[HN Gopher] Facebook extends its work-at-home policy to most emp... ___________________________________________________________________ Facebook extends its work-at-home policy to most employees Author : prostoalex Score : 120 points Date : 2021-06-09 22:07 UTC (52 minutes ago) (HTM) web link (www.cnbc.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.cnbc.com) | danbrooks wrote: | Clearly great news for Facebook employees. For reference, the | previous policy was that only level 5+ could request to work | remotely. | digbert wrote: | > Clearly great news for Facebook employees. | | For some Facebook employees, definitely. Personally, I think | I'll be finding a job elsewhere now. | magneticnorth wrote: | I'm curious to hear why - what do you see as the drawback of | more remote coworkers? | digbert wrote: | Mostly that by having remote co-workers I get many of the | downsides of remote work without any of the upsides. | | Once a few colleagues are remote, all collaboration has to | assume remote as the default. Even if I'm in the office I'm | still stuck with remote collaboration, but I still have a | commute. | ditonal wrote: | I'm mixed on remote work, even as an engineering IC, | despite claims that only management want in-office. | | To me, the downside of remote coworkers is we've already | seen a dynamic at many companies that start with "we'll | allow remote workers" straight to "if we allow any in- | person collaboration, then remote workers will be second- | class citizens, so to pre-empt that, we will actively | discourage any in person collaboration." | | For example, Coinbase didn't just allow remote but shut | down the SF office for this reason. Twitter is re-opening | their office but in a crippled state, where the food | options are massively downsized, and employees are actively | discouraged from eating with any teammates. | | If you're the type of personality who gets energized by | collaboration with teammates, if you like the real teammate | relationships that more easily develop with facetime, then | it's not a matter of allowing remote coworkers but whether | those remote coworkers now get to advocate for actively | destroying any office culture. | | Again, I understand why there's many advantages of remote | work, but let's not pretend the people who didn't want to | go remote are unaffected. | anon_tor_12345 wrote: | i onboarded last summer as an intern and it was pretty | miserable. language barrier with my intern manager mediated | by zoom plus the famously poorly documented codebase made | it damn near impossible to get things done. i got a return | offer but i'm pretty sure it was because everyone was | struggling (skip said as much). i'm surprised they're doing | this. | gricardo99 wrote: | what is "level 5+"? | reducesuffering wrote: | Avg. 4-5 years of FB experience out of college or 8 years of | experience in industry. | rejectedandsad wrote: | New grad is L3, mid level L4, senior L5. | [deleted] | magneticnorth wrote: | https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Facebook,Google,Amazon,Apple. | .. | | Roughly, "senior" at a lot of places. | nick0garvey wrote: | L3 is new grad L4 is an intermediate level - you must be | promoted to L5 in a fixed time frame (2-3 yearish) L5 is a | senior level | leoh wrote: | >you must be promoted to L5 in a fixed time frame (2-3 | yearish) | | What happens if you don't? | dado3212 wrote: | You're basically evaluated according to L5 requirements. | Given that you weren't promoted at that point, it's | likely you're not performing at those requirements, and | you'll be slowly managed out. More often as people get | close to the red zone, they just swap companies | preemptively. | someelephant wrote: | Let's be real. The loser here is middle managers. Not all of | them. Just the ones who feed off of the high they get from having | control over the office environment. | benatkin wrote: | This hinges on the following: | | > "Zuckerberg said employees who want to work in an office will | be asked to come in at least half the time." | | I agree - part time remote work will be bad for micromanagers. | stephc_int13 wrote: | I feel the same. | | Middle management is not always useful, they mostly have the | role of herding dogs, but if the work is not dumb and soul- | crushing I don't think most people need to be herded. | | (and I am talking as someone who built companies and led teams) | EugeneOZ wrote: | So now Facebook is better than Apple for the employees. | justapassenger wrote: | I don't think that Apple ever had a vibe as being especially | great for employees. Secrecy to a level that you may not know | what product you're actually working on, and heavy top down | management as a result. | foxpurple wrote: | They also basically ban you from working on open source. One | employee detailed that they could not release some | improvements they made to a Wordpress photo gallery plug-in | because legal told them it competes with the iPhone/iCloud | photo gallery. | rejectedandsad wrote: | Yeah, in terms of software working at Apple is impressive for | the fact that their products are luxuries, not for any real | technical reasons. | | Hardware is totally different though | thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: | You don't think Apple has technical challenges in their | software? That's really interesting to hear. I worked on | software there for five years and it was some of the most | interesting work I've been a part of. What do you consider | impressive in software? | voisin wrote: | Depends on whether, in the long run, employees who choose WFH | are treated the same. | alpacaillama wrote: | Wonder if they will hire more in UK/Canada now? | wintermutestwin wrote: | The bloomberg article mentions potential CoL adjustments: | https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-09/facebook-... | | It is interesting that the Slashdot crowd was fairly universal in | panning the idea of paying people less if they lived in a low | cost area. In my 17 years as a designated "teleworker" at a SV | megacorp, they adjusted compensation ratios. This meant that they | didn't reduce my salary when I moved from an expensive city to a | cheap mountain town, I just didn't get raises for a few years | because my comp ratio was too high. I don't understand why people | would rail against this kind of policy. It certainly didn't | motivate me to move back to an expensive city. | | I'm not sure how well this would work out for those geo-arbitrage | digital nomads, but I don't think that companies should be | particularly accommodating that corner case. | JulianMorrison wrote: | I think it would be reasonable to pay people extra if they live | in an expensive place, and the company actually needs them to | be in that place. Like maybe they have to be able to get on | site at short notice, so they need to live right by the office, | or the data center. | schoolornot wrote: | For new hires I suppose it's okay but to adjust the pay of an | existing worker whose output remains the same afterwards | because they relocated is a bit insulting to me. It's a pay | cut, not a "COLA". | jfoutz wrote: | Really drives home the point, business is not a meritocracy. | scotuswroteus wrote: | For FB WFHers wondering whether COL adjustments are in the cards | https://mashable.com/article/mark-zuckerberg-instagram-whats... | _rs wrote: | Sorry how does this article address this at all? | scotuswroteus wrote: | Thank you for your question | rejectedandsad wrote: | Even if they do them they're extremely unlikely to be | significant | warkdarrior wrote: | After you move to a low COL area, you are really at their | mercy, no? | ed25519FUUU wrote: | A year ago? Sure. Now the market for remote engineers is | competitive. | | I basically eliminated my mortgage by selling and moving. | My salary can go way down without affecting my living | standards. | magneticnorth wrote: | I am really curious to see where we'll be in a year, two, three | down the line wrt remote/office/hybrid work at major companies. | | This forced experiment has had some surprising outcomes about the | effectiveness of remote workplaces, but working from home for | only a year, in pandemic conditions, is clearly not the same as | indefinitely in normal times. But there's reason to think that | may go even better, not worse; I am really curious to see how it | plays out and glad more companies are continuing to let people | work remotely. | varispeed wrote: | I can see that many people who worked in cafes before the | event, will retrain to work as therapists and will be helping | people to adjust to normal life, in the sense, for example, | teaching how to find friends outside of work, how to meet with | local people for lunch and so on. There will be a lot of | opportunity to teach people how to cook and do other tasks that | they couldn't do because of commuting, no time outside of work | etc. I think this will lift us out of depression and improve | economy in many ways. | | The gravy train for property speculators, chain tax dodging | cafes and "restaurants" is over. | throwaway6734 wrote: | My biggest question right now about sustained wfh is how much | of the current productivity is the result of relationships that | were built in the office. | | A year ago, I remotely onboarded for a new position and | recently I can head back into the office, and there's a massive | difference for me between the virtual relationships I built and | the in-person ones. | | I learned more about people that I had spent months | zooming/emailing with over the past few weeks talking to them | face to face. Also having a dedicated workspace and a mental | break between home & work has increased my productivity. | admissionsguy wrote: | > has had some surprising outcomes about the effectiveness of | remote workplaces | | Curious, what are the outcomes? | foxpurple wrote: | Replacing predictions with experienced reality. Seeing things | continue as normal and at full pace while working from home | which many expected was not possible. | | Our company was quite restrictive of working from home | previously but after last year seeing that we had our most | productive year ever, things loosened up a lot. | magneticnorth wrote: | I was mostly just referring to the fact that team/org/company | productivity does not seem reduced compared to pre-pandemic | times. As far as I know, no major tech company is dealing | with more outages/incidents or slower product launches than | they typically saw, unless their business model was directly | impacted by spending pattern changes. I think most companies | expected lower output from forced-all-remote teams but don't | seem to be seeing it. | ribosometronome wrote: | Wasn't the video game industry fairly impacted by the | transition? | dheera wrote: | A big problem with both hybrid is that you're forced to live in | the same locality as the office, and most companies aren't | subsidizing rent, but at the same time you need a decent office | setup at home to be effective and that isn't cheap. | tester756 wrote: | it's 1.5 year into pandemic, wtf? | | I guess it's never too late | packetslave wrote: | This is the policy for _after_ the offices open back up. We 've | been 100% WFH (except for essential workers) for over a year, | just like everyone else. | capncleaver wrote: | The choice between mandatory 'more than half time' in the office | and completely remote ('with on/offsites!') is interesting. | | Swooping through the office for meetings is discouraged. What a | challenge for management! ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-06-09 23:00 UTC)