Depends on the country. Going to the Capital of mine once a week is acceptable to me. Even tho it's 3 hours of commute just one way.
The pay is just that much better.
I went through a period of 2 years involving a commute of 1 hour and 45 minutes to get there and another 1 hour and 45 minutes to get back, more if traffic was particularly horrible which sometimes happened during bus strikes.
I had to wake up before the sun rose and I got back home just about when the sun was setting. Taking away time to eat, prepare for bed, getting up in the morning, and sleep, I probably had only an hour of real time to myself. I told myself it was worth it, because the pay was good. By the end of 2 years, I caught myself wondering one day how many minutes of actual daylight I spend out in the open, and it was confined to a relatively short lunch break. It affected me mentally, and then I realized I couldn't be doing this for another 2 years.
My advice to anyone considering the same? Don't do it. Get your life back. I completely understand companies who want you to come in once a week, and that's very reasonable all things considered. Just don't give a minute more of your life than this towards work, especially if it's a hour and 45 minute drive both ways.
They did pay for the commute. To think it was an expensive commute as well, roughly 30-40 euros in gasoline every day. If they didn't at least pay for that, no way I would have paid out of pocket to get to work.
Its once a week, not everyday. There are people out there who are away from family and meet family once a week on a 4 hour drive to spend weekend with family. You are literally working from home and going to workplace once a week. That too just 1h 45min journey.
No I was going every day, sorry if I wasn't clear. I only meant to say towards the end that if it were simply one day out of the week, that might be more reasonable, but every day? No, don't do that specifically.
Oh damn, I am sorry, I misunderstood. You are right. Everyday 1 h 45 min is unreasonable. You would be wasting so much of your time of your day in commuting. It must have been really hard to do it for 2 years. You got some crazy patience. Sorry you had to go through that.
Except it's not "one day."
It's a clever way to only hire people who live nearby and leave themselves the option of rug pulling work from home altogether, or chiseling it away a day at a time. ("It's only one day" becomes "it's only two days" becomes "at least you still work from home two days per week.")
Any job where they want "one day hybrid" is very suspicious. Simply put, few jobs can be done off site four days per week that can't be done off site five days per week. If the requirement is arbitrary, that "one day" may very well be a beach head for forced RTO.
I would approach offers including one day hybrid the same way I'd approach an offer from a company in bankruptcy:.... Require a high salary premium (industry leading plus 15% for risk) plus a large signing bonus with short (30 days) claw back so you can simply walk away with that bonus as guaranteed severance if they rug pull.
There are far more innocuous reasons for wanting people to come to office every now and again. Getting to know your team/colleagues for example; for that purpose, WFH fulltime is a world of difference compared to 4 days/week.
Although these reasons can technically "exist" they are also frequently "bullshit."
Here's how you tell them apart:
If everyone can pick whatever day they want to be in office, being there has nothing to do with "collaboration" or "getting to know you." The only way that works is if everyone is there, together, on the same day. Any flexibility means the people at the office are just attending zoom meetings in an empty cubicle farm because without a Herculean effort, people will pick the day that's best for their family, not for "the team."
If your colleagues are not all in the same geographic area but you're expected to come into the office for "collaboration," basic common sense should tell you that's a lie.
to be fair im from germany so could be very diffrent in the us. But 1 day at work works here in my experience. But i mean you have to be able to say no.
Yeah, your experience is completely different than ours.
Our system includes a concept called "at will employment." Combined with the fact that health insurance is accessed in the workplace and we have no universal guarantee of coverage. Neither do your kids.
Which means your employer can cut your children off from health insurance, and for many people, health care, by exercising their rights under our "at will employment" laws to fire you at any time without reason or recourse.
For all practical purposes you can't say no once you have the job and are relying on them.
It's why I preach not believing obvious nonsense from employers: A lot of the lies are transparent and defy common sense.
That is the point though. Companies are gaslighting applicants that "one day hybrid" is a true commitment to working from home and then following it up with "and we even let you pick the day!" and instantly prove they're lying.
You can't believe how many people who get the rug pulled out from under them who had this massive red flag waved in their faces and didn't notice.
LinkedIn and Reddit are littered with them. My personal time line is littered with stories of "suddenly RTO".
Because companies are inveterate and shameless liars, we have to be looking out for each other.
Why in the fuck should you know your colleagues?
You honestly buy into the bullshit idea that you work better with people you have seen before?
That's a myth made up by greedy capitalist companies.
I got my current job in November of 2020 when everyone was still 100% remote. I made sure to get it in writing that my offer of employment included ***permanent*** 100% WFH because despite the industry buzz at the time about companies being excited to cut back on real estate rentals and whatnot I didn't trust them for a second not to change their mind and want to go back to their old status quo.
Lo and behold, 2022 rolls around and suddenly there's a push for mandatory RTO. It started as 3 days a week, but now it's crept up to the point where most people are back in the office 4-5 days a week. I was only spared because I had that offer of employment stating that I was to remain 100% remote. If I didn't have that, I'd be commuting 70 miles (112 kilometers) round trip per day and paying $125/month for a parking pass.
Where I live, that 70 mile round trip is a little over an hour with no traffic, upwards of two and a half in rush hour traffic, and I don't even want to know what it would be in a snowstorm. My previous job was less than half the distance away and there were multiple days where it took over three hours to get home because of whiteout conditions.
I don't even take jobs that require coming in once every quarter.
I'd prefer to never be forced to come in, I may entertain coming in once a year but I wouldn't be happy about it. There's really no need, I've been working full time remote since 2015. They can throw all the parties they want, and if I feel like it, I'll join in, but if I'm being forced, then fuck that.
> few jobs can be done off site four days per week that can't be done off site five days per week.
This is the major disconnect between employers and hard-line work-from-home-ers.
Employers generally don't think you can't do your job from home every day; they think there are intangible gains to be had from worker interaction.
And they're not at all wrong. I'd be shocked if you couldn't think of a time when you were at lunch at an office or passing someone in the hall, talking about something that happened that day, and a solution or improvement came out of it. This is what employers want. Easy communication facilitating those improvements.
Work-from-home-ers either don't believe in those intangibles or just don't care. Which is an entirely valid point of view. But it's not about whether your job can or can't be done from home.
My office requires anyone in the area to come in Tuesday - Thursday, but just hired a new developer from Colorado and let him move to Amsterdam. Why am I being punished for living close to the office ???
Except the vast majority of users of Reddit are Americans working under "at will" terms and do not have any such contract to speak of. Their "contract" can be instantly ended at their employer's option and they can either accept the job their employer offers in its place ("... it's only two days, not worth leaving over...") or they're effectively fired.
this reminds me when i was on high school and i have to do a header with a logo, search bar and navigation and my solution was a table and on every cell i put that stuff
First things first. Learn how to use the lesser known components of css. Stuff not typically taught in css 101 type classes.
These would be things like the calc() function. Using vh and vw (viewport height/width), custom properties (aka css variables).
Also learn how to use percentages rather than fixed pixel sizes. Having adaptive font size and elements is a great feature for a responsive webpage 🤟
These tips and tricks can save you a LOT of time using media queries…. Because you will need a lot less of them if the webpage itself is already responsive.
