More people telecommuting in Seattle?

[User0]

After commuting in and out of downtown for seven years, I quit my job for one where I can telecommute. I'm a consultant, though, and I don't work in tech. All I can say it's a billion times better. I hate driving. I hate the office. People treat it like an extension of high school. Everyone wants to be prom king/queen.

[MJ5150]

I worked for two different companies that had an office in Seattle.
The first one was when we lived in Olympia, and they were really cool, only had me come to the office once a month.
The second one of them while I was living in New Hampshire. My boss then was working out of the Texas office.
When we moved back to Olympia, she looked on the map and noticed the proximity to Seattle and told me I'd have to start going to the office every day now since one was 'so close'.
I said nope and turned in my resignation.

I think the shift in telecommuting policies for some companies is based on how those employees handle the privilege of working from home. I have been doing it since 2009. I have an actual office with a door that closes. I get dressed just like I would if I were going to the office. I have computer equipment I only use for work. I work in my office just like if I were working at a desk in the company office. I don't go in the office unless I am working.
Too many times I'd hear less mature employees all excited about working from home so they can clean house, do laundry, eat whenever they want, watch TV, etc all while getting paid. It's not hard to track and find out who those employees are, and sometimes they ruin it for those who are more mature.
*Note: by mature I am not strictly limiting that to the age of the person. While it seemed more common in younger people (in their 20's), I knew plenty of co-workers my age (30's and 40's) who had the same attitude about being able to do all this other stuff while at home.

-Mike

[Blondebaerde]

Originally Posted by MtnSurfer

Hi,

I'm wondering if you are aware of more folks telecommuting either partially or fully into Seattle based companies?

With an ever increasing population as new jobs draw in workers, its becoming more important to consider alternative work schedules and the environmental impact. To this end the state has put forth a new bill to incentivise employers to increase telecommuting. Employers in Washington state could get up to $20K in tax credits for employees who telecommute.

I've actually been approached by Seattle based companies as an IT professional on a number of occasions. However, I don't want to add to that snarled up mess of a traffic scene even though I love the state overall - for its natural beauty! I've also noticed that my current company, a Fortune 500 tech co, is allowing more employees to telecommute. This includes both long distance telecommuting (coast to coast) as well as part-time local telecommuting (several days per week).

As a tech lead, I've always believed there is value in face time. That synergy can be more challenging when the team is distributed. However, with the high cost of living in CA and especially the Bay Area, it's just becoming more prevalent to allow more flexibility in this area as opposed to 100% in the office every day!

Now that I'm considering moving to WA and working remotely with my co, I'm wondering if this same trend is catching on more with some of the big employers in Seattle? If not, do you see this changing as things get more crazy, crowded? Is there a growing sense of corporate responsibility that its time to do something more to reduce our human footprint? Or do you see most still insisting/wanting/needing that 100% face time from all employees?

Derek

Interesting, Derek. I see same trend in Seattle, been in tech here 20 years almost to the day. "Snarled mess" is certainly Seattle downtown during peak commute hours. Unlike SF, where I lived seven years in the 1990s, I cannot lane split with my motorcycle. Bus is a option, I'm on the 7:30 and roll up on the office about 8:40am downtown which is neither here nor there, but an hour and five minutes or so seems pretty normal. That was summer, no idea if winter is worse: haven't tried it yet.

I work for a management consultancy in Seattle, one of the bigger ones, and our office is mostly a ghost ship but could seat the whole crew if absolutely necessary. This is the first job I've had that is mostly remote, other than a stint early on where it was better to be in the office half the week (in a historic building, what I call "pseudo-financial district" of Seattle). I think they're going to downsize it, and should, to some sort of bat cave though it is nice to have clients in our gorgeous offices when we can.

I've been at home for about six months, an adjustment. Two computers, two monster 34" monitors, my phone, Skype, and Webex. One speaker phone, one awesome set of speakers on a monitor, one computer with a dedicated Client image, other for my employer business. Some of that I will write-off on taxes, or try to: my accountant is neutral on if I fit the bill for "home business" at this time.

Yes, my clients (Fortune 500) seem to be gravitating toward WFH couple days/week. Last year when I air dropped in to solve some problems, that firm had more people onsite than off, but most also WFH about two days/week without any trouble. It just works, these days.

"I hope" this affects traffic positively over time. I'm certainly not out there, now, with my beaucoup mileage Tacoma pickup that gets consistently 17mpg combined city and a little highway. Or P-car that in Eco mode somehow gets an almost-supernatural 24mpg with a flat-six making 118hp/liter, or 430bhp in this case.

I'm glad to see that bill, it is definitely time for that kind of thinking in our industry. At some point I'll be a lead again vs. current IC, and will probably almost insist staffers are WFH two days/week. This isn't 2007, when I wanted to see my people pretty much all the time in their offices or cubes, maybe one day/week at home with good reason (I didn't entirely trust it back then, but do now).

And yes, as a lead the collaboration is nice. Makes it harder to do a "scrum" discussion, but not impossible. Recently as 2013 I ran daily scrums 9-9:15am with a small team of ten co-lo'd at a client site, but we were there keeping the machine running and that was a bit different. Two were permanently offsite w/rare appearances (every couple weeks), yet entirely effective on the phone and Skype.

[hurricaneMan1992]

Think about it, the major tech companies, the ones that made the cloud a reality, are all building and expanding centralized campuses. And literally busing employees in. It's probably not for the bragging rights.

[MtnSurfer]

Originally Posted by hurricaneMan1992

Think about it, the major tech companies, the ones that made the cloud a reality, are all building and expanding centralized campuses. And literally busing employees in. It's probably not for the bragging rights.

While they are building bigger campuses, I don't think think these are mutually exclusive. For example, some folks work in those large, centralized campuses every day, 100% of their time under the corporate microscope. While others work from home a couple days per week. Then those are those who work fully remote all for that *same* large tech company.

Here's one of many real world examples of this. I know folks in similar positions working for these major tech companies. https://www.amazon.jobs/en/jobs/6111...t-aws-wwps-dod

That said there are certain position which require this kind of daily role call especially when more entry to mid-level - the worker bees working the factory floor. I would imagine the warehouses all require this as well. Here's one from the early days of IBM. At least they aren't requiring those same suits now




Derek

[leastprime]

I guess, kinda depends on the job role?
Our son is support/consult/special projects at his company. He has a lot of meetings. He lives in CentralDistrict and easily buses/Uber to central core area.