Commute to Work

[LordKOTL]

I've always been the type of person that likes to live relatively close to where I work. Right now, I actually live 5 minutes from work.

I work with some guys though that travel 1.5 hours to get here... like wtf? That's 3 hours commuting a day, 15 a week. Let's just say you don't take vacation and work all 52 weeks a year, that ends up being 43 days a year you spend in a car, train, or bus. I spend just under 2 days a year commuting.


What's your commute like?

25 minute walk each way.

If I drive it's under 5 minutes, but I usually prefer walking.

 

[dweebs19]

my brother commutes an hour each way 2 days/week. He loves it. I'm sure the money he's making from it is why he loves it.

 

[ShiftyDevil]

I've worked from home the past 9 months or so, which has it's positives and negatives. On the positive side, my commute is to the extra bedroom, which after a super fast tape measure-ing is ~20 feet from my bed.

 

[Hawkeye OG]

I've worked from home the past 9 months or so, which has it's positives and negatives. On the positive side, my commute is to the extra bedroom, which after a super fast tape measure-ing is ~20 feet from my bed.

I'm not sure why more companies don't do this. I could work from anywhere in the world with a laptop, WiFi and phone. My company is finally jumping on the WFH bandwagon and letting people with some tenure do it. I honestly believe I would be far more productive in a home environment then in a cubicle setting.

 

[Crystallas]

Telework was the future in the 1970s.

Between then and now, tools have been developed to ensure productivity more accurately than eyes in the corner of a cluster of cubicles. If your business can do it, then do it. Plus the other problem is this desire for 80% of the population to work a similar shift, therefore have little to no relief on the roads for traffic. Everything is on demand now and many stores are 24 hours. At least 40% of the population can move to an 'off-shift', even if that means they start at 10am or 5am instead of the usual 7-9am start.

 

[Hawkeye OG]

At least 40% of the population can move to an 'off-shift', even if that means they start at 10am or 5am instead of the usual 7-9am start.

I've always wondered this exact thing. While this may not be possible in larger cities (New York, LA, Chicago, Houston, etc) it would work in the City I live in which has a population of around 700,000 and growing at a good clip that has caused some major congestion because the city didn't plan on that much grown so soon. There's about 4-5 major employers downtown that could get together and easily come up with some shift differentials to ease the congestion.

 

[Burque]

My commute is currently 20-25 minutes depending on weather. Used to drive, but started riding the bus because my company pays for it. Less miles on my car too. Made a world of difference honestly. I very rarely fill up with gas and I can read on the bus or just zone out if I'm tired. I don't think I could tolerate anything in the 45min-1hour range though.

Yo do not want to ride the bus in Albuquerque.

 

[Crystallas]

I've always wondered this exact thing. While this may not be possible in larger cities (New York, LA, Chicago, Houston, etc) it would work in the City I live in which has a population of around 700,000 and growing at a good clip that has caused some major congestion because the city didn't plan on that much grown so soon. There's about 4-5 major employers downtown that could get together and easily come up with some shift differentials to ease the congestion.

IMO it would scale and work anywhere. The issue is is that a lot of businesses still run on arbitrary time schedules dealing with some other institution. Like banks, post office, kids school and other businesses dealing with the same schedule. It just creates more traffic #1, and maybe more importantly, it's harder to run errands for many if they work during the same hours the places they need to get things done are also open, opposed to those places being open when they are off work. So really, bigger cities would do better without these restraints because having a business open longer hours would serve more people.

 

[Iwritecode]

I used to commute from Rockford to Cicero every day. Typically it was somewhere between 2 and 3 hours one way. The money was pretty good but it SUCKED.

Now my commute is about 10 mins door to door. Less money but more of a home/social life.

 

[LordKOTL]

Telework was the future in the 1970s.

Between then and now, tools have been developed to ensure productivity more accurately than eyes in the corner of a cluster of cubicles. If your business can do it, then do it. Plus the other problem is this desire for 80% of the population to work a similar shift, therefore have little to no relief on the roads for traffic. Everything is on demand now and many stores are 24 hours. At least 40% of the population can move to an 'off-shift', even if that means they start at 10am or 5am instead of the usual 7-9am start.

