> I personally used to commute 3 hours every day to get to work from SF

Honest question: at that point why not move closer to work? Or get a job at any number of companies closer to home that are desperate for talent?

The whole point of enduring SFBA rent is that there’s dozens of tech jobs at every corner.

>Honest question: at that point why not move closer to work?

Because everyone thinks this first which is why a 1 bedroom in SF is like 5k a month.

Yea, the valley commute felt pretty brutal and incredibly stressful for me when I did it for a year or so. Not sure what it is, but traffic here seems really cut throat and there isnt much courtesy out there (e.g. merges here are hilarious, there is no such thing as a zipper merge here, you get everyone trying to cut ahead and merge at the last second).

Walking a few blocks to the office is an amazing way to start the day without incurring stress.

When I drove a bigger truck, I used to force people into zipper merges. Some of the would-be cheaters got really upset and some people cheered me on. It was a mixed crowd. Not sure I would do that these days. People are on edge and I don't have an armored vehicle.

I could have definitely been one of those cheering you on as I flipped off one of the people you were blocking. The road is similar to the internet in the way it allows some people to dehumanize others.

I lived two hours each way from work. Lived in a van mid week way before it was a popular thing. Used to joke that I was just waiting for the next pandemic then I'd have it made. Not so sure about that now, sometimes I miss the van.

That seems so economical and honestly if you can pull that off with a FAANG salary, you are so set. Sometimes I wish I could do that. If you work at Google, the van would pretty much be for sleeping. Only thing I would worry about is a late night break in.

It was a white cargo van with a steel bulkhead. Difficult to break into where I was sleeping. I wanted my family to grow up rural close to our recreational activities. The work is/was in a Canadian city. I'd typically be at work or at the gym or just in the van sleeping. I still pay mortgage on a house in the sticks but at least I wasn't getting into leases in the city that would be far away from the next opportunity. Someone tested my door once and another time a snow plow pushed a drift into my bumper. That was the extent of it over the years. I'd never camp anywhere residential. Commercial and industrial areas were the best.

> Honest question: at that point why not move closer to work? Or get a job at any number of companies closer to home that are desperate for talent?

Just one person’s view: My Bay Area commute is about 2 to 2.5 hours each way, depending on traffic. I make pretty decent Bay Area money but not even close to enough to live in an equivalent house near work. Not by a long shot. Changing jobs means starting back at the bottom. Re-build relationships, re-learn new company’s tribal knowledge, start at zero in the promotion treadmill. I’m too old for that shit. And at my age, (45+) you’re not getting a +10% raise when changing jobs, like what was do-able in your 30s.

So changing jobs is mostly downside and moving closer to work is not financially do-able. Stuck!

What level are you at that you have to stay forever at your current place to get a promotion but aren’t able to afford a place closer to work? If you’re trying to go from E8 to E9 (or vp to president/CTO), I’d understand but at those levels you should be clearing nearly 1mil/yr or well past it. If you’re below that, you could easily switch workplaces and likely get a lot of money.

Maybe joining a startup on the hyper growth track would be good financial returns. Only need one of those to do well to buy the house with cash at your likely experience range and the compensation they would be rewarding you.

Yea if I was at those nosebleed salary levels, I'd move right next door to work! Salary progression after your first 10 years or so in the industry is pretty flat when you're an IC, even if you change jobs. First couple of company moves I made back in the 90s boosted my comp 50-100%. My last two company moves were basically flat. Moving from IC to management has proven to be a tough nut to crack, the typical "need experience in that role to get the role" catch-22.

Your startup advice is decent, I just don't have the stomach for it anymore. Been there, done that, have 600,000 worthless stock options to prove it. I feel like I have better odds at the poker table.

> Your startup advice is decent, I just don't have the stomach for it anymore. Been there, done that, have 600,000 worthless stock options to prove it. I feel like I have better odds at the poker table.

