Working from home, good/bad?

[HirdsTheWord]

You don't have much of a sense of humour do you? Certainly no work ethic. It's best you stay home and not bore the living suitcase out of anyone. Things will not return to any sort of normality until people return to WORK and not bludge around at home. Wouldn't want you near any office or service industry anyway. Working at home is BS. We need to get our cities moving and people off their arses.

it works for some people and it works for some businesses but state governments will inevitably just about force people back into offices. It’s already started in Sydney.

some will continue to work from home but the majority will end up back in CBDs

 

[Chucks]

What are people's thoughts on workplaces that offer no WFH flexibility, and are in the office full-time?

Would that make a role less appealing for you?

I'm in a bit of a job search myself right now and one of the places in question say that they're full time in the office. Is it bad that that's a bit of a turn-off for me in terms of the lure of this role?

 

[kickazz]

What are people's thoughts on workplaces that offer no WFH flexibility, and are in the office full-time?

Would that make a role less appealing for you?

I'm in a bit of a job search myself right now and one of the places in question say that they're full time in the office. Is it bad that that's a bit of a turn-off for me in terms of the lure of this role?

If the office is far away that's a reasonable thing to want.

But I dare say if you are starting a new job you would be better off spending as much time in the office as possible at first. Building networks and learning about the organisation will be much easier that way.

 

[Kwality]

What are people's thoughts on workplaces that offer no WFH flexibility, and are in the office full-time?

Would that make a role less appealing for you?

I'm in a bit of a job search myself right now and one of the places in question say that they're full time in the office. Is it bad that that's a bit of a turn-off for me in terms of the lure of this role?

Is it a 'paper shuffler' role ? Do you understand the kpi's of the role or will it be explained to you 'later'?

 

[Gralin]

* the office

 

[Themanbun]

What are people's thoughts on workplaces that offer no WFH flexibility, and are in the office full-time?

Would that make a role less appealing for you?

I'm in a bit of a job search myself right now and one of the places in question say that they're full time in the office. Is it bad that that's a bit of a turn-off for me in terms of the lure of this role?

I simply wouldn't apply. And that's okay. Just as many who feel they need to be in the office wouldn't apply for fully remote work.

 

[checkraiseulite]

What are people's thoughts on workplaces that offer no WFH flexibility, and are in the office full-time?

Would that make a role less appealing for you?

I'm in a bit of a job search myself right now and one of the places in question say that they're full time in the office. Is it bad that that's a bit of a turn-off for me in terms of the lure of this role?

good if you’re junior and require training and oversight. a lot of what i learned early in my career was done my osmosis - you simply won’t get that in a post covid WFH world. which is why all professional industries are screaming for intermediate staff.

100% office is bad if you’re able to work autonomously (though i like going in 1 or 2 days a week).

 

[Alberto_Magnifico]

What are people's thoughts on workplaces that offer no WFH flexibility, and are in the office full-time?

Would that make a role less appealing for you?

I'm in a bit of a job search myself right now and one of the places in question say that they're full time in the office. Is it bad that that's a bit of a turn-off for me in terms of the lure of this role?

No deal. WFH 2 days is the price of entry these days ( as it was for me pre Covid also)

 

[Caesar]

What are people's thoughts on workplaces that offer no WFH flexibility, and are in the office full-time?

Would that make a role less appealing for you?

I'm in a bit of a job search myself right now and one of the places in question say that they're full time in the office. Is it bad that that's a bit of a turn-off for me in terms of the lure of this role?

I’ll never again work a job that doesn’t offer discretionary WFH

Totally accept that there’s certain things best done face to face, but anyone who works in front of a computer should have a significant amount of location flexibility

 

[kickazz]

I’ll never again work a job that doesn’t offer discretionary WFH

Totally accept that there’s certain things best done face to face, but anyone who works in front of a computer should have a significant amount of location flexibility

True.

Is anyone worried that this will logically progress to all of these 'in front of a computer' jobs going to people in other countries with much lower salaries?

 

[Gralin]

True.

Is anyone worried that this will logically progress to all of these 'in front of a computer' jobs going to people in other countries with much lower salaries?

Nope

 

[Caesar]

True.

Is anyone worried that this will logically progress to all of these 'in front of a computer' jobs going to people in other countries with much lower salaries?

Not really. There are a lot of practical and legal obstacles with employing people in a random foreign country you don’t operate in, and a lot of companies don’t want to deal with them. There’s also a lot of benefits of having people in-country, even if most of their jobs can be done remotely.

Anyway, even if some jobs do go, history says we will probably replace the jobs that go with better ones. The same advances that let us send low-skill positions to India make it easier for us to overcome the tyranny of distance and better compete with Europe and North America. In the last 15 years Australia has been a net winner from global services offshoring (both in terms of job numbers and dollars).

 

[kickazz]

Not really. There are a lot of practical and legal obstacles with employing people in a random foreign country you don’t operate in, and a lot of companies don’t want to deal with them. There’s also a lot of benefits of having people in-country, even if most of their jobs can be done remotely.

