I know lots of companies are handling the wfh and return to office situation poorly. But to provide a counterpoint, at the start of covid, I led all the engineering teams in a large organization with dozens of sites. When we went to wfh we made it clear that we were authorizing remote work with the contingent that the team could be called in as needed, not to move outside of the area, and not to travel more than two hours away when on call (1 week every two months) etc. Sometimes things break bad enough you need the team's to be physically present at a location, or doing major border device work, etc.
Either the organizations didn't message properly, or a lot of people moved despite being told that the wfh wasn't a permanent remote work accommodation. I'm all for remote work and hybrid, etc, but on a personal level buying a house outside your commute range while knowing you might get called in someday and being brown to your job... just poor decision making.
Fwiw, I approved permanent remote with for all my staff who didn't have any physical responsibilities. For those whose jobs involved any physical infrastructure, the best a could do was hybrid with no minimum number of days in office, just come in as required for the work.
Either the organizations didn’t message properly, or a lot of people moved despite being told that the wfh wasn’t a permanent remote work accommodation.
A lot of employers straight up lied. In some situations, management said employees would be permanent WFH but they didn't have that authority. In other situations, employers changed their mind and the employees have no recourse other than trying to call the employers bluff.
Yours is a sane and reasonable approach. Sometimes you need to drive down to the datacenter and push a button, or there's special equipment you need that is cheaper to have in one place. These jobs should be in person when necessary.
Pushing people to commute outside of this framework puts unnecessary strain on transportation networks and useless emissions in the environment.
At my previous role, I ALWAYS wanted to be onsite at the datacenter if I was doing upgrades of critical systems. I'd sit in the lobby where it was quiet instead of on the datacenter floor but there was comfort knowing that if a button needed pushed I didn't have to drive 30 minutes to do it.
They definitely moved with the intent to be fired if called on-site permanently again. There were tons of comments to that degree during that time (and now).
Essentially, there's more than enough demand for tech skills. They can easily find another job that allows WFH.
It's fair. Shitty to honest managers trying to accommodate where plausible, but honestly, tiny violin vibes there.
That wasn't poor decision making. That was knowing their worth. They knew if the company demanded a return to office they could simply continue working remote for a different company, likely with an increase in pay. Only a fool would alter their life plans for some company that might require RTO. Now they're enjoying improved quality of life while living where they prefer.
The article is about people who are moving back after work from home is ending at their company. I'm sure there are people in the situation you describe but that isn't what this article or my comment are about.
I wonder with these types of stories. The people were either lied to by the company, which I don't ever see mentioned, or settled down without making sure they could. If you're signing a mortgage and not thinking beyond a few years then it's partially on you. Partially because covid lockdowns were a crazy time, companies weren't communicating well because they didn't have a plan, and recent RTO policies aren't for the reasons the company claims.
Given the prevalence of bad management, I'm sure some people were lied to, or the manager believed wrongly that it would end up being permanent, etc. However, anyone who moved and signed a mortgage without a signed remote work agreement was making a heck of a gamble. None of my folks did that, and in my overall division I only knew of one person who moved without a signed agreement, and they ended up being let go of. The funny thing was, for that person, they likely could have gotten a full remote work accommodation if they had put the request in because as a developer they had no physical infrastructure to touch.
I know lots of companies are handling the wfh and return to office situation poorly. But to provide a counterpoint, at the start of covid, I led all the engineering teams in a large organization with dozens of sites. When we went to wfh we made it clear that we were authorizing remote work with the contingent that the team could be called in as needed, not to move outside of the area, and not to travel more than two hours away when on call (1 week every two months) etc. Sometimes things break bad enough you need the team's to be physically present at a location, or doing major border device work, etc.
Either the organizations didn't message properly, or a lot of people moved despite being told that the wfh wasn't a permanent remote work accommodation. I'm all for remote work and hybrid, etc, but on a personal level buying a house outside your commute range while knowing you might get called in someday and being brown to your job... just poor decision making.
Fwiw, I approved permanent remote with for all my staff who didn't have any physical responsibilities. For those whose jobs involved any physical infrastructure, the best a could do was hybrid with no minimum number of days in office, just come in as required for the work.
A lot of employers straight up lied. In some situations, management said employees would be permanent WFH but they didn't have that authority. In other situations, employers changed their mind and the employees have no recourse other than trying to call the employers bluff.
Yours is a sane and reasonable approach. Sometimes you need to drive down to the datacenter and push a button, or there's special equipment you need that is cheaper to have in one place. These jobs should be in person when necessary.
Pushing people to commute outside of this framework puts unnecessary strain on transportation networks and useless emissions in the environment.
At my previous role, I ALWAYS wanted to be onsite at the datacenter if I was doing upgrades of critical systems. I'd sit in the lobby where it was quiet instead of on the datacenter floor but there was comfort knowing that if a button needed pushed I didn't have to drive 30 minutes to do it.
They definitely moved with the intent to be fired if called on-site permanently again. There were tons of comments to that degree during that time (and now).
Essentially, there's more than enough demand for tech skills. They can easily find another job that allows WFH.
It's fair. Shitty to honest managers trying to accommodate where plausible, but honestly, tiny violin vibes there.
That wasn't poor decision making. That was knowing their worth. They knew if the company demanded a return to office they could simply continue working remote for a different company, likely with an increase in pay. Only a fool would alter their life plans for some company that might require RTO. Now they're enjoying improved quality of life while living where they prefer.
The article is about people who are moving back after work from home is ending at their company. I'm sure there are people in the situation you describe but that isn't what this article or my comment are about.
I wonder with these types of stories. The people were either lied to by the company, which I don't ever see mentioned, or settled down without making sure they could. If you're signing a mortgage and not thinking beyond a few years then it's partially on you. Partially because covid lockdowns were a crazy time, companies weren't communicating well because they didn't have a plan, and recent RTO policies aren't for the reasons the company claims.
Given the prevalence of bad management, I'm sure some people were lied to, or the manager believed wrongly that it would end up being permanent, etc. However, anyone who moved and signed a mortgage without a signed remote work agreement was making a heck of a gamble. None of my folks did that, and in my overall division I only knew of one person who moved without a signed agreement, and they ended up being let go of. The funny thing was, for that person, they likely could have gotten a full remote work accommodation if they had put the request in because as a developer they had no physical infrastructure to touch.