Do you think working full-time in an office environment is dead? (salary, Baby Boomers)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it may evolve that the office no longer needs it workers. I can't imagine that there's any job that is done remotely that can't be done remotely by someone overseas or in a different less expensive location. I don't see a business located say in San Francisco California continue to pay California wages to an employee who decided to move and work remotely in rural Nevada. I learned a long time ago that anyone is replaceable.
(...)
If this becomes a widespread problem, there will no doubt be a political push to try to restrict the overseas remote work. Probably some new law that is a sort of a cross between visa restrictions and tariffs.
The commute sucks, even on good days. Working from home is nice but my spouse thinks I am available now. I like the office now because hardly anyone is there. Hybrid works best for me.
I sure hope not. I’m retired, but the time I worked in an office, and then left it behind at the end of the day was special. I loved the interaction with clients and other grownups during the day, then just leaving it behind until the next day.
I get the allure of working from home, but I think something is lost.
Have we adequately considered, that for all of the myriad benefits of WFH for employees, the real (and subtly sinister) benefit to the employers, is the savings on office-space? It's part of the longstanding trend of outsourcing. Now the very environment where work is being done, is getting outsourced.
I'm somewhat introverted, but do my best work at the office... at night or on weekends, when I'm completely alone in the building. Why? Because the office-environment is mentally associated with "work"... whereas home is mentally associated with leisure, sleeping etc.
I wish that the WFH cheerleaders would realize this. If your job can be done by somebody in Peoria, just as easily as in Manhattan, then maybe it could also be done in Bangalore.
The older set nevertheless treats workmates as neighbors, if not outright friends.
In the pre-industrial age of WFH, most people lived in villages... villagers knew everyone in the village. Socializing was in the village. Everything was in the village. Now, we have no more villages. Especially for those without family, socializing is in the workplace.
It will to some degree, but time zones will be a limiting factor, meaning it won't quite have the same race to the bottom labor price that manufacturing went through. Most jobs still require meetings. Much of the US remote work can only be done effectively in the Americas with the time zones.
Information and collaboration is going to be stickier than manufacturing, which is stickier than resource extraction that globalized first.
And to some degree, this is probably not the worst thing. It can suck for privileged Americans, but it really will reduce world inequality quite a bit and allow truly amazing geographies, like Colombia, to be plugged into a high earning workforce.
Is work really a good village replacement though? Conversation is more filtered than street interactions and people revolve in and out faster, leading to shallower relationships.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gentlearts
I sure hope not. I’m retired, but the time I worked in an office, and then left it behind at the end of the day was special. I loved the interaction with clients and other grownups during the day, then just leaving it behind until the next day.
I get the allure of working from home, but I think something is lost.
I agree, those are definite positives. I really do enjoy going into the office and talking and having the cool real estate of the extra office space. But it's not worth having to be in the middle major metro grind. I'll give up those things I like to be able to be in a smaller city / town where you can have more unspoiled open space, limited congestion, and a little closer social fabric.
Look at anxiety rates - look at how people in 5 million person metros live - look at how 20,000 town life is. Constant crowds and interstate noise and jams and air pollution affect the body's homeostasis.
It will to some degree, but time zones will be a limiting factor, meaning it won't quite have the same race to the bottom labor price that manufacturing went through. Most jobs still require meetings. Much of the US remote work can only be done effectively in the Americas with the time zones.
Information and collaboration is going to be stickier than manufacturing, which is stickier than resource extraction that globalized first.
And to some degree, this is probably not the worst thing. It can suck for privileged Americans, but it really will reduce world inequality quite a bit and allow truly amazing geographies, like Colombia, to be plugged into a high earning workforce.
Is work really a good village replacement though? Conversation is more filtered than street interactions and people revolve in and out faster, leading to shallower relationships.