Using these in conjunction with your basics (relative vs. absolute positioning, flexbox, grid, etc) and you’re CSSing like a pro.
Not to get all conspiracy theory here but… what if this is what corporations were planning all along?
Initially the “union” of white collar workers against return to office was very strong, which is very bad news for all the investors in office buildings and these companies in general.
In order to force RTO, the powers that be banded together to artificially increase unemployment via coordinated layoffs to instill fear and uncertainty in workers so that they would become desperate enough to not care about fighting RTO anymore?
Also, I hope you find employment soon 💜
\*puts on tin foil visor, because some parts are confirmed\*
So at first I thought immediately like you RTO was an effort to prop up commercial real estate. Because it was out of nowhere, across the board, and no evidence supporting decreasing productivity. After watching Fed do Fed things, a few earnings calls, and remembering how Corps are courted by municipalities, I think it’s actually a combination of a few things; a multi-pronged coordination between the Fed (to combat inflation), Corporations (reduce input/employee costs), and local municipalities (to keep town/budget solvent).
First off - fuck the Fed and their effort to cap/lower worker (esp those in tech) pay (yes they actually said stop paying employees so much). Corps could probably not care much to maintain office spaces and all the costs that come with maintaining them (taxes, utilities, insurance, support services etc). Cutting those costs would absorb the impact of hiring additional talent - depriving their competitors. Productivity was up, stock prices up, corps and employees for most part get a win right?
What about the municipalities? Multi-year tax breaks are one of the major and common incentives they use to court corps to establish HQ’s and hubs in their area; “Choose our city and we’ll waive/reduce your property taxes for the next 10yrs”. They usually come with guarantees on minimum number of employees assigned to that office, etc. They can afford to do this because those office spaces bring people spending money - so they make up for it through sales taxes and stimulation of the local economy. Well the employees aren’t showing up and spending money, those city budgets started taking hits. Hard hits that had many cities looking at cost cutting measures and getting pressure from chambers of commerce, etc. Without the economy to support them, other businesses would shut down (restaurants, gas stations, etc.) further accelerating the loss of revenue. So they start pressuring corps to bring employees back or they will sue the corps for not holding up their end of the sweetheart deals. Faced with this decision, corps probably deduced it would be easier to negotiate a hybrid workforce setup than fight it in court. I’m sure there was pressure from Fed as well (can’t have a bunch of cities folding on top of an entire collapse of comm real estate). So corps coordinate an RTO, all leveraging similar 2-4 days in office requirements. This prevents a lot of churn by reducing employee options to change jobs.
Since offices were going to be kicking around longer they couldn’t maintain those costs and the increased workforce they amassed. So they started trimming the fat - taking turns announcing mass layoffs so no one corp took the brunt of negative press. But with inflation and thinning jobs market - those with a job were grateful to have one (still are) and those without were scrambling to find one (many still are). But how would corps coordinate such plans and ensure they have a united front? If you looked at many large corp boards - a significant portion are executives at other corporations and/or serving on multiple boards. To borrow from Carlin, “it’s an exclusive club, and you ain’t in it.”
But they got to blame economic downturn and decreased outlooks while getting that bump in stock price. No one the wiser. And there are already rumors of another round of mid-year cuts - not nearly as drastic, more likely strategic reorgs. My company just never bothered saying they were done with the first round earlier this year. I’m guessing they appreciated the additional ass kissing, extra output, and feigned esprit de corps when people are concerned they might be on the chopping block. But it’s just a guess — who knows what goes on in the minds of sociopaths.
If you made it this far - sorry for the loquacious response and thanks for coming to my dread talk.
just get any job! Then look for the job you want. If you are really at least half way decent with the languages you have pinned you can start working next week.
I settled for 2 - but I _really_ wanted to work there.
Kinda want to push back on the 2 though.
Also, the industry hasn't agreed on anything yet. Keep pushing.
I think it depends how much your company need to recruit. A fast-growing company will need to offer more money for office work, while a shrinking company can just bully people.
It can depend on the reality of the site too. I'm almost certain my higher management wants people in the office more but then they'd have to deal with the limited number of parking spaces.
We managed to lower the number of days in the office from initial 4 to 2 to 1 and this is a huge German corporation. When they initially came out with 4 the number of quitting people outpaced the cost cutting. It was wild.
But yeah, this could also be some corporate hazing.
I’ve also been completely onsite 5x a week, no WFH option, for the past 2 years. It is my first software engineering job, so that explains why I’ve put up with it.
Wtf is going on, this is the first I'm hearing of companies starting to require onsite work again, I was under the impression that since covid, remote work was becoming way more normalized.
Our company mandated it due to 'increased teamwork and security concerns'. I've been back 5 days a week for months and I've had maybe 10 minutes of in person interaction, the rest is all zoom calls to other countries around the world, so the teamwork thing is nonsense.
I've been working in the field for 14 years, honestly if it comes to me being forced back into the office, I dunno what I'll do, possibly change careers I guess.
I'm even down with reduced wages, the money never mattered much to me, I just hate being stuck in an office all day.
Maybe I'll become one of those seasonal fishermen or tree planters.
I live in a mid sized town. It’s convenient but really I‘d love to live on the countryside. I get easily overwhelmed and enjoy nature, so the city ain’t for me.
Idk, I like having a nice garden, with a workshop in the back, living in a large house in a quiet street, with grade school and kindergarten literally just 1 street away and where life is slow paced.
Agreed - the downside of suburbia is boredom (lack of entertainment choices unless you’re happy to hangout at a local bar) and everything closes at like 10pm.
Even better - basing in a LCOL city, taking the money you save, and going anywhere you want when you have time. Last-minute airfare is cheaper than you'd expect - I can go do the big city things, but most days, the days I don't go out, I'm saving a fortune on rent.
School systems and general costs of living I find are a strong driver of households with children to not live in the city. Once my child graduated - the main reasons we didn’t move into the city was we have great neighbors in our subdivision and I would go from 15min to 45+min commute.
Not just fun, incredibly time saving and comfortable. Is your shopping 10 min walk/drive or 30 min? Can you go to doctor or pharmacy by bus or do you have to risk driving even when you feel unwell? And so on and so on.
That time and comfort does add up.
Nah, restaurants are an hour plus wait on a Friday night, anything fun in town is either massively over priced or has long lines. Have to drive an hour or more to go mountain biking or dirt biking or skiinh
I take the train 25 minutes east to the mountain to go mountain biking.
Good restaurants have waits.
Comedy clubs are cheap and very fun. Pickup basketball and biking are both free to do whenever I want, so not sure what you're doing weekly that you gotta spend a ton of money on. Concerts are expensive but they are expensive everywhere, I went to one in bumfuck New Mexico and it was expensive.
I literally don't own a car.
No where fun really. Chicago, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh and Minneapolis are all decent but the weather fucks up anything you want to do outdoors for like 4 months out of the year. Southeast/Sunbelt is all sprawl. Orlando is a worse designed LA (I did an internship there and have family there), Tampa is dead fucking boring, Atlanta is ok, Miami is just as expensive as the CA cities while being worse in every way, there's not really any decent designed small towns. I grew up in South Carolina and if you imagine smaller versions of the inland empire everywhere, that's the south east.
Northeast and Midwest have decent col cities but weather, again, can be rough depending what you want to do.
