For the person 20 years deep into their career who eats lunch at their desk every day rather than going with coworkers, WFH might be awesome!

Well said btw. I don’t know that I’ve seen anyone even attempt a comprehensive assessment of how work from home helps or hurts, just these narrow appeals to those in a similar situation.

I eat lunch at my desk and still prefer the office. It's all just different strokes.

I've saved money but do miss the various options close to work. Taking an hour to jump offsite with music or a coworker for lunch was great. Today's lunch break is a shower and quick lunch. Very exciting.

I'd say it depends a lot on the company and team. We've been all-remote for 10 years now, and I'm certainly biased, but I don't think evidence suggests it's been less than good for young, ambitious members of the team. Our lead front-end developer had no previous paid experience as a developer, but stood out in our interview process (which is based on a series of short, real-work-like assignments done asynchronously), and has continually impressed since then. If leadership is competent, I don't think it's necessary to have fortuitous in-person run-ins and such to demonstrate one's drive and ability.

This is so true. Those "fortuitous in-person run-ins" are also highly correlated with looking the part and having the same hobbies and friends as well-connected people.

I think there's a chance we're going to see all-remote employees be subconsciously judged on things like the quality of their lighting, audio, background, mute etiquette, etc. IMO that's a lot better than the current approach of judging based on similar appearance, hobbies, lunch schedules, golf club memberships, etc.

Being all-remote is a wonderful equalizer.

When I started working remotely I felt like I had to prove myself. I had to produce something useful every day.

Whereas when I was in the office I saw lot of people doing mostly nothing but hanging out in the lunch-room. I guess they felt like if they take the trouble to arrive in the office that's a lot of work already. And they did not make the choice they are just doing it because they were told to do it.

I agree there is value in talking to people in person and having wide-ranging conversations about everything but there has to be a balance. But all in all I thought me working from home gave the employer much more than if I had come to office every day, and hung around in the lunch room with others.

How is subconsciously judging based on lighting, audio etc. any better than whether or not you play golf? The only spot for me to put my desk means that, in video conferences I look like an anonymous whistle blower from a news report. How is being subconsciously ignored because of how my apartment is laid out any better than being ignored because I prefer to swim than play golf?

Based on your examples, all-remote isn't an equalizer, it's changing the rules by which you are judged.

A good lamp for your desk might be cheaper than that golf club membership at least!

Maybe, doesn't make the judgement criteria any less arbitrary though. And given how dark my corner of the room is, I suspect I'd need a pretty expensive lighting setup to make it any better :)

These are mostly things you can control and easily fix.

At the same time, it sucks for friends and coworkers around here in 1 bedroom apartments with both partners working from home or 3 kids and no yard and social events to structure around. My manager is going insane working and sleeping in the same (high cost) room while locked into a lease. I was lucky to move to a place with 2 bedrooms recently so 1 is the office and I'm so glad to not have kids.

If a person has parenting obligations than how is WFO better than WFH? Or are we talking about more than just WFH, such as a pandemic that reduces childcare options?

If only one parent is working they might get roped into helping out the parent who normally stays at home. At least that's how co-workers in that situation have described it to me; small children don't understand why daddy is home but can't play with them, plus you feel guilty not helping your spouse if they're having a rough day.

I myself have experienced those challenges. And IMO it is an opportunity to help with kids more and without becoming all consuming: on break, during would-be-commuting time, and during emergencies.

Spouses and kids--even young ones--can adapt if healthy boundaries and expectations are established. Office life is a modern phenomenon. Before that most families lived and worked together.

> small children don't understand why daddy is home but can't play with them

This is exactly correct.

My office did work from home Tuesdays / Thursdays even before the pandemic. My wife stays home with our three kids. I tried it precisely once. My kids were grumpy, my wife was grumpier. There is an unspoken expectation that if you are present you should be helping / interacting. I'm sure we could have worked it out, but it wasn't worth the effort.

Having the entire office (5 people, so nothing big) to myself twice a week was pretty nice though. And it set a great precedent so that I've been the only person going into the office the past four months.

We had our child in February. I took a planned two weeks off, then had planned on working from home two to three more weeks to help transition, then to go back to the office as I was required to do. By the time I was looking at going back to the office, I went in for about a week to onboard a new employee then pushed the office into WFH for everyone due to the pandemic.

