Comment by DoofusOfDeath | Hacker News Reader

Comment by DoofusOfDeath | Hacker News Reader

I get the sense that many employers see WFH as a temporary measure rather than long-term shift. And consequently they're not willing to seriously invest in tools and processes that would make WFH maximally productive.

Suppose for example that Google enacted this policy:

(1) They reimburse each employee up to $30k to upgrade their home office, including soundproofing. After Google trained local builders on effective soundproofing strategies and designs.

(2) Google provides (with installation) a Google Jamboard to facilitate virtual whiteboard sessions.

(3) Google updates their team rules and meeting rules s.t. if anyone in a team or meeting is remote, then the entire team or meeting is remote.

(4) Google invests in networking infrastructure (as needed) to ensure decent network connectivity from the employee's home office to Google's internal networks.

I imagine that all FAANG companies could afford this. The open question, to me at least, is whether or not that magnitude of investment would make WFH a net win for those companies. But if they see WFH as a short term measure, I assume the answer is no.

(1) Google will train local builders, seriously? Otherwise, lump-sum payment for home office upgrade is probably good. 30k is excessive by any standards. 10k should probably be enough to buy a good monitor, desk, camera, some digital whiteboard, etc. It's unconditional, i.e. it's always 10k, no questions asked.

(2) What for? They just gave you a lump sum. Google is not a builder, its a software company!

(3) ??? How can you come up with this? Why would I work remote, just because someone else works remote. I makes zero sense. This rule would effectively eliminate remote work. If you work remote, it's your business. There should be policies in place to foster inclusion of remote workers. However, there could still be the option for "fully remote teams", which is generally a better choice.

(4) Again, Google is not a builder or telecom service. If you want to work from home, make sure you move to a place with a good internet connection..

Tzzz. Expectations people really have. How about Google also does your laundry, takes care of your child while you WFH, so you don't get distracted and perhaps prepares lunch and pads you on the back after 5pm for a job well done?

> How about Google also does your laundry, takes care of your child while you WFH, so you don't get distracted and perhaps prepares lunch and pads you on the back after 5pm for a job well done?

You joke, but some people are like this. While I think Google should make accommodations, especially for parents, some people ask for way too much...

I think this a lovely sentiment, but (1) would never get past HR - what do you do with that $30K for a renter? How do you ensure parity between upgrading a high-rise condo in NYC vs. a simple ranch-style house in Kansas? Like a bonus, is the employee on the hook for paying back the $30K if they leave within a few months or a year? What if the employee wants to / has to move? Do you get another $30K if you move within 1 year? 2? 5? Ever?

> How do you ensure parity between upgrading a high-rise condo in NYC vs. a simple ranch-style house in Kansas?

One of the advantages of compensating people in kind is that there's no need to do this. If the business need is that people have a quiet space in which to work, then the business can soundproof a space for everyone. That's the relevant type of parity. That it costs more to soundproof the condo in NYC isn't relevant.

My employer expects that I live in the Bay Area, but does not pay enough that I can afford to:

#1. Move out of my apartment into a bigger apartment with a dedicated home office.

#2. Move out of my rented apartment into a home that I own and could upgrade with soundproofing.

The cost of this would far exceed $30k. My primary goal now (barring get an unexpected huge end-of-year raise) is to move to a satellite office of my current company or work for a company outside the Bay Area. I’ve spent the past few months outside the Bay Area, and I can’t really imagine moving back next year. The cost of houses rose so much faster than my salary, it just makes no sense.

> (3) Google updates their team rules and meeting rules s.t. if anyone in a team or meeting is remote, then the entire team or meeting is remote.

(When offices are open) Dialing into a well equipped conference room is mucb better than doing a meeting with 5 or 10 people in little phonebooth rooms, if there are even enough rooms. Taking conference calls at open office desks is a non-starter.

Automatic does some of this. They reimbursed my office chair, stand/sit desk, desk lamp, monitor, router, headset for calls, and keyboard/mouse. All total it was probably less than 10k (the monitor being the bulk of it).

> then the entire team or meeting is remote.

There’s nothing more annoying than having a remote meeting with people sharing an audio device. The quality is terrible.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com