There seems to be a sizable amount of companies who seem to not be so fascist when it comes to work schedules anymore.

We have a good amount of people here who come in very early or very late simply to beat the commute--especially those coming in from across the River (Vancouver, WA). We also have some (like my boss) who work from home a couple of days a week due to family life and honestly, productivity is still good if not better comparably when everyone was forced into the archaic 8-5 shift with a 1 hr lunch.

 

[Ares]

I'm not sure why more companies don't do this. I could work from anywhere in the world with a laptop, WiFi and phone. My company is finally jumping on the WFH bandwagon and letting people with some tenure do it. I honestly believe I would be far more productive in a home environment then in a cubicle setting.

As a Manager in IT I will say certain positions can WFH often and not drop productivity too much.

For my team (clone can attest), I prefer we come into the office and sit together so we're interacting in person.

I personally find it is a better way to do things for our work.

Some global cons for WFH:

- You more/less work 24 hours a day.... you may not realize it right away, but since your laptop and phone are always handy, you are always capable of working.

- Much like my first point, but you don't have a mental/physical mechanism to end your work day and start your life.... your life becomes mixed with work.

- You become isolated and silo'd... I know many 100% WFH people who struggle with communication because they are so damned isolated.... yeah your commute is from your bed to your desk but you become a fucking hermit for 8-12 hours a day. We have to keep up extra meeting cadence with some groups in order to kind of keep them socialized/talking. You can give people all the communication tools in the world, but when you work in a silo you become isolated, even from your own team.

- One on Ones with bosses for WFH/remote employees tend to get cancelled way more frequently than when you are in person.

- Productivity drops for like 50% of part-time/full-time WFH people.... your life mixes with your job.... you start doing life things during business hours one way or another and not just browsing for flights or paying bills.... like oh I washed the dishes and took the kids to school and I missed 9am-10:30am business hours, whoops.

- Full-time WFH start to work w/e hours they want.... which becomes ultra frustrating when you need to coordinate meetings or deployments or other activities. I had a WFH developer who didn't show up for the deployment of his fucking code at 10am and when he finally responded we found out he was out mountain biking and would be back in a couple hours. Bosses become isolated from remote WFH employees and then they do w/e they want with little to no accountability. I have business folks who disappear in the middle of the day to drive their kids to/from school or activities.... no real warning or notice.... they will take important calls out in the course of their life stuff.... kids in the background.... driving in the car.... you become unprofessional at work and mix your life with your business.

In short.... full time or heavy WFH seems like a really awesome thing, until you start to see the downsides of it over long term usage.

I fully utilize WFH where myself or my staff need it.... if you have a Dr appt or something at your home you need to be there for, WFH for the day.... if you have an injury or feel sick and prefer to WFH for a day or a week or something... fine.... but regular WFH that often goes from 1 day a week to 2-3 days a week to no one comes in to office unless they are asked to come in.... I don't go for that.... it isn't a good practice to push towards full-time WFH isolation in my experience... it is good practice to have WFH and use it where necessary and with employees that use it properly/professionally.

 

[LordKOTL]

As a Manager in IT I will say certain positions can WFH often and not drop productivity too much.

For my team (clone can attest), I prefer we come into the office and sit together so we're interacting in person.

I personally find it is a better way to do things for our work.

Some global cons for WFH:

- You more/less work 24 hours a day.... you may not realize it right away, but since your laptop and phone are always handy, you are always capable of working.

- Much like my first point, but you don't have a mental/physical mechanism to end your work day and start your life.... your life becomes mixed with work.

- You become isolated and silo'd... I know many 100% WFH people who struggle with communication because they are so damned isolated.... yeah your commute is from your bed to your desk but you become a fucking hermit for 8-12 hours a day. We have to keep up extra meeting cadence with some groups in order to kind of keep them socialized/talking. You can give people all the communication tools in the world, but when you work in a silo you become isolated, even from your own team.