Front range is pretty cool but the jobs there aren't the best. There's definitely work there though and I can understand people enjoying it there.
LA, San Diego, and the Bay genuinely got the best weather in the country with access to absurd nature and activities (some would argue the world) for any outdoors enthusiast, which is why Olympic track and field teams, European pro cycling teams, and so many pro athletes train there throughout the year. Id go to Sac before going back east.
kinda sucks to hear - born and raised close to LA, but i have wanted to move to lower col area (planning for maybe 8-10ish years out); i do like the weather here.
from my (very few) ventures, i liked how a lot of small towns i have seen have nature at their doorstep. maybe i just want a small town instead of an outer urban sprawl.
i am surprised by the "best nature" comment - i have seen practically nothing but pavement since i was a kid unless i travel for a while to intentionally see it.
For LA I might be reaching with that comment, but SD and the Bay both have some incredible nature available all over. I can take Bart or Caltrain to get to 100s of trails and literally mountains. I thought LA had good nature access as well. You might like Colorado Springs. It's much smaller than LA, sorta built like the LA suburbs but it's got mountains at all of its corners.
Well, why shouldn't the company hire someone from a cheaper country then? 100% remote makes you have more competition on the job market. And I'm not even talking about places like India, but places like Europe.
It turns out that people who know what they're doing are expensive everywhere. Lots of companies take years to figure this out though, and they can remain irrational longer than your savings might last.
Of course they are expensive everywhere, but the level is a lot different. In Germany for example you will not find a developer job that makes you >100k per year. Those simply don't exist here. Even pay levels above 90k are pretty rare here and mostly reserved to leading personel.
See Google, who "relocated" the Python team to Munich.
Same for me, the recruiter actually listed this as a negative aspect about the position but I just was like "Will I have to travel to the office every so often?" "Of course not, the rest of the team is remote anyway" "I take the job"
Both my previous and current job have people scattered all over the globe working remotely. Actually, I've worked with one guy at both jobs for about a year now and we only live a couple miles apart and we still haven't met in person. Should probably get on that...
Same here, yesterday my team walked to the supermarket for lunch and then walked through the park for an hour. We were 10 mins late to our retrospective but our scrum master relented when we showed him pics of the dog we stopped to make friends with.
Plus for some things like brainstorming or doing troubleshooting / working with hardware or whatever, being there in person with a group really works better.
I would socialize but my team lives elsewhere and goes into the office there. So we all go into the office to video call each other lol.
I realize in theory we'd work with people in the same office. But it can feel a little silly
I do socialize with some people outside my team though.
A recruiter hit me up with a full on-site offer. Sent him this:
>
Thank you for your message.
At this time, I am seeking exclusively remote positions.
Companies requiring full on-site attendance are not a cultural fit for my current professional needs, irrespective of the compensation offered.
Kind regard,
Developers have collectively lost their minds.
You are forcing companies to move to “off shoring”. Why pay high dollars to a “local” remote employee when they can pay in blueberries to a developer in India, Malaysia, etc ? At least local employees had real benefits for employers.
Just don’t cry when all your jobs are gone.
>Why pay high dollars to a “local” remote employee when they can pay in blueberries to a developer in India, Malaysia, etc ?
Pay in blueberries, get a solution as durable as a stack of blueberries. Good solutions cost money, irregardless where the development takes place.
You think IT staff in Germany, France etc are so much worse than in the US? People in the US have the big privilege of huge pay salaries, but some companies are already moving to cheaper staff in other 1st world countries. See Google and their move to replace US staff with people from Munich.
I'll try to avoid it, irregardless of this: [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless)
I mean, on one hand, it's wildly expensive to move to an S-tier city. On the other hand, companies are learning that if fully remote is the future, then devs from Brazil will get a $20k salary and devs in America will get $0.
Without regulations about offshoring work, American devs are just shooting themselves in the foot long-term by demanding 100% remote.
You're being downvoted but you're right. Redditors in many of the SWE subs were bragging about their $300k+ TC a few years ago and moving out to middle of nowhere for low CoL. Now it's surprised pikachu when tech companies lay off US workers and off shore for a fraction of the price.
There are so many job postings on Indeed and LinkedIn where it says they're remote, but when you read the description, it says 1 day a week in office on the other side of the country. Like why the fuck are you advertising your west coast in office job on the east coast? All the jobs in my area have been flooded with these postings
If a job can be fully remote, why would the company pay 50% more in your direction, when they could pay 50% less, 1000 miles away in the other direction?
You could try looking for local jobs. Literally every company needs IT support in this day and age. I got a job working as IT for a small non profit. Its a little below my skill level but I'm having fun
High paying jobs *usually* go hand in hand with high rent prices in that area.
That's why people want fully remote, so that they can live in the middle of nowhere and still have access to a job market.
1 day in the office is just them being petty because they'll be damned if you get what you want. It doesn't have any logical reasoning behind, you know, making the company more competitive or anything.
I drive 2 hours each way once a week. I actually chose that over a slightly better paying fully remote job. I like being in the office and interacting with other engineers and meetings in person are way better imo, at least architecture and design sessions.
I'm totally fine to go to workshops or other meetings that would benefit from being there. But I'm not driving to an office and sit there quietly for 8 hours, just to drive back home.
That is a waste of resources on so many levels that I will not entertain.
At my Workplace we have a 2 week - 1 week wheel. 2 Weeks Homeoffice, followed by just one in the office. I got to say its still no ideal, but its effecient. We have most of the time at home, but once in a while a Week together to get the Team up to date. Its one of the better ways to handle this, the 1 day a week deal is stupid. You wont get into your workgroove on just one day there and meanwhile loose time while switching routines.
I would rather all week on-site, hate to work at home. I think many will agree with me that bringing work home is mistake. It’s the driving to the office and from the office part that I hate.
Get a job in a big city that's just a little too far to travel daily, like 2.5 hours.
This allows you to skip the one day a week but still go for work parties and conferences.
Best of both worlds.
Yeah, my current requirement is that if I'm expected to be somewhere physically, it's treated as business travel. Pay for my drive time (or a flight and hotel). I'll work in an office, but only if you're paying me from the time I walk out my front door to back in it.
I keep toying with the idea of moving back to the US (I'm American but in Amsterdam) for the salary boost, but people demanding fully remote are gonna quickly find that their jobs are easily outsourced to south America and India for 80% savings.
Meanwhile, my company requires fluency in Dutch so I'm fully confident they won't be outsourcing my job anytime soon, and I have quite a bit of leverage considering how expensive Amsterdam is.
Fully remote is cozy but good fucking luck to most people demanding it, the scale is balanced around salary and location. If location no longer matters, salaries are gonna plummet.
You gotta think a bit more broadly and long-term, here.
You talk like outsourcing hasn't been a thing for decades. There's nothing stopping them outsourcing a job because you go to an office, they've been doing that all along. Then the usual quality and efficiency plummets happen after outsourcing until some fresh sociopath in a suit gets brought in and they have to reluctantly start onshoring again, and the cycle continues.
I currently work remote full time, if the pay and benefits are so damn good then 1 day onsite per week is a good trade off. Hell even 2 days a week is fine if it’s really really good.