I agree, those are definite positives. I really do enjoy going into the office and talking and having the cool real estate of the extra office space. But it's not worth having to be in the middle major metro grind. I'll give up those things I like to be able to be in a smaller city / town where you can have more unspoiled open space, limited congestion, and a little closer social fabric.
Look at anxiety rates - look at how people in 5 million person metros live - look at how 20,000 town life is. Constant crowds and interstate noise and jams and air pollution affect the body's homeostasis.
Considering that South America and a lot of extreme western Africa are within a few hours (time zone wise) of much of the continental US, this isn't as much of a barrier as you might think, at least for those areas. If you have your meetings early in the morning (8-10 am), there are at least 500 million people living outside the US that would be "during normal work hours" for those meetings, if you live anywhere in the eastern 2/3 of the country.
Considering that South America and a lot of extreme western Africa are within a few hours (time zone wise) of much of the continental US, this isn't as much of a barrier as you might think, at least for those areas. ...
Some years ago, I was involved in phone meetings (before the advent of Zoom, Teams, Webex and so on) with counterparts in the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand... literally spanning the globe. We managed to find an hour that, while not exactly convenient, was least-bad for all parties involved. The "real" annual meeting was in a physical location, rotating among facilities in the various 5 countries. Everyone agreed that while the phone calls were useful for plenary purposes, for going over Powerpoint slides and so on, there was no replacement for face-to-face.
That was well before the pandemic scrambled everything. I'm no longer involved with that group, but credulity would be strained, to suppose that face-to-face meetings have resumed. Between fears over travel-costs, environmental impact and so on, such "happy times" are unfortunately relegated to the past.
Then of course there's the infamous example of live tech-support over the phone, mostly based in India or Bangladesh. Those folks seem to have no problem being awake at hours convenient for Americans.
That's not something that could ever be duplicated remotely. You can trace who is on a Zoom or similar meeting, but you might not know who is sitting off-screen and listening in.
If someone is willing to allow an off screen eavesdropper to sit in on a Zoom call what would prevent him/her from just sharing the confidential information after an in person meeting?
There's been continual debate and discussion over working from home versus at the office since the pandemic began. What is your preference if your job would allow an option? Would you rather have a hybrid situation where you do a little of both? Do you think the world will ever go back to working in offices full time the way it used to be? Do you think working full-time in an office environment is dead?
No, to bolded question. There needs to be a division between work and home. We reopened our office in June 2020. We need interaction and teamwork.
No, to bolded question. There needs to be a division between work and home. We reopened our office in June 2020. We need interaction and teamwork.
But do you really need to be in the office for all of the typical 5 day 40 hour work week? Could you work from home at least one day a week?
For me, going into the office a few days per week is enough, and many meetings can be held just as well on Teams or Zoom. It's mostly classified work that drives me to go in.
I agree that sometimes we need the in-person interaction, but while remote work does not provide for quite as good a level of interaction, it can be 90% as good for less than 10% of the cost.
I for one have participated in remote training "webinars" where it would be difficult to justify travel costs for me to attend in person, again about 90% of the benefit for 10% of the cost.
But do you really need to be in the office for all of the typical 5 day 40 hour work week? Could you work from home at least one day a week?
For me, going into the office a few days per week is enough, and many meetings can be held just as well on Teams or Zoom. It's mostly classified work that drives me to go in. p
The problem is, though, that everyone won't be there. To some extent in-person is democratizing, leveling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by M3 Mitch
I agree that sometimes we need the in-person interaction, but while remote work does not provide for quite as good a level of interaction, it can be 90% as good for less than 10% of the cost.
I for one have participated in remote training "webinars" where it would be difficult to justify travel costs for me to attend in person, again about 90% of the benefit for 10% of the cost.
For lectures and seminars, yes. I do not propose eliminating the gains that we may have had from lockdowns, just like I would not tear up the Autobahns because of their sponsorship. But in general, in-person interactions evolved for a reason. That means unmasked, and not distanced. People are social animals, despite the attempt of some to reinvent humanity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