I understand. I'm just saying I did it and got $1m+/yr out of it. I've done startups before that lead nowhere - so I understand the feeling... It's not like joining startups at seed stage or something - I'd only join one with a $XXXm dollar valuation or greater. (And one that has gotten that valuation very quickly hopefully - not over 10 years) I left because of the horrible environment before I vested everything. I decided if I can find a job at $350-400k/yr with some minor upside and a much better culture then I'd probably be happier in the end. (I have about 8 YOE)

SO didn’t want. I also don’t want to live in a suburb (it means death of social life to me).

With that kind of commute (assuming it's 1.5 hrs each way), OP is probably in the Vacaville/Fairfield/Davis/Sacramento area, where there are not actually a ton of great tech jobs. Some to be sure, but it's pretty different from SF.

OP says he's coming from SF. Must work in SJ or around 237.

> I personally used to commute 3 hours every day to get to work from SF

Menlo park

I live in MP, and it doesn't take nearly that long to get here from SF. Maybe Mountain View, on a bad traffic day. But nothing north of Palo Alto could take that long, IMO.

That sounds terrible! I work at a nice office with nice people , 10 minutes commute by bike, and most of my colleagues are eager to get back to work, at least part of the time.

I never thought I would feel that way - there were times in my life I dreamed of unlimited home office. But honestly there are things which work better in person, like solving problems on a whiteboard, or picking up on subtle cues in a meeting, or laughing with colleagues over a coffee.

For me, I think 2 days/week in the office would actually be the preferable split.

It seems like there is going to be a big generational divide where the older execs want everyone to come to come back, but the younger employees feel they were more productive and want to stay remote.

I’m pretty sure my company’s surveys were almost exactly the opposite.

The older generation with their families, homes in the suburbs with the bad commute, and already established networks in the office have no interest in coming back, while it’s the younger generation that wants to be in the office.

I read the GP's comment as referring to 55+-year-old "older execs"—Boomers, basically—and late-20s to mid-40s "younger employees". Those are the ones with families.

I can see a certain subset of recent college grads and young techbro-types who would want to be in the office so they can hang out with each other, but it's definitely the boomer and older gen-X crowd who believe that it's only "real work" if it's done sitting in a cubicle where your boss can loom over your shoulder any time he wants.

What are they going to go do instead? I feel like this is what everyone says to try and hope it stays that way. The whole world may not be able to work from home.

All those people in the Bay may have a tough time with bills when they quit...

Not just existing bills, but health insurance paid individually is usually more expensive. That has been one of the few things keeping me at work. Companies have incredible purchasing power with insurance and this usually also bypasses insurance companies setting a rate based on a persons health history. This is one surprise some will get when they exit the workforce early. I've heard that there are some non profit groups that also have group purchasing power, like some religious groups. Maybe there are other big groups that do this as well. Anyone know of other big groups that can get the same discounts as corporations?

An organization is not only top down, enough people having the same opinion confers a great amount of power over the direction of the organization as a whole.

You didn’t have to do it, you know it right?

I’m really curious how it is going to play out. I’m a bit concerned that our salaries will be slashed, especially if engs from other countries enter the wfh market

Is that 3 hours one way, or total 3 hours for to and fro?

Good point, since it says "to work". But I can't imagine anyone could live in SF and drive three hours one way. I would assume it's round-trip, and that it's to the South Bay. Netflix is in Los Gatos, for example. (But then anyone who's had NFLX options for more than a couple years can probably afford to have two houses in the Bay Area....)

Anecdata: I know of multiple people that drove 3+ hours each way to work in the Bay. ~10% of the commuters I know there. It's not a majority, but it happens with frequency.

Yup, I did that. As soon as they announced at work we were going back to the office I started looking and got a remote job. Never liked the office life

Until all jobs return to full-time on-site and there's no where else to go.

Not all will, the ones that won't are salivating at the chance of getting a significant competitive advantage.

Why did you do it before?

Not OP, but sometimes if something sounds like it sucks but I'm unsure exactly how much, I'll do it just to see how bad it is.

I don’t feel bad for the person who chooses to work 3 hours away from where they live.

Maybe move closer?

And thank you for that. That will surely drive down supply of engineers and inflate salaries - a great outcome for those of us willing to to into an office.