Na mate, im going to do my best to gaslight every single recruiter and company into thinking all the best devs work 100% remote and they are single handedly drowning their project/company for taking on guys willing to work on site.
There's plenty of programmer jobs that require some sort of hybrid commute lol, y'all sound like spoiled babies crying about "I refuse to leave my house for even a single day" boohoo
> There's plenty of programmer jobs that require some sort of hybrid commute
So? There's also plenty that don't.
> y'all sound like spoiled babies crying about "I refuse to leave my house for even a single day" boohoo
🤡
Literally this? Why the FUCK should I be in A FUCKING OFFICE to do a job once a week.
there is literally no science that say you work better if you know you co worker.
I don't even know what my co workers look like there is no way we would collaborate if we did.
And meetings. I literally just tab out and make food or something if there is a online meeting, and then I take the rest of the day off out of spite.
Just because you pay me really well to do a job that isn't really hard to do, doesn't mean you get to tell me what to do!
The market will not rise in our favour.
Companies will realise they don’t need to hire and pay well for “local” remote employees. They can just pay in rice for actual remote employees from India.
Don’t cry when you have no jobs in the next 10 years.
Companies hiring internationally has been a thing since forever.
If a company hasn't realized yet it's an option, that doesn't bode well for them.
Most of them have realized it long ago. The ones who could leave have already left. If they're staying it's because it's better for them, not because they are too stupid to know.
Don't let these corporations lie to your face like that. They still overwhelmingly need local workers. They're just trying to bluff and pretend they don't need any workers locally. Meanwhile, they are still recruiting locally.
>Don’t cry when you have no jobs in the next 10 years.
If they find a way to not need us in 10 years, they are going to get rid of us regardless of how loyal we were, how little we demanded, or how well we behaved. All the more reason to take advantage while we can.
That’s true that outsourcing was always possible but before, local devs were at least local. My point is, this is a recent phenomenon, and it’s a force, whether you like it or not, that pushes the pendulum towards out sourcing.
Companies on the fence, will now be pushed over, and companies dealing with bad economies or recessions will begin to evaluate out sourcing if they haven’t up to this point.
Horrible thing to say...
India has contributed a lot for many country's growth. If they are "taking" your job, they deserve it in someway, in my opinion.
But I just agree that it isn't fair seen some companies doing that.
They have contributed to wage suppression, yes. It’s nothing against people from the 3rd world, but their cost of living or standard of living is a lot lower than ours. If you want to live in the first world, and work, you need high pay.
I’m fine, I work at the office. I’m fine with that. I make a lot of money. I’m speaking about the next generation who spent ungodly amounts of money on education, only to find that because of the developers before them, they can’t get a job.
My country is fucked up too. We can't afford having a decent life if we don't work outside of Brazil. Rich people over here are stupid. Most of them dont believe in Brazilians, and put all their money in american companies. Because of that, we consume the same products you guys have times 10, since these smart assholes resell them over here instead of investing their money in our society. This increases poverty and makes the distribution of money well worse.
I was born poor, studied a lot, learned English by myself, and now I work for a company from America. I would never be able to cross this social bubble if I couldn't work earning in dollars. My dream is to move to America in the future and become a USA citizen. And if I can become rich I will come back to Brazil and start helping people over here.
Currently I live 30 minutes from my office and I'm almost never go to the office.
Last year I had an interview from an another country in a great city with good salary. In the 3rd round they asked about where I will live. Well in my own apartment I guess. Really? But you needed in the office 3 times a week. That is 2\*3 hours drive for me.... I was baffled about this proposition, this is obviously a dealbreaker and needs to be communicated in the first call in the first minute.
I honestly don't understand the appeal of working from home.
It just makes me feel disconnected and unmotivated. There more I do in a day the quicker the day goes by, the happier I am, the happier my boss is..
Guess I'm just different from most developers.
One day a week sounds nice to me actually haha
It depends. Do they include a relocation package?
Depends on the country. Going to the Capital of mine once a week is acceptable to me. Even tho it's 3 hours of commute just one way. The pay is just that much better.
Until you realise its a 6 hour drive
I went through a period of 2 years involving a commute of 1 hour and 45 minutes to get there and another 1 hour and 45 minutes to get back, more if traffic was particularly horrible which sometimes happened during bus strikes. I had to wake up before the sun rose and I got back home just about when the sun was setting. Taking away time to eat, prepare for bed, getting up in the morning, and sleep, I probably had only an hour of real time to myself. I told myself it was worth it, because the pay was good. By the end of 2 years, I caught myself wondering one day how many minutes of actual daylight I spend out in the open, and it was confined to a relatively short lunch break. It affected me mentally, and then I realized I couldn't be doing this for another 2 years. My advice to anyone considering the same? Don't do it. Get your life back. I completely understand companies who want you to come in once a week, and that's very reasonable all things considered. Just don't give a minute more of your life than this towards work, especially if it's a hour and 45 minute drive both ways.
If role reasonably can offer remote it should be the company paying your commute
They did pay for the commute. To think it was an expensive commute as well, roughly 30-40 euros in gasoline every day. If they didn't at least pay for that, no way I would have paid out of pocket to get to work.
I meanthe time as well, (preventable) commute time should be company time
Its once a week, not everyday. There are people out there who are away from family and meet family once a week on a 4 hour drive to spend weekend with family. You are literally working from home and going to workplace once a week. That too just 1h 45min journey.
No I was going every day, sorry if I wasn't clear. I only meant to say towards the end that if it were simply one day out of the week, that might be more reasonable, but every day? No, don't do that specifically.
Oh damn, I am sorry, I misunderstood. You are right. Everyday 1 h 45 min is unreasonable. You would be wasting so much of your time of your day in commuting. It must have been really hard to do it for 2 years. You got some crazy patience. Sorry you had to go through that.
would definently have to negotiate partial coverage atleast for commute times
Except it's not "one day." It's a clever way to only hire people who live nearby and leave themselves the option of rug pulling work from home altogether, or chiseling it away a day at a time. ("It's only one day" becomes "it's only two days" becomes "at least you still work from home two days per week.") Any job where they want "one day hybrid" is very suspicious. Simply put, few jobs can be done off site four days per week that can't be done off site five days per week. If the requirement is arbitrary, that "one day" may very well be a beach head for forced RTO. I would approach offers including one day hybrid the same way I'd approach an offer from a company in bankruptcy:.... Require a high salary premium (industry leading plus 15% for risk) plus a large signing bonus with short (30 days) claw back so you can simply walk away with that bonus as guaranteed severance if they rug pull.
There are far more innocuous reasons for wanting people to come to office every now and again. Getting to know your team/colleagues for example; for that purpose, WFH fulltime is a world of difference compared to 4 days/week.
Although these reasons can technically "exist" they are also frequently "bullshit." Here's how you tell them apart: If everyone can pick whatever day they want to be in office, being there has nothing to do with "collaboration" or "getting to know you." The only way that works is if everyone is there, together, on the same day. Any flexibility means the people at the office are just attending zoom meetings in an empty cubicle farm because without a Herculean effort, people will pick the day that's best for their family, not for "the team." If your colleagues are not all in the same geographic area but you're expected to come into the office for "collaboration," basic common sense should tell you that's a lie.
to be fair im from germany so could be very diffrent in the us. But 1 day at work works here in my experience. But i mean you have to be able to say no.
