Slashdot Mirror
Remote Work is Going To Keep Increasing, Study Says (upwork.com)
Freelancing website Upwork has published its annual Future Workforce Report, which explores hiring behaviors of over 1,000 U.S. managers. It finds: As companies struggle to fill the skills gap, they're embracing agile, remote teams to get work done. Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of companies today have remote workers, yet a majority lack remote work policies.
Companies have the resources, but lack the policies to support remote work: While companies feel confident they have the resources in place to support remote work, many lack a formal policy. Sixty-four percent of hiring managers feel that their company has the resources and processes in place to support a remote workforce, yet the majority (57 percent) lack a remote work policy.
Companies with work-from-home policies have become more lenient & inclusive: As companies increasingly embrace remote work, they're evolving their work-from-home policies. Nearly half (45%) of hiring managers said their company's work-from-home policy has changed in the past five years, with 60 percent saying it has become more lenient and inclusive. This increased inclusivity is making it easier for companies to find the talent they need. Over half (52%) of hiring managers that work at companies with work-from-home policies believe hiring has become easier in the past year.
Findings indicate remote work is likely to become the new normal: Over half (55%) of hiring managers agree that remote work has become more commonplace as compared to three years ago. Five times as many hiring managers expect more of their team to work remotely in the next ten years than expect less.
Companies have the resources, but lack the policies to support remote work: While companies feel confident they have the resources in place to support remote work, many lack a formal policy. Sixty-four percent of hiring managers feel that their company has the resources and processes in place to support a remote workforce, yet the majority (57 percent) lack a remote work policy.
Companies with work-from-home policies have become more lenient & inclusive: As companies increasingly embrace remote work, they're evolving their work-from-home policies. Nearly half (45%) of hiring managers said their company's work-from-home policy has changed in the past five years, with 60 percent saying it has become more lenient and inclusive. This increased inclusivity is making it easier for companies to find the talent they need. Over half (52%) of hiring managers that work at companies with work-from-home policies believe hiring has become easier in the past year.
Findings indicate remote work is likely to become the new normal: Over half (55%) of hiring managers agree that remote work has become more commonplace as compared to three years ago. Five times as many hiring managers expect more of their team to work remotely in the next ten years than expect less.
I've worked remote since ~2010. I still go to the office occasionally, usually one week a month for all of the stuff I can't do remotely.
I can't imagine trying to shoehorn my life back into the terrible 9-5 mold. The first thing I ask recruiters when they try to poach is if remote is possible and if not shoo them away.
Our house is paid for, I like where we live, my wife likes her job. I'm not playing the "lets drag the family across the country for breadcrumbs and hope I don't get laid off from this new position" game.
With news story after news story about companies cancelling their work from home programs, it this really true?
Don't get me wrong, I think that remote work SHOULD increase, I see no reason to deal with a commute just to be less productive in the office than I could be at home. all while costing the company more money in real-estate and equivalent.
But as long as managers are lazy and prefer to manage by time-clock rather than by worker performance, I'm not sure we can expect to see large strides in this area.
I mean , there are 'alot' of positions that will never be romote.
Remote waiter? Remote real estate agent? factory worker? Home builder, gardener, cook.
I mean, not that they can't have a 'remote office', but there is just a lot of work that actually requires a persons hands be in the same location as the work they are doing.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
In a global economy it turns out that people get paid closer to what they're worth. For our meat grinder 'warm bodies' work I'd rather hire a voctech student at $15/hr that I can have a plain English conversation with over some outsourced team.
And the ones that actually can cut it, aren't working for $15/hr.
Wake me up whenever this movement settles, please.
if your employer expects you to get things done, and you actually get done the things they want, what difference does anything else make.
If your employer doesn't have a good way of measuring your work product , then they have a different management issue that exists if you are in the office or not.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
Too bad prices don't also come down to what everything is worth. Instead, your salary goes down and prices seem to be very much the same.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
That's because businesses have lobbied hard to ensure that employees are a global market, but that commodities are not. That's what trade tariffs are for, that's what IP laws that guarantee monopolies on certain ideas are for, that's what region coding and anti-circumvention laws are for, that's what intentionally non-uniform safety standards are for.
As a multi-national corporation you can feel free to make your products in whatever country you chose, have your employees in whatever other countries you chose, and pay your taxes is a completely different country of your choice.