My wife and I haven't had an issue at any point. She understands that the reason we're not homeless right now is because I spend all day on the computer. She doesn't come to my workspace and communicates with me as she would as if I was at an office (i.e., via IM). She will, very occasionally, shoot me a message and _ask_ if I can spare some time to give her a hand with something but there's no animosity if I say no and for the most part she will try and work it out herself, even if it's inconvenient (e.g., finding somewhere to safely park the baby for a few minutes while she throws a load of laundry in).

I think the only one in the house that doesn't understand "dad working != dad at home" is the dog so she sometimes has to be crated when I have important meetings.

And I wouldn't trade the extra 2-3 hours a day I get with my family or to spend on hobbies instead of sitting in bumper-to-bumper traffic for anything.

I'm just going to point out that if you kid was 2-3 years old, both you and your wife would be having a VERY different experience. A newborn mostly eats and sleeps. A toddler will tear your house appart, constantly interrupt you, call for you (usually lowdly), etc.

Those are not comparable experience, the month I spent at home when my kid was born was spend playing MMOs most of the day, now I cant have 5 minutes alone unless the TV is on 24/7 (wich is terrible, also).

I have done the WFH with a 2/3 years old, and my experience wasn't all that different than the comment you're responding to. Even children that young respond to boundaries.

> And I wouldn't trade the extra 2-3 hours a day I get with my family or to spend on hobbies instead of sitting in bumper-to-bumper traffic for anything.

This is the actual difference between our situations.

I have a ten minute commute. Avoiding ten minutes in the car isn't worth the hassle of working from home (we don't have space for me to have my own "office", so I'd just be in the living room with everyone else)

If I did have a multi-hour commute every day, I'd absolutely be working from home any chance I could.

And yeah, if I had a ten minute commute and had to work in my living room I'd probably be working out of my car in a parking lot somewhere to have a hope of getting anything done. :)

Wasn't trying to invalidate your situation or anything, just throwing more anecdata at the wall.

you have a real baby. that is the easiest kind of kid to have during a time like this.

It's almost as if different folks have different family situations. :)

Personal circumstances vary of course, but for me, one of the perks of working from home is that I can help out when my spouse is having a rough day. Obviously, I don't spend all day helping with children, but I can occasionally take a break to comfort a crying child or help with something when my spouse's arms are full.

Also, after the first couple of weeks my young children had no problem understanding that when I'm in my office room I am working, and I can't play. But they do really enjoy seeing me at lunch, which didn't happen when I was WFO.

But again, that's just my experience and I'm sure it's different for other people.

Our 2-year old understands pretty well that he can't disturb me when I'm working. It's not like there's zero distraction, but it's no worse than random people stopping by to chat when I used to work in an office. I think it's very different when the kids know you work when you're in the home office vs random covid-wfh where there's no pattern.

I they're just talking about the ill equiped. As a father who has been WFH for a couple years now, having a dedicated office and establishing boundaries & expectations with my spouse has made a world of difference.

(Note: I know not everyone can have a dedicated office.)

People learn the hard way that kids in school/daycare are very different than kids at home. Even at an age when they can largely fend for themselves there’s a lot of difficulties that come from trying to focus on work while kids are around.

Then we're not comparing only WFH but rather pandemic-from-home. I've dropped off kids at daycare and worked from home. It was much quicker than daycare+commute to office.

Now they need extra space like an office to concentrate if their kids are at home all the time.

Consider the cost of the alternative: commuting time, car expenses (or bus/train), loss of control over office annoyances.

And kids grow up, fast. Once they're all in school it's a whole new dynamic.

Other things being equal, WFH is a huge boon for short employees - you can't see height over VC.

I read VC as venture capital (this is a ycombinator domain) and was very confused as to what you meant for a moment.

I'm just guessing, but by the context of it it's videoconference, not Venture Capital.

Sorry for the ambiguity, I can't edit the original comment anymore but I meant "video chat" or "video conference".

I think laying out the various dimensions like this is the right approach. There are also factors such as, what about cracking jokes or otherwise having pleasant non work conversations at work. Zoom doesn't cut it. Slack surely not. Next, the outsourcability of our work may not be ideal for those in high rent, expensive real estate areas. We'll be competing with the cheap, or will need to move.

Oh yeah, nothing like being forced to commute for several hours every week so I can hear my coworkers' jokes.