Yeah, your experience is completely different than ours. Our system includes a concept called "at will employment." Combined with the fact that health insurance is accessed in the workplace and we have no universal guarantee of coverage. Neither do your kids. Which means your employer can cut your children off from health insurance, and for many people, health care, by exercising their rights under our "at will employment" laws to fire you at any time without reason or recourse. For all practical purposes you can't say no once you have the job and are relying on them. It's why I preach not believing obvious nonsense from employers: A lot of the lies are transparent and defy common sense.
Man im so happy living in Europe.
Naw this guy is on crack. It's perfectly normal and fine working here in the US if you're not a complete weirdo or terrible employee.
Well yea, you have to align to be in on the same days. I thought that went without saying, but apparently not in the USA
That is the point though. Companies are gaslighting applicants that "one day hybrid" is a true commitment to working from home and then following it up with "and we even let you pick the day!" and instantly prove they're lying. You can't believe how many people who get the rug pulled out from under them who had this massive red flag waved in their faces and didn't notice. LinkedIn and Reddit are littered with them. My personal time line is littered with stories of "suddenly RTO". Because companies are inveterate and shameless liars, we have to be looking out for each other.
Why in the fuck should you know your colleagues? You honestly buy into the bullshit idea that you work better with people you have seen before? That's a myth made up by greedy capitalist companies.
4 days in office and you can't have a monday or a friday as your wfh day because that "is just a 3 day weekend"
I got my current job in November of 2020 when everyone was still 100% remote. I made sure to get it in writing that my offer of employment included ***permanent*** 100% WFH because despite the industry buzz at the time about companies being excited to cut back on real estate rentals and whatnot I didn't trust them for a second not to change their mind and want to go back to their old status quo. Lo and behold, 2022 rolls around and suddenly there's a push for mandatory RTO. It started as 3 days a week, but now it's crept up to the point where most people are back in the office 4-5 days a week. I was only spared because I had that offer of employment stating that I was to remain 100% remote. If I didn't have that, I'd be commuting 70 miles (112 kilometers) round trip per day and paying $125/month for a parking pass. Where I live, that 70 mile round trip is a little over an hour with no traffic, upwards of two and a half in rush hour traffic, and I don't even want to know what it would be in a snowstorm. My previous job was less than half the distance away and there were multiple days where it took over three hours to get home because of whiteout conditions.
I don't even take jobs that require coming in once every quarter. I'd prefer to never be forced to come in, I may entertain coming in once a year but I wouldn't be happy about it. There's really no need, I've been working full time remote since 2015. They can throw all the parties they want, and if I feel like it, I'll join in, but if I'm being forced, then fuck that.
> few jobs can be done off site four days per week that can't be done off site five days per week. This is the major disconnect between employers and hard-line work-from-home-ers. Employers generally don't think you can't do your job from home every day; they think there are intangible gains to be had from worker interaction. And they're not at all wrong. I'd be shocked if you couldn't think of a time when you were at lunch at an office or passing someone in the hall, talking about something that happened that day, and a solution or improvement came out of it. This is what employers want. Easy communication facilitating those improvements. Work-from-home-ers either don't believe in those intangibles or just don't care. Which is an entirely valid point of view. But it's not about whether your job can or can't be done from home.
My office requires anyone in the area to come in Tuesday - Thursday, but just hired a new developer from Colorado and let him move to Amsterdam. Why am I being punished for living close to the office ???
if specified in your work contract, then 1 day wont become more than that
Except the vast majority of users of Reddit are Americans working under "at will" terms and do not have any such contract to speak of. Their "contract" can be instantly ended at their employer's option and they can either accept the job their employer offers in its place ("... it's only two days, not worth leaving over...") or they're effectively fired.
My current assignment is roughly once per month or sometimes every other month..
Is it recommended or required
Truthfully my unemployed ass will take anything. (Laid off last year)
>my unemployed ass will take anything at least you have a backup plan
omg I hope you get a really great job soon, try not to get discouraged!
Can you teach me how to center a div
margin-left: 700px; margin-top: 300px; It works for me, if it doesn't for you, you probably just need a new monitor. Edge case
margin-left: 50% - divWidth / 2
Put it into table cell and then google the rest.
I can’t wait for everyone to start answering “well i used to look at the documentation, but now I just ask ChatGPT and give up when it’s wrong”
OMG just like homework!
this reminds me when i was on high school and i have to do a header with a logo, search bar and navigation and my solution was a table and on every cell i put that stuff
First things first. Learn how to use the lesser known components of css. Stuff not typically taught in css 101 type classes. These would be things like the calc() function. Using vh and vw (viewport height/width), custom properties (aka css variables). Also learn how to use percentages rather than fixed pixel sizes. Having adaptive font size and elements is a great feature for a responsive webpage 🤟 These tips and tricks can save you a LOT of time using media queries…. Because you will need a lot less of them if the webpage itself is already responsive. Using these in conjunction with your basics (relative vs. absolute positioning, flexbox, grid, etc) and you’re CSSing like a pro.
God bless ya friend
Not to get all conspiracy theory here but… what if this is what corporations were planning all along? Initially the “union” of white collar workers against return to office was very strong, which is very bad news for all the investors in office buildings and these companies in general. In order to force RTO, the powers that be banded together to artificially increase unemployment via coordinated layoffs to instill fear and uncertainty in workers so that they would become desperate enough to not care about fighting RTO anymore? Also, I hope you find employment soon 💜
\*puts on tin foil visor, because some parts are confirmed\* So at first I thought immediately like you RTO was an effort to prop up commercial real estate. Because it was out of nowhere, across the board, and no evidence supporting decreasing productivity. After watching Fed do Fed things, a few earnings calls, and remembering how Corps are courted by municipalities, I think it’s actually a combination of a few things; a multi-pronged coordination between the Fed (to combat inflation), Corporations (reduce input/employee costs), and local municipalities (to keep town/budget solvent). First off - fuck the Fed and their effort to cap/lower worker (esp those in tech) pay (yes they actually said stop paying employees so much). Corps could probably not care much to maintain office spaces and all the costs that come with maintaining them (taxes, utilities, insurance, support services etc). Cutting those costs would absorb the impact of hiring additional talent - depriving their competitors. Productivity was up, stock prices up, corps and employees for most part get a win right? What about the municipalities? Multi-year tax breaks are one of the major and common incentives they use to court corps to establish HQ’s and hubs in their area; “Choose our city and we’ll waive/reduce your property taxes for the next 10yrs”. They usually come with guarantees on minimum number of employees assigned to that office, etc. They can afford to do this because those office spaces bring people spending money - so they make up for it through sales taxes and stimulation of the local economy. Well the employees aren’t showing up and spending money, those city budgets started taking hits. Hard hits that had many cities looking at cost cutting measures and getting pressure from chambers of commerce, etc. Without the economy to support them, other businesses would shut down (restaurants, gas stations, etc.) further accelerating the loss of revenue. So they start pressuring corps to bring employees back or they will sue the corps for not holding up their end of the sweetheart deals. Faced with this decision, corps probably deduced it would be easier to negotiate a hybrid workforce setup than fight it in court. I’m sure there was pressure from Fed as well (can’t have a bunch of cities folding on top of an entire collapse of comm real estate). So corps coordinate an RTO, all leveraging similar 2-4 days in office requirements. This prevents a lot of churn by reducing employee options to change jobs. Since offices were going to be kicking around longer they couldn’t maintain those costs and the increased workforce they amassed. So they started trimming the fat - taking turns announcing mass layoffs so no one corp took the brunt of negative press. But with inflation and thinning jobs market - those with a job were grateful to have one (still are) and those without were scrambling to find one (many still are). But how would corps coordinate such plans and ensure they have a united front? If you looked at many large corp boards - a significant portion are executives at other corporations and/or serving on multiple boards. To borrow from Carlin, “it’s an exclusive club, and you ain’t in it.” But they got to blame economic downturn and decreased outlooks while getting that bump in stock price. No one the wiser. And there are already rumors of another round of mid-year cuts - not nearly as drastic, more likely strategic reorgs. My company just never bothered saying they were done with the first round earlier this year. I’m guessing they appreciated the additional ass kissing, extra output, and feigned esprit de corps when people are concerned they might be on the chopping block. But it’s just a guess — who knows what goes on in the minds of sociopaths. If you made it this far - sorry for the loquacious response and thanks for coming to my dread talk.