- One on Ones with bosses for WFH/remote employees tend to get cancelled way more frequently than when you are in person.

- Productivity drops for like 50% of part-time/full-time WFH people.... your life mixes with your job.... you start doing life things during business hours one way or another and not just browsing for flights or paying bills.... like oh I washed the dishes and took the kids to school and I missed 9am-10:30am business hours, whoops.

- Full-time WFH start to work w/e hours they want.... which becomes ultra frustrating when you need to coordinate meetings or deployments or other activities. I had a WFH developer who didn't show up for the deployment of his fucking code at 10am and when he finally responded we found out he was out mountain biking and would be back in a couple hours. Bosses become isolated from remote WFH employees and then they do w/e they want with little to no accountability. I have business folks who disappear in the middle of the day to drive their kids to/from school or activities.... no real warning or notice.... they will take important calls out in the course of their life stuff.... kids in the background.... driving in the car.... you become unprofessional at work and mix your life with your business.

In short.... full time or heavy WFH seems like a really awesome thing, until you start to see the downsides of it over long term usage.

I fully utilize WFH where myself or my staff need it.... if you have a Dr appt or something at your home you need to be there for, WFH for the day.... if you have an injury or feel sick and prefer to WFH for a day or a week or something... fine.... but regular WFH that often goes from 1 day a week to 2-3 days a week to no one comes in to office unless they are asked to come in.... I don't go for that.... it isn't a good practice to push towards full-time WFH isolation in my experience... it is good practice to have WFH and use it where necessary and with employees that use it properly/professionally.

There's a lot of truth in that. There's also the fact that it does depend on the job and if your work doesn't hinge too much on human interaction it tends to work better.

One thing about the whole WFH is that it helps a ton if WFH policies are well-defined. For instance--set hours. On the rare times I WFH I still keep my usual hours. If something gets in the way I do shift them, but via e-mail and other communication tools I communicate this to the people I'm working with so there are no surprises--and this is spelled out in our policies. Failure to do so would be like ducking out of the office without telling your boss and carries the same consequences. Presence and telepresence have to be treated as the same thing with same consequences for violating them.

Another thing I personally find can trip up WFH is just the preparation to work puts you in that mindset. If you stay in your PJs and move to your home desk to work your mind doesn't go through the whole process it would of getting up, showering, dressing appropriately, etc. to come into the office. With some companies moving to webcam-based team interaction it might quell that a bit, but it still helps focus your mind to work if you put on pants.

My boss has it down well. She's usually in the office 2 days a week and 2 days from home, but her availability at home is about the same as it is at work. She has published hours and for the most part sticks to them and if she has to be unavailable because of an issue at home, she lets us know.

Personally, I use it if I need it like you do, but I'm not against it. I find there are some people that are better at it than others because they are able to compartmentalize work time and off-work time even when at home. Those that can't or won't tend to be the problem.

 

[truthbedamned]

My last 3 years at my old job was strictly WFH. Ares is 100 percent correct in everything he says. It got to the point where I would take care of personal things while on company time. I used to load my laptop up and go down to the local Harley shop and spend the day with my friends while logged into work. But I was always available for the 8 hours per day unlike the mountain biker.

You truly begin to feel isolated when you WFH after a while. I began to feel like a prisoner in my own home at times. Not a pleasant feeling.

 

[brett05]

I'm in IT so I am on call 24/7 even on vacation.
My day starts at 330 am, leave the house by 430 am, at the park n ride by 440 am, then alternate driving in with one other person. We get to work about 520-540am depending on traffic. Work starts at 630 and I get out at 3. Home by about 5 PM.

 

[KoreanBear]

My last 3 years at my old job was strictly WFH. Ares is 100 percent correct in everything he says. It got to the point where I would take care of personal things while on company time. I used to load my laptop up and go down to the local Harley shop and spend the day with my friends while logged into work. But I was always available for the 8 hours per day unlike the mountain biker.

