Interestingly, Spain has already started on regulating to handle this. An english-language writeup: https://english.elpais.com/economy_and_business/2020-06-26/f...

In short, for remote working employees (any employee that spends >30% of their time working outside an employer-designated office/client site/etc over 3+ months), all employers must have a written contract with the employee, that must:

* Define the tools & workspace necessary to provide a sufficient & safe workspace, for which the employer must cover any costs

* Define working hours (with some requirements on flexibility)

* Be voluntary, in both directions (employers can't fire people who don't want to change to remote work, employees aren't entitled to remote work if employers don't agree)

* Detail how, if at all, the employee's productivity might be monitored, and do so with reasonable regard to privacy and ability to disconnect from work

* Ensure equal treatment of on-site & remote employees, including pay, job stability, promotions, etc.

There's some caveats in there for force majeure, such that this doesn't immediately apply for the unavoidable remote setups created by COVID, but will apply for ongoing remote work where that continues in future.

Woah! Very cool. I hope to see something like that in the U.S. soon. The voluntary line strikes me as a little odd -- but I think that's because I believe soon, employment contracts will start mentioning "x days WFH per week/month" as a perk.

Wouldn't it be easier to compensate for these costs via salary increases? Not everyone will have the same needs, and attempting to track everyone's expenses seems more complicated than necessary.

Although, come to think of it, it might make sense to mark some amount of money as an "equipment stipend" or similar on paychecks. That way, it's clear to both parties what the funds are intended for, even if there's no actual mandate on how to spend them.

Also for tax reasons. If they reimburse you $1000 for equipment, you don’t have to pay income tax or any other tax on that $1000 and neither do they.

Not an accountant but I think "reimburse" is the key word there. If it's a spend how you will stipend, that's just like salary I believe.

Yes, there needs to be receipts that you give to your employer.

paying it out as salary is less tax efficient. simply marking it as "equipment stipend" would probably not be enough to prevent it from being counted as income under tax law. if you already have accountants to track business expenses, it's probably more efficient to do whatever the minimum amount of expense tracking is needed to make it a non-taxed expense. plus if you give everyone a budget, there's always the chance that some of them won't spend all of it each year.

Ah, that's true, taxes are an angle I didn't think of!

Salary increases are less effective at achieving the goal. If the company thinks a $5k desk and monitor setup will make me most effective, I might think that with a $5k bonus I'd rather spend it on other things. Stipend + stipulations is the best way to go.

Well companies are actually trying to do salary cuts instead.

We'd be lucky if the salaries stayed the same, because the trend seems to be to cheap out on us.

My company did internet reimbursement.

But most people don't know that there are massive tax benefits to working from home (at least in Canada) you can write off the percentage of your house you work in of your rent and stuff like that. That alone can equal a $1000 a year or so.

But from a company point of view, getting rid of the office is a massive save in money, so I suspect some will increase salaries or offer other perks such as skipthedishes accounts or what not. Most will just pocket it though.

> But most people don't know that there are massive tax benefits to working from home (at least in Canada)

That's generally not true for workers in the US. If you are self-employed, yes, you can take a home office deduction, but not if you are a W2 employee.

The US used to have an "unreimbursed employee expense" itemized deduction, but even then there was a pretty high floor (had to be more than a couple percent of your total income) so most people couldn't make use of it. That deduction was eliminated in the 2018 tax law.

I don't think that's true in Canada either. I think it's only true if you're self-employed.

I think this is an exaggeration.

The "massive tax benefit" is not that large for most people. Perhaps if you have dedicated office space and a large mortgage.

I did the math for my T2200 and the total tax benefit was $500/yr.

2x is hardly exaggeration, but my amount was including extras and other office stuff you can write off (power, internet, heating, office supplies, etx)

There are trade offs with that too. If you use a home office for a write off, you have to pay tax when you sell the home

I assume that's in the US?

You don't have to do that in Canada.