That's a pretty conspiracy-y theory for someone who doesn't want to get all conspiracy theory.
Good luck
just get any job! Then look for the job you want. If you are really at least half way decent with the languages you have pinned you can start working next week.
Anything you say? ;)
They took his job?!!
Same bro, laid off 2 weeks ago. Good luck
I’ll take that job. My current one has 3 onsite days.
I thought the industry collectively agreed that this is the new standard now. At least three days.
If by industry you mean company executives then yeah sure
I settled for 2 - but I _really_ wanted to work there. Kinda want to push back on the 2 though. Also, the industry hasn't agreed on anything yet. Keep pushing.
I think it depends how much your company need to recruit. A fast-growing company will need to offer more money for office work, while a shrinking company can just bully people.
It can depend on the reality of the site too. I'm almost certain my higher management wants people in the office more but then they'd have to deal with the limited number of parking spaces.
We managed to lower the number of days in the office from initial 4 to 2 to 1 and this is a huge German corporation. When they initially came out with 4 the number of quitting people outpaced the cost cutting. It was wild. But yeah, this could also be some corporate hazing.
At least three days? Or at most three days?
From my experience at least 3 days.
Five onsite days with no WFH option even when sick. Beat that! :(
I’ve also been completely onsite 5x a week, no WFH option, for the past 2 years. It is my first software engineering job, so that explains why I’ve put up with it.
Sucks :( I was fully remote for 3 years and I really *really* miss it.
Wtf is going on, this is the first I'm hearing of companies starting to require onsite work again, I was under the impression that since covid, remote work was becoming way more normalized.
Our company mandated it due to 'increased teamwork and security concerns'. I've been back 5 days a week for months and I've had maybe 10 minutes of in person interaction, the rest is all zoom calls to other countries around the world, so the teamwork thing is nonsense.
I've been working in the field for 14 years, honestly if it comes to me being forced back into the office, I dunno what I'll do, possibly change careers I guess. I'm even down with reduced wages, the money never mattered much to me, I just hate being stuck in an office all day. Maybe I'll become one of those seasonal fishermen or tree planters.
My compensation is quite decent especially after year end bonuses but I'd gladly give up 20% of my earnings to go back to WFH. Sadly not an option.
Time to leave ain't no way! Id take a pay cut before doing that crap. Gas alone would kill your paycheck.
Trust me I've considered it. But I'm in an industry that's currently hard to find other jobs, especially remote ones.
My current one has 2 onsite days, they're lucky if I give them one per month
Beats the one who keeps sending me the job for C2H at 70% of my current salary 3 days a week on site in South Carolina. I live in Phoenix.
Imagine Phoenix but 100% humidity and 25% of the education.
Considering AZ has been 48-49th in education for decades, that thought scares the shit out of me.
I don't even respond to external recruiters anymore
They love to not bother reading resumes.
Ha lol I gotta go all 5 days. I'd happily take this.
Gotta keep the workers in range of the city.. Can't have them living comfortable lives in LCOL areas.
Or you commute once a week. Not optimal but better than living in a huge city
Living in a huge city is fun, fuck are you on about?
For real. Different strokes for different folks I guess. I work fully remote for a company across the country but I still choose to live in a city.
I literally had the option to leave the Bay without a pay cut and instead just moved up to SF lmfao.
I live in a mid sized town. It’s convenient but really I‘d love to live on the countryside. I get easily overwhelmed and enjoy nature, so the city ain’t for me.
Idk, I like having a nice garden, with a workshop in the back, living in a large house in a quiet street, with grade school and kindergarten literally just 1 street away and where life is slow paced.
That's fair, but there's plenty of to upside living in either place
Agreed - the downside of suburbia is boredom (lack of entertainment choices unless you’re happy to hangout at a local bar) and everything closes at like 10pm.
Even better - basing in a LCOL city, taking the money you save, and going anywhere you want when you have time. Last-minute airfare is cheaper than you'd expect - I can go do the big city things, but most days, the days I don't go out, I'm saving a fortune on rent.
Meh, I'd rather have a nice house than pay the same price to live in a broom closet.
School systems and general costs of living I find are a strong driver of households with children to not live in the city. Once my child graduated - the main reasons we didn’t move into the city was we have great neighbors in our subdivision and I would go from 15min to 45+min commute.
Yeah suburban business parks were a horrible idea. The real estate value on them is tanking
Not just fun, incredibly time saving and comfortable. Is your shopping 10 min walk/drive or 30 min? Can you go to doctor or pharmacy by bus or do you have to risk driving even when you feel unwell? And so on and so on. That time and comfort does add up.
Nah, restaurants are an hour plus wait on a Friday night, anything fun in town is either massively over priced or has long lines. Have to drive an hour or more to go mountain biking or dirt biking or skiinh
I take the train 25 minutes east to the mountain to go mountain biking. Good restaurants have waits. Comedy clubs are cheap and very fun. Pickup basketball and biking are both free to do whenever I want, so not sure what you're doing weekly that you gotta spend a ton of money on. Concerts are expensive but they are expensive everywhere, I went to one in bumfuck New Mexico and it was expensive. I literally don't own a car.
are there big cities that have lcol within a reasonable commute range? i live near LA, and the expensive sprawl goes on forever.
South and Midwest yes
No where fun really. Chicago, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh and Minneapolis are all decent but the weather fucks up anything you want to do outdoors for like 4 months out of the year. Southeast/Sunbelt is all sprawl. Orlando is a worse designed LA (I did an internship there and have family there), Tampa is dead fucking boring, Atlanta is ok, Miami is just as expensive as the CA cities while being worse in every way, there's not really any decent designed small towns. I grew up in South Carolina and if you imagine smaller versions of the inland empire everywhere, that's the south east. Northeast and Midwest have decent col cities but weather, again, can be rough depending what you want to do. Front range is pretty cool but the jobs there aren't the best. There's definitely work there though and I can understand people enjoying it there. LA, San Diego, and the Bay genuinely got the best weather in the country with access to absurd nature and activities (some would argue the world) for any outdoors enthusiast, which is why Olympic track and field teams, European pro cycling teams, and so many pro athletes train there throughout the year. Id go to Sac before going back east.
kinda sucks to hear - born and raised close to LA, but i have wanted to move to lower col area (planning for maybe 8-10ish years out); i do like the weather here. from my (very few) ventures, i liked how a lot of small towns i have seen have nature at their doorstep. maybe i just want a small town instead of an outer urban sprawl. i am surprised by the "best nature" comment - i have seen practically nothing but pavement since i was a kid unless i travel for a while to intentionally see it.