You truly begin to feel isolated when you WFH after a while. I began to feel like a prisoner in my own home at times. Not a pleasant feeling.

Damn, never thought about this. I guess coming home from work wouldn't feel like coming home...

 

[Crystallas]

As a Manager in IT I will say certain positions can WFH often and not drop productivity too much.

For my team (clone can attest), I prefer we come into the office and sit together so we're interacting in person.

I personally find it is a better way to do things for our work.

Some global cons for WFH:

- You more/less work 24 hours a day.... you may not realize it right away, but since your laptop and phone are always handy, you are always capable of working.

- Much like my first point, but you don't have a mental/physical mechanism to end your work day and start your life.... your life becomes mixed with work.

- You become isolated and silo'd... I know many 100% WFH people who struggle with communication because they are so damned isolated.... yeah your commute is from your bed to your desk but you become a fucking hermit for 8-12 hours a day. We have to keep up extra meeting cadence with some groups in order to kind of keep them socialized/talking. You can give people all the communication tools in the world, but when you work in a silo you become isolated, even from your own team.

- One on Ones with bosses for WFH/remote employees tend to get cancelled way more frequently than when you are in person.

- Productivity drops for like 50% of part-time/full-time WFH people.... your life mixes with your job.... you start doing life things during business hours one way or another and not just browsing for flights or paying bills.... like oh I washed the dishes and took the kids to school and I missed 9am-10:30am business hours, whoops.

- Full-time WFH start to work w/e hours they want.... which becomes ultra frustrating when you need to coordinate meetings or deployments or other activities. I had a WFH developer who didn't show up for the deployment of his fucking code at 10am and when he finally responded we found out he was out mountain biking and would be back in a couple hours. Bosses become isolated from remote WFH employees and then they do w/e they want with little to no accountability. I have business folks who disappear in the middle of the day to drive their kids to/from school or activities.... no real warning or notice.... they will take important calls out in the course of their life stuff.... kids in the background.... driving in the car.... you become unprofessional at work and mix your life with your business.

In short.... full time or heavy WFH seems like a really awesome thing, until you start to see the downsides of it over long term usage.

I fully utilize WFH where myself or my staff need it.... if you have a Dr appt or something at your home you need to be there for, WFH for the day.... if you have an injury or feel sick and prefer to WFH for a day or a week or something... fine.... but regular WFH that often goes from 1 day a week to 2-3 days a week to no one comes in to office unless they are asked to come in.... I don't go for that.... it isn't a good practice to push towards full-time WFH isolation in my experience... it is good practice to have WFH and use it where necessary and with employees that use it properly/professionally.

Some of this is the exact opposite of what I've both seen and heard from people who work from home. Production goes up, punch in and outs stick to the plan better and work over less often because productivity is up, and more meetings are kept because you eliminate a lot of in between and stick to the point, not just fluff meetings.

Some people are not equipped to work from home, but for those that are, every single thing improves, except face to face relationships. Which, in today's hostile world, that becomes a push, dependent on the person.

Also, men are less likely to outperform women in WFH scenarios, because women are generally better multitaskers and are motivated to keep their WFH privileged since they like driving less then men as well as want the flexibility to check in with kids. So I can see if you have a department full of men, where you draw these conclusions. Not to say you're sexist, but the impressions you posted do point out flaws men have more than women with WFH. Especially deeply introverted men who need the forced interaction, or highly extroverted men who lack nearby family and/or acquaintances for whatever reason.


I did WFH for a few years and it improved everything for myself. Workflow is huge, and having my personal systems and tools at my disposal gave me a huge edge over others. Like other things, when you switch to a full telework schedule, you are responsible for your own success. And then that begs the question, if you employ people who need to be babysat to get things done, do you really want those people on your team? I literally had friends over while I worked and it was awesome. Watch TV shows in the background, listen to music, order stuff online and be there for pickup. From a personal perspective, any person who gets that privilege should do everything to keep it, because it's awesome. Plus you save $ on transport/maintenance, which is more expensive than the cost to setup a home office space. Plus now you can itemize a heck of a lot more stuff, including internet.