It applies to Canada as well. Claim 25% of your home as a business expense means 25% of any capital gains are taxed, unlike your primary residence which isn’t taxed.

“You may have to report a capital gain if you change your principal residence to a rental or business property, or vice versa.”

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/tax/individ...

However, it looks like there were some changes that may allow you to avoid it (business use was a small fraction and you didn’t take advantage of tax benefits from business use).

I don't think you get to write off work expenses as a W2 (ie, hourly or salaried) employee in the US. pretty sure only independent contractors get to do this. otherwise, everyone would be doing this for commuting expenses.

(At least in Canada) commute to your "usual place of business" is explicitely excluded from write-off. Also, if your employer reimburses you for travel (mileage) you can't write it off at tax time.

How does that work for a rental?

I somehow don't feel sorry if overpaid tech workers, like me, have to buy a desk and chair. It's not like you need new office furniture very often.

I tend to think of the junior engineers, who might not have a ton of disposable income.

In the before times, they would be put at a workstation with a $2-3000 desk, a $500+ chair, reliable Internet and power, and usually a new(ish) computer, monitor, keyboard, and mouse.

Those engineers don't have the income to get all those pieces for home use; they'll get a cheap Ikea desk and chair, a middling-quality monitor and keyboard, and if they're lucky, their workplace provides a reliable computer at least.

But even for 'overpaid tech workers', there are some tools of the trade you invest in for your own good, but the company should also provide the basics (e.g. reimbursement for things used primarily/exclusively for business).

I think you'll see something akin to the Joel Test [1], but for how companies manage remote. What equipment are they providing? Are you getting a one time allowance to buy your home office setup (desk, external monitor, etc)? Are you getting a stipend towards your internet connection? Are they providing a corporate managed mobile device (why are you using your personal device for work!?)? Do they provide you with a support contact within the org if you need technical support or are you left to flail on your own? Do you have the option of a coworking space allowance so you're not always having to work from your home? How enjoyable and well put together is your onboarding process?

[1] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/08/09/the-joel-test-12-s...

> Are you getting a one time allowance to buy your home office setup (desk, external monitor, etc)?

Note that this really should be a recurring stipend. Nothing lasts forever; everything has a service life. I think a three- or four-year depreciation makes sense on a lot of these items, although this is probably something which should be considered an industry standard.

Wow, great article! It's astounding how forward thinking this was 20 years ago, and how relevant it still is. It's even more amazing how many companies still don't live up to these standards today!

I'm 2 decades into my career and have been working from home for a fortune 100 company for 2 years before covid (well, we would meet once a week in the office but just for meetings), so when the pandemic hit, it didn't change our work habits.

A cheap Ikea desk is perfect for my needs. It's a wood counter-top board and 2 adjustable sawhorses. Cost me about $200. However where I spent the money is on a good 5k monitor. With these 2 (and a saddle chair), I have everything I need for a workspace that is far more functional than an expensive modular furniture desk (ie. cubicle) with a low-res monitor.

Your company paid for that 5k monitor I hope ?

you don't need a $2-3000 desk just to hold a computer and some monitors. you can get a large desk with electronic height adjustment from ikea for about $400.

I'm a junior engineer and I already happen to have a nice chair, computer, and monitor at home. my desk is a piece of trash from walmart, but it gets the job done. altogether, it's about $3500 worth of stuff if bought new. I wouldn't be happy to pay for all that in one go for work, but it wouldn't be an extreme hardship either. I would gladly pay that in exchange for permanent WFH.

The expensive standing desks are only 6-800.

I've been a dev for 20 years and I have a second hand Ikea table that works great and a $60 chair from staples which I'm thinking of upgrading to Steelcase from ebay that is a few hundred. My old PC is much quicker than my crappy PC I used to have in the office.

I suppose I don't feel overpaid, given that I'm living in a 1BR apartment. And now with my office closed, I'm somehow supposed to find a dedicated space in my tiny-ass apartment where I can:

a) Setup the same configuration of laptop, multiple monitors, a desk phone, and an Ethernet jack into my router.

b) Sufficiently insulate the background noise on the hours of Zoom meetings I'm expected to join every day from my girlfriend working in the dining room, and the cacophony of screaming children in the apartment above me.