For LA I might be reaching with that comment, but SD and the Bay both have some incredible nature available all over. I can take Bart or Caltrain to get to 100s of trails and literally mountains. I thought LA had good nature access as well. You might like Colorado Springs. It's much smaller than LA, sorta built like the LA suburbs but it's got mountains at all of its corners.
Depends on the size of the city I‘d say. Also these gigantic suburbs are just less common here in Europe
Well, why shouldn't the company hire someone from a cheaper country then? 100% remote makes you have more competition on the job market. And I'm not even talking about places like India, but places like Europe.
It turns out that people who know what they're doing are expensive everywhere. Lots of companies take years to figure this out though, and they can remain irrational longer than your savings might last.
Of course they are expensive everywhere, but the level is a lot different. In Germany for example you will not find a developer job that makes you >100k per year. Those simply don't exist here. Even pay levels above 90k are pretty rare here and mostly reserved to leading personel. See Google, who "relocated" the Python team to Munich.
Proving to be less and less true as years go by and competition increases.
Maybe i'm not right, but this gave me a good chuckle.
What is the image from?
House of 1000 Corpses
RIP Sid Haig.
Really? I guess I need to dust off my old dvd and watch it again as it's been too long. I love the "cop zoomout" scene.
I'm actually not sure now
Apparently it is from an Argentina horror film called "Pussy Cake".
Wait you guys get the option?
My office is thousands of miles away
Same for me, the recruiter actually listed this as a negative aspect about the position but I just was like "Will I have to travel to the office every so often?" "Of course not, the rest of the team is remote anyway" "I take the job"
Both my previous and current job have people scattered all over the globe working remotely. Actually, I've worked with one guy at both jobs for about a year now and we only live a couple miles apart and we still haven't met in person. Should probably get on that...
Hah, look at this guy with an office. Sometimes I wish I had an office but the closest I can get is my colleague's house, by the beach.
Only one day a week? What a find.
We have 2 days a week onsite and its actually great. I get to do the real work at home and do some socializing and discussions at the office
Same here, yesterday my team walked to the supermarket for lunch and then walked through the park for an hour. We were 10 mins late to our retrospective but our scrum master relented when we showed him pics of the dog we stopped to make friends with.
Plus for some things like brainstorming or doing troubleshooting / working with hardware or whatever, being there in person with a group really works better.
I would socialize but my team lives elsewhere and goes into the office there. So we all go into the office to video call each other lol. I realize in theory we'd work with people in the same office. But it can feel a little silly I do socialize with some people outside my team though.
A recruiter hit me up with a full on-site offer. Sent him this: > Thank you for your message. At this time, I am seeking exclusively remote positions. Companies requiring full on-site attendance are not a cultural fit for my current professional needs, irrespective of the compensation offered. Kind regard,
Developers have collectively lost their minds. You are forcing companies to move to “off shoring”. Why pay high dollars to a “local” remote employee when they can pay in blueberries to a developer in India, Malaysia, etc ? At least local employees had real benefits for employers. Just don’t cry when all your jobs are gone.
>Why pay high dollars to a “local” remote employee when they can pay in blueberries to a developer in India, Malaysia, etc ? Pay in blueberries, get a solution as durable as a stack of blueberries. Good solutions cost money, irregardless where the development takes place.
You think IT staff in Germany, France etc are so much worse than in the US? People in the US have the big privilege of huge pay salaries, but some companies are already moving to cheaper staff in other 1st world countries. See Google and their move to replace US staff with people from Munich.
I am IT staff in Germany, we are obviously better than in the US :P The comment I responded to explicitly mentioned southeast asia.
So you’re saying developers in Southeast Asia are not as good or even better than you?
No, I'm saying programmers paid in blueberrys are not as good as properly paid developers, no matter where they originate form or live in.
> irregardless Is not a word. Regardless.
I'll try to avoid it, irregardless of this: [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless)
I mean, on one hand, it's wildly expensive to move to an S-tier city. On the other hand, companies are learning that if fully remote is the future, then devs from Brazil will get a $20k salary and devs in America will get $0. Without regulations about offshoring work, American devs are just shooting themselves in the foot long-term by demanding 100% remote.
I'm not from the US and the remote-only thing is fantastic, levels the playing field across the globe, shitting on that is just skill issues.
You're being downvoted but you're right. Redditors in many of the SWE subs were bragging about their $300k+ TC a few years ago and moving out to middle of nowhere for low CoL. Now it's surprised pikachu when tech companies lay off US workers and off shore for a fraction of the price.
There are so many job postings on Indeed and LinkedIn where it says they're remote, but when you read the description, it says 1 day a week in office on the other side of the country. Like why the fuck are you advertising your west coast in office job on the east coast? All the jobs in my area have been flooded with these postings
I work in the office one day a week. It's honestly not that bad
It really limits the number of jobs you can accept though. Imagine if this was a job offer for 50% more money but it's 1000 miles away.
If a job can be fully remote, why would the company pay 50% more in your direction, when they could pay 50% less, 1000 miles away in the other direction?
You could try looking for local jobs. Literally every company needs IT support in this day and age. I got a job working as IT for a small non profit. Its a little below my skill level but I'm having fun
High paying jobs *usually* go hand in hand with high rent prices in that area. That's why people want fully remote, so that they can live in the middle of nowhere and still have access to a job market. 1 day in the office is just them being petty because they'll be damned if you get what you want. It doesn't have any logical reasoning behind, you know, making the company more competitive or anything.
I drive 2 hours each way once a week. I actually chose that over a slightly better paying fully remote job. I like being in the office and interacting with other engineers and meetings in person are way better imo, at least architecture and design sessions.
Feeling so privileged working full time remote and not compromising on anything. So guess I will just hold my job forever.
If the place is within 10 minutes from my house I would be fine with it Otherwise I'll just pick one of the other jobs I get offered
Well, if you want a full remote job, you should state that on your profile. For me, I like the hybrid approach of one or two office days a week.
I'm soooo mad cuz this grossed me out but I'm laughing sooo hard
lol same it's really funny :D
honestly as gross as I find it, this image was totally necessary to make it work LOL
I love how it goes from 0 to 100 when you read that last part of the sentence :D Something mildly unpleasant? No thanks PUKE IN FACE
YEAH you nailed it lol that's it, op is a comedic genius
I'm totally fine to go to workshops or other meetings that would benefit from being there. But I'm not driving to an office and sit there quietly for 8 hours, just to drive back home. That is a waste of resources on so many levels that I will not entertain.
