You've pretty much outlined all the pros and cons of working remotely. However working remotely is not so common in Europe than it is in US. Probably Europe is lacking behind with 5+ years, because most of the companies here are still on the "top-notch MBA consulting" staff. I still meet people who make their living from 2 excel files they copied from their Big4 internship :)
You said you are the only guy outside US. Have you tries looking for something "nearby"?
Excellent analysis of remote working. I worked for nine years remotely (full-time for the last three years) with an entirely remote team, and most of this article rings true. Flying team members in every so often for in-person meetings is hugely valuable.
This subject is near and dear to me, as I live in a rural area and I'd like to find another full-time remote position. I'm frustrated by the opposition to remote devs from so many tech companies, who ought to be the last ones to resist this obvious solution. Many of the reasons ring hollow when the same companies lament the lack of qualified candidates to fill their positions -- they're essentially saying that they'd rather do without than deal with the potential downsides of remote workers.
This is due to mediocre middle/upper management. For them it is a huge difference if you are the building next to theirs or in some rural area, although in both cases you will communicate through the wire.
The business is already global, soon or later they'll have to accept this.
This subject is interesting to me. I've worked remote my entire career, and mostly positive experiences. One negative experience was at a place struggling to fill positions and opened up to remote team members, but they did not change the company culture to support the remote members, and as a result all of the remote members were gone within a year or two and the experiment deemed "a failure".
So I understand why some companies are reluctant to bring on remote members. It requires your entire company culture to change if you want a remote team member and not just someone used as basically contract labor. For a team used to making decisions and having conversations in person, it's a big change to have to move everything online to include the remote person/s. It can breed resentment on both sides. In my negative experience I would find out decisions had been made days ago while the on-site team was out to lunch together, and no one had informed those of us working remotely.
Change is not easy. Companies that started with a remote workflow or commit fully to embracing a remote workflow can make teams located anywhere work. Adding on remote team members without a culture change to support it is a recipe for disaster.
I wouldn't recommend making office visits a requirement, however, as some companies appear to do. Like all things corporate-mandated, this can seem heavy-handed and present logistical challenges for remote workers.
I believe I've seen some companies requiring quarterly travel, and this places a burden on devs with families, pets, etc.
Even then, would those who opt-out be treated differently? ("Well Jon has no problem traveling to the office, why do you?")
On the "Substandard Treatment", my personal experience is the loss of power. I was the team lead for a government project. My wife took a job she always wanted; we move 900 miles away to Florida. Pretty much after that, while still team lead, the team lost cohesion. It was harder to drive changes and tasks at a distance than if I was in someone's cube.
I'm in a similar boat: remote team lead on a government project living in FL :)
Was the rest of the team local to each other? That can be difficult because the team may be accustom to conducting all communication verbally, where you need it to be electronic. I was a new-comer to the team when I became the remote lead, and one of the things I did was focus on getting folks to communicate electronically. Luckily for me, they were in individual offices spread around the building and two were in other buildings, so they were already using IM, chat, and email. I just needed to reinforce it.
Also from the beginning, I've focused on team cohesion and team communication. The team was in a bad state when I joined, so again lucky for me, it was something I knew needed extra attention. As a team lead, it's an important factor that you need to pay attention to, but perhaps don't have to spend a lot of time on when everyone is local. As a remote team lead, you need to spend a non-trivial amount of time on it.
And face time is still important. I travel twice a month for a day or two and try to meet with everyone during that time. I also conduct a daily standup where the rest of the team is in the room and I'm on the phone. It can be difficult to follow the conversations in the room from the phone, but really the goal is to make sure the team is talking to each other, and isn't about my control of the conversation or of the team.
Have you tried doing a daily standup where everyone calls in individually from their office? In my experience things work the best when everyone is operating remotely with the same "communication handicap".
Yes I've tried both. It seems like a trade-off to me. Everyone now is completely into using electronic, asynchronous communication, following up verbal discussions with a quick email or IM listing highlights/decisions, etc. Imposing that handicap can help, but don't need to work on it so much anymore. Whereas getting everybody in the room for a quick status, a few jokes and good laughs, and some ranting about the customer seems to keep morale high. That non-trivial amount of time includes continuously assessing what is and isn't working.
My team was entirely new. It was built around a core of two people: myself and a systems admin. We directed the bulk of the technical decisions.
Looking back, the problem was a cult of personality driven by both of us. We were the go-to guys for everything. The rest of the team didn't get, or expect much say in the overarching design. I tried to ease myself out of the cult leader into more of a director when I moved.
That easing didn't work. People just kinda drifted off. Things got done, but details were over looked.
We had stand ups everyday, but most people wouldn't give granular enough responses to figure out the burn down, etc. As a tech lead I didn't have much pull on trying to get them to be more scrum-y.
The ethos of the team seems to be more like the Mangalores from 5th Element. Without a tangible head, fiefdoms arose.
I've been working remotely for a big bank for the past 7 years. I don't go into an office and haven't seen my team in the past 4 years.
The last time people got together for a project kickoff a few years back they just sat around a conference table all on webex. I stayed home.
Unfortunately new management is taking away the remote option for new hires for the most part. Also some people based on where they live had to go back into the office.