Anyway, even if some jobs do go, history says we will probably replace the jobs that go with better ones. The same advances that let us send low-skill positions to India make it easier for us to overcome the tyranny of distance and better compete with Europe and North America. In the last 15 years Australia has been a net winner from global services offshoring (both in terms of job numbers and dollars).

Fair call and good to get the macroeconomic view on it.

I've had and seen other experiences in established multinationals though. To be fair it was probably more due to a geographic shift in power though. Still there's nothing like doing a project budget and seeing that you cost 5 to 10 times more than a similarly skilled colleague.

 

[Caesar]

Fair call and good to get the macroeconomic view on it.

I've had and seen other experiences in established multinationals though. To be fair it was probably more due to a geographic shift in power though. Still there's nothing like doing a project budget and seeing that you cost 5 to 10 times more than a similarly skilled colleague.

I think any time you reduce barriers to trade (whether its goods or services) you get increased fluidity. There will definitely be specific jobs in specific companies that go overseas, but that doesn’t mean we won’t end up as net winners (either as employees or as a country).

Certainly if you look at sectors like tech, financial services, etc. - fields that you would expect to be hit hard by offshoring - they have experienced very, very strong jobs growth in the last 20 years and show no signs of slowing down.

A lot of that is because we can now keep jobs that would previously go to countries closer to the centre of the global economy. Look at Atlassian for example - 20 years ago they would have had to relocate to the US prior to going public. Instead they remain headquartered here - taking advantage of software engineering salaries that are a fraction of Silicon Valley, whilst retaining all the benefits of being based in a highly developed, politically stable and economically liberal economy.

Geographic location is such a huge economic disadvantage for Australia that anything taking that out of the equation is going to benefit us massively.

 

[Alberto_Magnifico]

True.

Is anyone worried that this will logically progress to all of these 'in front of a computer' jobs going to people in other countries with much lower salaries?

My company tried to off-shore large parts of its IT and project finance/administration and learnt that the apparent cost savings weren't worth it long term and went back to local staff.
Created way too many problems with mistakes, training issues, local staff being hired to "babysit" and ultimately spend more money redoing poor work, loss in local productivity, and the apparent negative cultural impact it had on the rest of the company. Several good staff left during this period and they told me that outsourcing was part of it, I'm sure the feedback was provided in their exit interviews.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

True.

Is anyone worried that this will logically progress to all of these 'in front of a computer' jobs going to people in other countries with much lower salaries?

This will naturally occur. But it depends what the role is of course.

Any business owner/Company that has staff working from home 100% of the time in basic admin roles would be stupid not to explore the option of offshoring roles.

 

[Gralin]

This will naturally occur. But it depends what the role is of course.

Any business owner/Company that has staff working from home 100% of the time in basic admin roles would be stupid not to explore the option of offshoring roles.

and then they will bring them back if they do off shore when they find it hurts their business more than the cost saving

 

[HirdsTheWord]

and then they will bring them back if they do off shore when they find it hurts their business more than the cost saving

We offshore certain admin tasks.

Doesn't hurt our business at all.

Depends on what the role is and where you offshore it.

Nothing hurts more than paying Australian wages when you don't have too and can instead pay 20%

 

[Gralin]

We offshore certain admin tasks.

Doesn't hurt our business at all.

Depends on what the role is and where you offshore it.

we offshored a bunch of stuff and all it did was push a bunch of work onto people on higher salaries while looking really good from a bottom line perspective, now they are trying to automate those people out of work which again won't work but hey someone will get a bonus for it so all good

 

[HirdsTheWord]

we offshored a bunch of stuff and all it did was push a bunch of work onto people on higher salaries while looking really good from a bottom line perspective, now they are trying to automate those people out of work which again won't work but hey someone will get a bonus for it so all good

like i said it depends what you offshore and where you do it.

its not a black and white thing where it either works for everyone or doesn't work at all.

 

[Gralin]

like i said it depends what you offshore and where you do it.

its not a black and white thing where it either works for everyone or doesn't work at all.

no but the idea that working from home means you will lose your job overseas isn't true

 

[HirdsTheWord]

no but the idea that working from home means you will lose your job overseas isn't true

We’ll I didn’t say that so yeah.

 

[checkraiseulite]

and then they will bring them back if they do off shore when they find it hurts their business more than the cost saving

client facing stuff sure. but anything back end will be heading off shore if it isn't already. it will be done both better and cheaper offshore.

 

[Caesar]

client facing stuff sure. but anything back end will be heading off shore if it isn't already. it will be done both better and cheaper offshore.

this is 90s thinking that has proven a false economy, it has been superseded by more modern integrated approaches such as devops

 

[checkraiseulite]

this is 90s thinking that has proven a false economy, it has been superseded by more modern integrated approaches such as devops

to me if it’s an easy job that doesn’t involve dealing with clients or being physically present - it makes sense to outsource it to the cheapest resource possible regardless of where that resource is located.

tell me why i’m wrong and living 20 years in the past. try not use corporate buzz words or economic jargon.

i had to google what devops means.