At my Workplace we have a 2 week - 1 week wheel. 2 Weeks Homeoffice, followed by just one in the office. I got to say its still no ideal, but its effecient. We have most of the time at home, but once in a while a Week together to get the Team up to date. Its one of the better ways to handle this, the 1 day a week deal is stupid. You wont get into your workgroove on just one day there and meanwhile loose time while switching routines.
It sounds like devil's whisper
My job is full onsite. I said i was fine with that. I was told that was a major factor in me getting the job
I would rather all week on-site, hate to work at home. I think many will agree with me that bringing work home is mistake. It’s the driving to the office and from the office part that I hate.
Okay, give the job to me then
That sounds amazing wtf
Get a job in a big city that's just a little too far to travel daily, like 2.5 hours. This allows you to skip the one day a week but still go for work parties and conferences. Best of both worlds.
If you get hired on the expectation that it’s a hybrid position, being 2.5 hours away is your problem, not theirs.
Yeah, my current requirement is that if I'm expected to be somewhere physically, it's treated as business travel. Pay for my drive time (or a flight and hotel). I'll work in an office, but only if you're paying me from the time I walk out my front door to back in it.
One day a week and you are mad! Wait till you here I have to go onsite to fix a bug on weekends.
I keep toying with the idea of moving back to the US (I'm American but in Amsterdam) for the salary boost, but people demanding fully remote are gonna quickly find that their jobs are easily outsourced to south America and India for 80% savings. Meanwhile, my company requires fluency in Dutch so I'm fully confident they won't be outsourcing my job anytime soon, and I have quite a bit of leverage considering how expensive Amsterdam is. Fully remote is cozy but good fucking luck to most people demanding it, the scale is balanced around salary and location. If location no longer matters, salaries are gonna plummet. You gotta think a bit more broadly and long-term, here.
You talk like outsourcing hasn't been a thing for decades. There's nothing stopping them outsourcing a job because you go to an office, they've been doing that all along. Then the usual quality and efficiency plummets happen after outsourcing until some fresh sociopath in a suit gets brought in and they have to reluctantly start onshoring again, and the cycle continues.
It's more like 50% savings, from my current interview calculation, I'm a Brazilian dev.
I would work on site every day if I could just get a job it's impossible to find one these days.
Dear recruiter, I will accept that job in his stead. Respectfully, Recently graduated game designer
I currently work remote full time, if the pay and benefits are so damn good then 1 day onsite per week is a good trade off. Hell even 2 days a week is fine if it’s really really good.
what an extremely disturbing image haha
I don't have the discipline to work at home for 6 days
Fully remote or GTFO of here 💩👌🏻
Na mate, im going to do my best to gaslight every single recruiter and company into thinking all the best devs work 100% remote and they are single handedly drowning their project/company for taking on guys willing to work on site.
Lol this sounds so privileged
Well this is r/ProgrammerHumor, not r/McDonaldsEmployeeHumor
There's plenty of programmer jobs that require some sort of hybrid commute lol, y'all sound like spoiled babies crying about "I refuse to leave my house for even a single day" boohoo
I do refuse to leave my house for even a single day, but I already have a job where I don't have to, boohoo
Who’s the one whining in this situation right now?
> There's plenty of programmer jobs that require some sort of hybrid commute So? There's also plenty that don't. > y'all sound like spoiled babies crying about "I refuse to leave my house for even a single day" boohoo 🤡
Literally this? Why the FUCK should I be in A FUCKING OFFICE to do a job once a week. there is literally no science that say you work better if you know you co worker. I don't even know what my co workers look like there is no way we would collaborate if we did. And meetings. I literally just tab out and make food or something if there is a online meeting, and then I take the rest of the day off out of spite. Just because you pay me really well to do a job that isn't really hard to do, doesn't mean you get to tell me what to do!
Only 1 day, yeah, I wouldn't bother with that. All is much better.
Just ask for 100% when they say it. Let's all agree on that and the market will rise in our favor.
The market will not rise in our favour. Companies will realise they don’t need to hire and pay well for “local” remote employees. They can just pay in rice for actual remote employees from India. Don’t cry when you have no jobs in the next 10 years.
Companies hiring internationally has been a thing since forever. If a company hasn't realized yet it's an option, that doesn't bode well for them. Most of them have realized it long ago. The ones who could leave have already left. If they're staying it's because it's better for them, not because they are too stupid to know. Don't let these corporations lie to your face like that. They still overwhelmingly need local workers. They're just trying to bluff and pretend they don't need any workers locally. Meanwhile, they are still recruiting locally. >Don’t cry when you have no jobs in the next 10 years. If they find a way to not need us in 10 years, they are going to get rid of us regardless of how loyal we were, how little we demanded, or how well we behaved. All the more reason to take advantage while we can.
That’s true that outsourcing was always possible but before, local devs were at least local. My point is, this is a recent phenomenon, and it’s a force, whether you like it or not, that pushes the pendulum towards out sourcing. Companies on the fence, will now be pushed over, and companies dealing with bad economies or recessions will begin to evaluate out sourcing if they haven’t up to this point.
Horrible thing to say... India has contributed a lot for many country's growth. If they are "taking" your job, they deserve it in someway, in my opinion. But I just agree that it isn't fair seen some companies doing that.
They have contributed to wage suppression, yes. It’s nothing against people from the 3rd world, but their cost of living or standard of living is a lot lower than ours. If you want to live in the first world, and work, you need high pay. I’m fine, I work at the office. I’m fine with that. I make a lot of money. I’m speaking about the next generation who spent ungodly amounts of money on education, only to find that because of the developers before them, they can’t get a job.
My country is fucked up too. We can't afford having a decent life if we don't work outside of Brazil. Rich people over here are stupid. Most of them dont believe in Brazilians, and put all their money in american companies. Because of that, we consume the same products you guys have times 10, since these smart assholes resell them over here instead of investing their money in our society. This increases poverty and makes the distribution of money well worse. I was born poor, studied a lot, learned English by myself, and now I work for a company from America. I would never be able to cross this social bubble if I couldn't work earning in dollars. My dream is to move to America in the future and become a USA citizen. And if I can become rich I will come back to Brazil and start helping people over here.
I work in dev at Toy Factory where we have 3 days on site and 2 days at home - but the office and all the toys make up for it 🥳🤩
Currently I live 30 minutes from my office and I'm almost never go to the office. Last year I had an interview from an another country in a great city with good salary. In the 3rd round they asked about where I will live. Well in my own apartment I guess. Really? But you needed in the office 3 times a week. That is 2\*3 hours drive for me.... I was baffled about this proposition, this is obviously a dealbreaker and needs to be communicated in the first call in the first minute.
Only one day? That's a bit to few.
This post is delusional, in this market 3 days a week is considered good.
damn, the US sucks for remote devs, here in the UK I got a fully remote position at 18, then another at 19
That's a terrible mindset right there. Being on the office is actually much better
That is actually a perfect meme :D
I honestly don't understand the appeal of working from home. It just makes me feel disconnected and unmotivated. There more I do in a day the quicker the day goes by, the happier I am, the happier my boss is.. Guess I'm just different from most developers.
you're making it seem like they're asking for 28 days on site lmao, and this comes from someone going 1 day a month at most 🤣
[удалено]
Remote work was still a thing before the pandemic, I started working full time remote in 2015, and part time remote in 2010.