alt Hacker NewsIt might be efficient to work 60 hours week. Doesn't mean we should agree to it. Remote work improves quality of life. I don't care about company KPI or efficiency, I care about my own well-being first and foremost, as long as I have a choice. Companies should adapt and if it means that their efficiency will decrease, so be it.
Replies
Unfortunately this can be a race to the bottom as companies with wfh are driven out of business by those without
> I don't care about company KPI or efficiency, I care about my own well-being first and foremost, as long as I have a choice.
This is a double edged sword. You don’t care about the company, you care for yourself. Your company sees that and gives you a certain treatment. If you don’t care just quit?
It sounds like you're advocating for a legally protected right to WFH. Are you?
> I don't care about company KPI or efficiency, I care about my own well-being first and foremost, as long as I have a choice.
You better be good then or have a niche/rare skillset. There's no intrinsic right to remote work. Things will mostly revert to pre-covid, where only the best/most disciplined/highest performers are given the freedom to WFH. Sure, some companies will be 'remote first', but for the most part, you'll need to be a special hire with an exemption carved out. I'm already seeing this in my workplace. Managers are begging leadership for remote headcount but getting Bay area headcount instead. The teams getting remote headcount are the hardest to fill/most in demand skillsets, and almost always very senior.