Hacker News Reader

Comment by podgib | Hacker News Reader

Not at all. When looking for my current job, having some in-person time was one of my top criteria. I was initially trying to find something 100% on-site, but that proved pretty hard to find.

I'm currently doing in-office 2 days per week, which isn't great, but it's less draining than fully remote at least.

I'm hoping that over the next few years things will normalise into some companies being fully remote and some fully on-site, rather than everywhere being "hybrid" (ie. bad for everyone) now. If it stays as it is I can't see myself working in tech much longer.

As a side note, I've found many job boards that have a "remote" filter, but not many that allow you to filter for "no remote".

View on HN

Is the issue that you want a job where everyone else is also required to be 100% on site? I'm assuming that most "2 day per week" companies would be ok with you coming in 4 or 5 days a week but because most of your coworkers would not choose to do that you would lose most of the benefits you get from a 100% on-site environment? Or are some companies now also imposing a maximum on the number of days you're allowed rather than required to come in?

Yeah, if my coworkers aren't in the office, then going to the office is just remote work with a commute.

Obviously forcing people that want to work remotely to come in isn't great either though. That's why I'm hoping that companies will choose one path or the other, and people can self-select into companies with their preferred working arrangement

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. It seems like most of the big tech companies are having a hard time putting the genie back in the bottle with remote work as enough of their employees seem to prefer it that they can't remove the option completely without risking losing a lot of their people.

For new or small companies there are definite advantages to being fully remote (no office expenses, bigger talent pool to draw from) or fully in person (able to get any benefits from everyone being on site and able to more easily hire from the pool of people who prefer 100% on site). If we start to see companies make a clear choice then long term we might see one or the other model win out if the benefits are big enough or maybe they can both coexist as the benefits are context dependent.

You are right, there is no even one job board that I know with a "no remote" filter!

Thanks :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com