As a consumer though you must buy many items only from sanctioned groups in specific countries.
e.g. A company can make my car in Mexico, but I can't buy a car from Mexico, that would be illegal as only vehicles sold in my own country are certified to pass our safety standards, and we don't care about the safety standards of any other country. A company can film a video in India, but if I buy a copy of it sold there it won't play on my DVD player, and it would be illegal to bypass that restriction. The list goes on, and on, and on.
Best laws money can buy.
oh? /. decided to start working again?
We'll, not getting the posts right this time either. Big companies are demanding more control and restricting remote workers. sorry:
https://www.nbcnews.com/busine...
'worth'.
I doubt that word means what you think it means.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
no network neutrality = ISP can rip people off You want you VPN to have good QOS then pay for our teleworker add on
and finds that remote work will keep increasing. That's big news. It's not like surveys are so easily manipulated by the questions asked that not manipulating them is the really hard part.
Surveys performed at the request of people or organizations with a stake in the results are rarely brokered by a third party to hide the customer and are thus rarely worth the paper they are written on. Yes, I know this is electronic.
Says the person posting to slashdot during work hours.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Companies stopped doing W@H since hiring Indians was a cheaper alternative and they figured "remote is remote" as if there is no difference between one tech worker and another. So what if they don't know your language, aren't awake when you need to talk to them, or have shit-standard skills. Bean counting business suit weasels don't care. They'll just pound the table to get "less with more" from the folks left behind.
'citing kind of'
As in, not really.
Whoosh.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Too bad prices
Don't "remote" work from San Francisco. Without ever leaving the US there are a lot of cheap communities, some with community broadband.
Problems with remote work:
1. If a company goes 100% work from home, they could outsource to India.
2. When a company decides remote work is not working, they make everyone come in full time, massively disrupting everyone's lives.
These issues can both be avoided with a combination of the two - where I am allows for up to 5 days work from home every 2 weeks. This is quite flexible, since you can do 1 week on-1 week off, or alternate days, or any other pattern employee and supervisor agree on. The above problems are solved because:
1. Management seeing and interacting with the employees goes a long way to stave off offshoring ideas. It places a concrete value on locally available employees.
2. They're more likely to tweak individual work plans if there's a problem, rather than blanket rescinding permissions for everyone (i.e. Yahoo). It's less disruptive for both sides if management asks an arbitrary handful of employees to change their days to facilitate a project than if those same employees suddenly have to come in when they may not have even seen the office in years.
So why do we need companies ?
We only need collaboration to achieve big things.
Management is best done by computers and the workers take all the profit.
Once workers accumulate wealth, they won't need shareholders skimming the cream.
Go well
It's mostly the same here: you get what you pay for, but about a 15% difference. You have to pay roughly 70k in the US for competence. (I know, plenty of exceptions, it's only a generalization.)
Screwed-up managers will screw things up regardless of where they get staff such that they figure it's better to pay less for failure. Would you rather pay $115 mil for the Titanic or $100 mil? Dysfunctional orgs can't compete on competence, so they instead focus on cost, becoming the 98-cent store of service. Sure, their wash-rags degenerate into lint, but so do the competitor's: the 99-cent store.
Table-ized A.I.
False. And true...
It really depends upon the individual. It actually takes more effort to be productive from home I think. If the person was a trouble in the office for not communicating effectively, it will usually become a disaster if that person works remotely. You often need to specify clear goals, sharply constrained tasks, and solid deadlines for remote workers. The company also has a responsibility to let the worker know clearly they they are or are not meeting expectations.
For instance, a contractor often does better at this, because they almost always have a clearly defined set of goals in their contract.
I would suggest that workers should only get a chance to work remotely once they've proven their value and work ethic. Of course, this depends upon the job type.
Found the PHB!
There are so many industries, I'm probably not in yours. Last position was at $65/hr. Is that up or down for you?
Alvin Toffler suggested it. Imagine if we didn't spend money on mass transportation but mass remote working!
That's about what I make (around $66/hr if I take my salary and break it down). I'm in the debt collections software industry, and it's very niche and difficult to find good engineers or even good software for the industry. I used to work at a national ISP and made about half that, and when my job was literally sent to India I am glad I found this niche, though it sucks community-wise rarely anyone to speak to about it, largely because the industry itself is run by just total scumbags.