This solution reeks of tone-deaf executives who would think, "What? You mean all of our employees don't have freestanding houses with a spare bedroom or basement that they can easily convert to a home-office?"

It really changes the whole "I live with someone" situation. A 1BR with a partner may be reasonable when you each go to work for 8+ hours a day. A 1BR when you're both working from home, taking meetings and calls, etc, is a completely different story. It means a 2BR is really a requirement for most people who are in a relationship IMO, and that's a massive cost difference, many thousands a year.

> I suppose I don't feel overpaid, given that I'm living in a 1BR apartment.

I was about to post on this topic as well when I saw your post. There are people on our team who have been working in less than ideal circumstances at home for more than six months now, and who are really struggling as a result.

Even if people do have a good space to work, if partners are working at home together there's often only enough room for one of them to use that good space at a time. Again, not ideal.

My priority at the moment is securing some office space so that people have some respite from the endless grind of working at home under these circumstances.

I expect at most companies, people will have a choice to come back into the office they were in previously once it's safe to do so. That said, it won't necessarily be like it was before. For example, there may not be assigned seating and people you work with may choose to and be allowed to come in occasionally or rarely.

But I'm not sure what you want done in the current situation?

Good luck if your a junior living in a studio apartment with no space to put a desk let alone have a spare room for office.

Exactly why do you seem to be on the employers side here

Certainly some people are in a worse situation than others in many different ways. However, I'm not sure what employers are supposed to do right now other than to be sensitive to the challenges many people are facing. It's not like a $1K stipend for equipment (or whatever) is going to solve small apartments, kids learning at home, partners on Zoom calls all day, etc.

In general, I think employers should provide some sort of outside-home working space once practical, at least for employees who didn't sign up to work remotely.

it's a bad precedent when workers pay the company they're working for

Is it, though? I've always brought my own tools - my Aeron, my preferred high-refresh monitors, a Linux dev machine where possible, my monitor arms, my IDE.

I have a good setup. I know it works.

It's not as feasible to get my own standing desk in each time so I let that go. But they always give me everything and I just set them aside and use my (superior) tooling.

I don't think that's paying the company. That's just me buying tools that are optimal for me. I don't really need each employer to do that for me. These things are mostly buy it for life (except for the desktop and IDE license).

I'd never even consider paying for an IDE I need for work. Why would a company not buy me software that has a direct and immediate impact on my productivity? Huge red flag.

All of these things are productivity improvements. And I'm sure any company would buy them if I cared, but $200? It's a rounding error. And it liberates me from any choices they'd make.

IntelliJ Ultimate is $500 for a commercial license I believe (and you need a commercial license to do work for a company over a certain size, even if you pay for it yourself). Sure it's not going to affect my finances either way but:

1. The 2 minutes it takes to file an expense report is a good trade for $200 (I don't make $6,000 an hour at my job)

2. It's the principle; they should pay for it, not me.

No, you don't have to do that¹. Where did you get that info? I don't want to argue your personal value calculation and I accept that you feel the way you do, so let's set that part aside.

I've been using my IntelliJ licence at multiple jobs on my own and AFAIK if I don't get it reimbursed I don't need a business licence.

¹ https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240855-Can-...

Ah you're right, I stand corrected on the license.

I don't see the value calculation as an emotional one, I truly don't see a reason not to fill out the expense report

I didn't mean to imply that it was emotional, just that it is your own preference and different from mine. Personal there as relating to your person.

Sorry, needed to clarify that, but I really don't want to argue this point with you.

In the past I’ve been a dev at a company that didn’t understand software development at all; and fighting these battles is exactly why I left. Different strokes for different folks, but it’s great to work somewhere that gives me the tools I need for the job without having to ask, and certainly without having to source and pay for them myself.