I don't think that was his point. His point is that it's hard to build relationships when no one ever sees each other. Relationships are extremely important in the business setting and it's something the Aspergers inclined tech crowd has a little bit of a difficult time grasping.

Relationships are really important outside the business setting too. Often much more important.

Something that a lot of people in the business setting don't seem to understand.

My work friends are just that... work friends. I have to hide large swaths of my personal life from them and they don't usually stick around outside work. Work relationships suck.

Sure. OTOH, you don’t have to be either an Aspie or a Business A-Player Career Superhero to give a pragmatic nod to the fact that work is where many people, perhaps most, spend their waking hours. It’s only natural and eminently human that for a lot of them, that’s where their friendships and relationships will form and play out.

In my opinion, it’s all the more so if they live in one of the many nondescript suburban places of which Middle America comprises. Having little to come home to or go out to, with our bankrupt concept of civic space and the public realm, it’s all the more likely many of us will unconsciously look to work as the locus of social possibility. It’s not because we want to, it’s just the shape of the situation.

Totally agree. In my previous job our project team (Program Manager + project engineer, me) flies out to our biggest vendor every month to discuss production issues and development updates. This face time is critical in building the strong relationships and has proven its worth when prioritization or escalation is needed but not covered explicitly in the contract.

We grasp it, but we went into this career so that we would have to do the bare minimum of it.

You forget the conversation being responded to is a list of pros and cons of being in the office. I listed additional pros as having comraderie. It doesn't mean you need to be there. I just point out that for some of us, it makes working actually worth it, or at least feel a little more meaningful.

Ideally we WFH or come in as we see fit. If I'm the boss I'd say, aim to come in at least 3X a week if you don't live hours away. But some people just prefer to keep to themselves and simply purely work. More power to them, let that be an option too.

> There are also factors such as, what about cracking jokes or otherwise having pleasant non work conversations at work.

These things are mildly pleasant. But commuting is very unpleasant. Being interrupted all the time is unpleasant. Working with a dog on my lap is pleasant.

On the pleasant scale, remote wins hands down.

TBH, I do most of my "chat" through chat now anyway.

> -- For the small company CEO who relies on force of personality and everyone in the same room urgently working to get something done, WFH might be terrible.

Forgive me but the way you formulated it doesn't correspond to reality. What is really happening is that the 'small company CEO' suddenly has an idea and wants everyone to work on something but at the same time expect everyone to get their normal work done. This basically means people have to work overtime, and more often than not this overtime is unpaid. Moreover, instead of clear rules there are "expectations". Having to spell it out, especially in writing, makes it clear that this kind of behavior is abusive.

Don't depend on 'personality', just explain to your workers clearly what you expect from them, define priorites, and listen to their feedback.

For a person who has trouble staying with a task, for example me, WFH would be BAD. I NEED at least some supervision to not stray off my tasks.

I am not mentally tough and have poor impulse control. Which would almost certainly get me fired in a WFH environment.

You have a call with the team every few days where you have to describe what you've done and what you are going to do next. This helps keeping you in check.

Definitely agree with these points. You left out some of the more individual ones where personality and preferences come into play. I think that a lot of variability will come down to preferences.

Also, it's worth noting that for many people who have not worked from home much (or if at all), they won't really "know" whether or not it's a good setup for themselves until they actually do it for more than a few weeks to start drawing some observations about what works well and what doesn't.

For the introvert with misophonia, WFH (or at least a private, quiet workspace) is almost a necessity.

Ultimately, I think the best situation is where workers can choose what is best for themselves.

For middle manager's WFH is terrible. They can't account their time for what they did. For everyone else its great.

For parents its great. Parents get to spend commute time with childrens.

For developers its just amazing. I can't stress this enough. You get uninterrupted time to design or coding in the zone

For hardware startups it might not work, but software its already proven by wordpress, gitlab and many others.

Budding engineers can always think before asking senior devs and learn how to ask questions.

Most importantly WFH is great to fight against age bias. For any one over 30 this is huge win.

> For middle manager's WFH is terrible. They can't account their time for what they did

What do you mean, "account their time for what they did"?

As a middle manager myself, I am graded on my projects getting done on time. I don't need to fill out some sort of timecard. Do you?

I think the op was referring to the middle managers who don't code .

Also missing the mix of both WFH and office presence at a chosen %, which is the best for nearly all categories.