment provided by the employee, and the improved productivity. Hence my question: how much, if any, of that is paid to the employee?

      The equipment issue also applies to workplaces which do BYO Device too. I don't mind using my phone or tablet or laptop etc for a small amount of work-related stuff, I don't even mind using my own home desktop machines for that (it's routine for me to test and practice a lot of systems stuff on my home network/VM Lab before planning the implementation at work).

      But a) only if it's 100% voluntary and 100% at my discretion how much of my equipment/space I choose to use for work, and b) if I'm constantly using my equipment and the bandwidth I'm paying for OR especially if they require me to install non-open-source software then they can provide the device for it and pay for the bandwidth (it will never be connected directly to my LAN. At most, I'd connect it to an isolated firewalled zone).

  54. Selection bias by hazardPPP · · Score: 1

    Results that show working from home is great are usually a result of selection bias: currently, working from home is an *option* in *some* professions at *some* employers.

    The default type of job is still the one that requires going to a workplace. Even where working from home is allowed or even encouraged, it is not required. Hence, most of the current work-at-home positions will be filled by people who prefer to work at home.