 

[ShiftyDevil]

As a Manager in IT I will say certain positions can WFH often and not drop productivity too much.

For my team (clone can attest), I prefer we come into the office and sit together so we're interacting in person.

I personally find it is a better way to do things for our work.

Our team was this way as well. Prior to being full time WFM we all worked together in an office, which I think outweighed the positives of working from home (speaking as employee/team lead). We're a team of data engineers and data scientists, sometimes we have to walk through complex issues/code/whatever, and just the super simple act of being able to draw on a whiteboard is beyond useful. And yes there are 'productivity' tools to try to replicate that, but it's not nearly the same as being face to face in the same physical space working together.

Plus, we all actually liked each other. Having face to face, social interaction with coworkers you actually like everyday really helped team morale and productivity. Yeah, not having to deal with Seattle traffic, and being able to play my music as loud as I want on my own bad ass stereo is nice. I get a couple hours back in my life not having to go into an office, but I would still take being in a corporate office than my home office. Maybe mixing it up, couple of days a week WFM and the rest in the office would be the perfect balance.

My last 3 years at my old job was strictly WFH. Ares is 100 percent correct in everything he says. It got to the point where I would take care of personal things while on company time. I used to load my laptop up and go down to the local Harley shop and spend the day with my friends while logged into work. But I was always available for the 8 hours per day unlike the mountain biker.

You truly begin to feel isolated when you WFH after a while. I began to feel like a prisoner in my own home at times. Not a pleasant feeling.

There are definitely times where I've afk'd and ran to the post office, or whatever. But yeah, I've definitely gotten cabin fever. I'll go work on the balcony sometimes just to be outside. It's helped that I started going back to school so I have a regular scheduled thing most days so I have a reason to get the hell out of the house and actually interact with other people. This Summer has been brutal without that, I've been driving my friends nuts every weekend trying to get people to go do shit just so I can get some more human interaction. The WFM isolation is real.

 

[Ares]

Some of this is the exact opposite of what I've both seen and heard from people who work from home. Production goes up, punch in and outs stick to the plan better and work over less often because productivity is up, and more meetings are kept because you eliminate a lot of in between and stick to the point, not just fluff meetings.

Some people are not equipped to work from home, but for those that are, every single thing improves, except face to face relationships. Which, in today's hostile world, that becomes a push, dependent on the person.

Also, men are less likely to outperform women in WFH scenarios, because women are generally better multitaskers and are motivated to keep their WFH privileged since they like driving less then men as well as want the flexibility to check in with kids. So I can see if you have a department full of men, where you draw these conclusions. Not to say you're sexist, but the impressions you posted do point out flaws men have more than women with WFH. Especially deeply introverted men who need the forced interaction, or highly extroverted men who lack nearby family and/or acquaintances for whatever reason.


I did WFH for a few years and it improved everything for myself. Workflow is huge, and having my personal systems and tools at my disposal gave me a huge edge over others. Like other things, when you switch to a full telework schedule, you are responsible for your own success. And then that begs the question, if you employ people who need to be babysat to get things done, do you really want those people on your team? I literally had friends over while I worked and it was awesome. Watch TV shows in the background, listen to music, order stuff online and be there for pickup. From a personal perspective, any person who gets that privilege should do everything to keep it, because it's awesome. Plus you save $ on transport/maintenance, which is more expensive than the cost to setup a home office space. Plus now you can itemize a heck of a lot more stuff, including internet.

I will point out a few things you are incorrect on as far as my post.

1. Most of the business team I deal with is women (5 women 1 man) and they are often the ones disappearing to go drive the kids places, but the guy on their team does it too because that behavior has become normalized.

2. You are assuming that WFH is a nice privilege that can/should be revoked if people are abusing it or performing poorly... that isn't true for a full-time WFH.... you would have to fire them, and unlike regular performance plan bullshit you would have to try to judge their behavior/productivity remotely.