You may not realize that the $500 chair, the ping pong table and the beer fridge effectively comes out of everyone's paycheck.

Right, but is that money coming back to employees in the form of pay bumps now that those things are gone?

Those thing aren't gone, they've already been paid for and are being written off.

Of course, with new contracts being negotiated, not having to pay for all these expenses will give an employer more leeway in terms of salary. However, remote work also increases the candidate pool, so the net effect is going to be lower salaries.

And it's not like it has to be new. Thrift stores await your arrival.

We give people $5k for setup (includes PC, though), reimburse cell and internet (and ask them to upgrade) and basically spare no expense on webcam, lighting and ethernet setup.

Ethernet setup - do you hire techs and electricians to run cabling?

The biggest issue with me for WFH has been the quality of my internet connection and it was entirely on me to get Comcast to come fix my lines and run my own ethernet to my basement "office".

If you intend to work from home then of course hire an electrician (or low voltage contractor, don't even need an electrician) to run an Ethernet cable! If you won't invest $500 in your WFH setup you're missing the forest for the trees.

The company should be the one hiring the electrician / wiring contractor.

Also, joy, hiring contractors. My favorite thing to do with my time.

Why should my employer make permanent improvements to my own house? That would only make sense in a lifetime employment kind of situation. If I have Ethernet run in my house that's going to be usable for 10+ years. Not going to be at my current employer then.

Get a Powerline and ethernet adapter for your laptop. Won't link here due to spam, just search 'Ethernet Powerline' on Amazon.

Unless you're on an AFCI circuit or split circuits in your house. Or have old wiring.

I tried one in my old place and it was really poor - much worse than congested WiFi (dense neighborhood in a large apartment building).

It can work. I installed one in my dad's old house and it worked like a charm. But when I went to put one in my house a few months ago, I did get it to work, but I had to try various locations of ethernet jacks and power plugs to find a combination that both worked and usefully extended my WiFi.

According to the incredibly comprehensive "understand Wi-Fi" guide posted here recently, MoCA is likely to be better than powerline adapters.[0]

[0]https://www.duckware.com/tech/wifi-in-the-us.html#improvespe...

Interestingly, the commissioned study opens with a productivity argument being much more than any of those perks:

> Loss of focus due to distractions translates to an estimated annual salary cost of US$34,448 per person in lost productivity, or US$391bn for US companies in the sectors analysed, equivalent to 28% of baseline salary payments

that argument is idiotic. from my personal experience, at least, I had FAR MORE interruptions when I was working in the office than I have when working from home.

They’re talking about exactly that: disruptions in offices have a huge drag, so WFH can allow companies to recoup productivity.

ahh, i read that as the other way around. hah

>But it will likely just be on the employee to pay for all these things, and the companies will reap the benefits.

Not for long, surely. Workers' productivity has presumably not changed much and the companies remain in fierce competition for employees so why would a drop in de facto compensation be the new equilibrium?

Employee salaries are by FAR the largest expense for these companies.

Office rent is nothing in comparison.

Companies will make decisions based on employee productivity, which IMO, means having people in an office.

Employee salaries are a huge expense because housing near San Francisco or New York City or wherever is expensive, so you have to pay those salaries to get people to sign up. If you can hire someone in Arkansas (who frankly would rather keep living there then move to SF) you can pay half the salary or less.

I wonder if the tax implications are more complex since the employee can presumably keep that equipment after clocking out (or quitting)

Technically any time you use work equipment for personal use you’re either supposed to pay rent or they have to put it on your w2. Including every time you take your work laptop home and check your personal email on it.

But the IRS right now doesn’t enforce those small amounts. They only care when you use the corporate jet for personal travel.

But when you leave, if they let you keep the stuff, they either have to include the depreciated value as income on your last check or you have to pay them for it.

When I left my first job they let me keep my computer and phone and I paid them $60 for it, which was the legal depreciated value.

I don't remember companies passing those savings along when they moved from offices to cubicles to save money.