3. You seem to be missing the long-term negatives of social isolation that comes with WFH.... I get it, it isn't a problem for you, but for MANY full-time WFH people including a female developer whom used to be on my team in my office, it causes a degradation of communication skills and behavior that is not good IMO. Take any person and stick them in their home for 8-10 hours a day with only chat/phone (if that) for social interaction and they will become more and more isolated.

4. Clone works for me and you describe my workers as needing to be "babysat" and that is offensive to me. I don't need to babysit him or any of my staff, but I like us to be together so we can collaborate on issues better and so I can better understand when or if my staff needs help. The way I run my team has been working for years now, so I don't appreciate you judging with little to zero information.

If you do well as a full-time WFH employee and you see zero negatives to doing it, that's awesome.

I do see many practical negatives of full-time or most-time WFH for a number of roles within my own company.

I am not against WFH capability, but I feel it should be used appropriately and not just offered as a blanket privilege.

Lastly.... lol you talk about extreme introverts.... I don't think it is the best idea to hire introverts that you then shut up in their houses ... that's how you breed more incels

 

[clonetrooper264]

Dang right I don't need to be babysat

 

[Crystallas]

I will point out a few things you are incorrect on as far as my post.

1. Most of the business team I deal with is women (5 women 1 man) and they are often the ones disappearing to go drive the kids places, but the guy on their team does it too because that behavior has become normalized.

2. You are assuming that WFH is a nice privilege that can/should be revoked if people are abusing it or performing poorly... that isn't true for a full-time WFH.... you would have to fire them, and unlike regular performance plan bullshit you would have to try to judge their behavior/productivity remotely.

3. You seem to be missing the long-term negatives of social isolation that comes with WFH.... I get it, it isn't a problem for you, but for MANY full-time WFH people including a female developer whom used to be on my team in my office, it causes a degradation of communication skills and behavior that is not good IMO. Take any person and stick them in their home for 8-10 hours a day with only chat/phone (if that) for social interaction and they will become more and more isolated.

4. Clone works for me and you describe my workers as needing to be "babysat" and that is offensive to me. I don't need to babysit him or any of my staff, but I like us to be together so we can collaborate on issues better and so I can better understand when or if my staff needs help. The way I run my team has been working for years now, so I don't appreciate you judging with little to zero information.

If you do well as a full-time WFH employee and you see zero negatives to doing it, that's awesome.

I do see many practical negatives of full-time or most-time WFH for a number of roles within my own company.

I am not against WFH capability, but I feel it should be used appropriately and not just offered as a blanket privilege.

Lastly.... lol you talk about extreme introverts.... I don't think it is the best idea to hire introverts that you then shut up in their houses ... that's how you breed more incels

Like I said, my experience is the opposite of your team. It's not just my experience, but that of a number of people I worked with, friends, etc. And none of them were stuck in rooms with only "chat/phone". So I'm thinking your experience is more due to poorly planned WFH methods, because I know far too many people IRL who would never give it up, and every single one of them is happier, more productive, and better rested. And most of them are caught up on TV shows LOL. That's more money in their pocket, more money in the companies pocket. So yes, if it fails, I don't blame the concept of WFH, I blame how a company may be implementing it or the persons hired. I was a GM at large facility of a huge company before I committed to being self-employed full-time. It's not like I'm only speaking from myself or a small team(and I'm not talking about you, more talking about me and the large group under me).

You are simply not going to convince me that WFH is inferior based on your experience, because I have seen it time in and time out improve everything for those who participated. Those who would have issues, you don't allow to work from home, that simple. If your company only has the option of termination, then that isn't the problem with the concept, that is a non-flexible policy, too black and white. The bottom line is, if you are unable to revoke the privilege because someone is performing poorly, that person needs to be babysat. I'm not sugar coating it and you can choose to be offended all you like, but there is no way around it. That person who signed up for WFH is not responsible enough to WFH. Forcing the whole company to WFH is another thing all together, that is also not what I suggest. If you know you are not going to like it, don't do it, as I never suggested that a person who does not like WFH should be forced to do it. Flexible management > micromanagement.