For myself, I never felt a difference in work, other than I didn't have to have headphones on all the time to try and get any work done in a cube and no tie. I did find that it can lead you to feel 'alone' during the day when wife is at work and kids at school I guess. Though after getting a dog who wants to play and go out it's not as bad :-).
When I move on from this job, it will be VERY hard to not work at least some days remotely. There aren't a lot of jobs around here that offer that. That is a downside of doing this so long, it just becomes how you work and how your day is supposed to be. I've tuned my life around it.
Do you know the reasons why management is moving away from working remotely?
In an effort to attract and keep more talent the company for which I work allows working remotely more and more.
Without that option the turn over rate for engineers would have doubled in the last year.
The reason they went remote was to save money on real estate. They could sell buildings and get rid of leases.
The specific reasons they no longer want to go remote has not been shared with us other than the usual 'we want more teamwork'.
It's a shame. I tried to apply to other internal jobs, but they won't allow me to work remotely because of the new policy. So now they've severely limited their candidate pool and may have to look outside the bank and incur the costs that brings.
Not seen that much remote work in banking. I work at an investment bank in London at the moment, and while I do have to option to work at home, it's only really supposed to be if you need to.
With the state of public transport in London, it can't be long before they start looking at how much money they lose on a prticularly bad day of thier employees being stuch on a train somewhere!
The part about "Substandard Treatment" hits home for me. When I first went remote the hardest that was the hardest thing for me to adjust too. Lunches and/or dinners being bought for them, weekend team trips, etc. It's a trivial thing in the grand scheme of things, but it can affect morale.
Also jealousy issues... Realize that most people can't stand those things and it tends to turn into a test of personality, who will kiss up no matter how awful the experience, or who has the guts to admit the emperor has no clothes... In my wife's work at home experience there was some jealousy that she got to avoid teambuilding by default, while the office people were punished by having to attend. How come I have to go to the Christmas party on my day off and (VLM's wife) doesn't have to?
Oh and another jealousy issue... in this day and age not so many people smoke, but the smokers did not like that my wife could theoretically smoke at her desk but they can not (thankfully she doesn't smoke)
And discipline issues... "(VLM's wife) gets to pick up a sick kid at school without being formally written up for leaving work early because nobody notices, so why am I being written up?" and so forth. A lot of workplace BS exists so bosses can manufacture the reason to fire folks they can't just fire for no cause, and its going to collide with the obvious work at home differences.
At medium size corporations you can also run into Dilbertian requirement problems. Small corporations ignore "corporatism" and big corporations already have remote training, but it can be a mystery how to check the checkbox for annual diversity training, or annual PCI/DSS compliance training, or however else HR tortures the employees. She usually combined this kind of stuff with the rare facility visit, so we'll all go to diversity class as a team in the morning and then hang out and talk about work (aka goof off) in the afternoon.
i love going to the office. i really do. it gets me out of the house, it gives my day structure, it clearly separates work and play.
but i do like that more and more companies allow working remotely. I'm from a smallish city in Germany with not many jobs available. Having the opportunity to find interesting work in the US without moving there is awesome. Last month alone, I collected 700 job listings from various job boards for my remote work newsletter. (http://remoteworknewsletter.com)
OP (or other Etsy-ers) - is Etsy remote friendly as a rule? They've always been around the top of my employment-crush list but I'm pretty committed to staying remote after over four years working that way (and NYC is a visit-not-live location for me!). I thought when I'd looked in the past Etsy wasn't obviously remote friendly.
Looking at their site it seems that they are not remote friendly. My guess would be that OPs specific team and or specific office location is remote friendly. But Etsy as a whole does not promote remote work anywhere on their site.
He mentions improved video conferencing. I recently discovered that a $90 Logitech webcam [1] hugely outperforms the one built into my Retina MacBook Pro. It has a wider angle, higher resolution, and—most importantly—makes the room look bright in a way that I never managed to achieve using lighting.
Nice writeup. I've noticed that a lot of the negatives (which the author nails, by the way) go away if you move the entire company remote.
I've been working for the last 4 years with a 150 person software company that has no office whatsoever. Everybody is remote. As such, we get to remove the biggest land mine, which is being the "remote guy" on an otherwise onsite team, missing out on communication and finding yourself sidelined. Instead, everybody is forced through all the bullet points on the author's "communication" section, and the playing field is leveled.
It also kills off the "Sub Standard Treatment" and "Stopping Work" issues, since everybody is going through the same thing. I'm also 6+ hours ahead of most of my team, and there are only a handful of times a year when somebody forgets that and pings me at 10pm. And in those cases, since my work machine is out above the garage, I only find out about it the next morning.
The upsides the author touches on are just plain amazing. I'll often "commute" to work via an hour or so of mountain biking and bouldering. In the winter, I'll often simply up sticks and take the family to go live on a beach in the Caribbean because hey, they have internet there and it's actually a better time zone for the team. (That's where I am now, and will be through March).
In short, remote is the way forward. And Software is just ridiculously compatible with it. I'm amazed that there are any product companies left that force their employees to drive an hour each way to sit in a felt cube.
It's the future. If you're not remote, find a way to fix that.
> Would you suggest this even for new grads looking for a first job?
Nope.
I've been a full-time remote worker for 6.5 years, and 1/2 time (2 days a week) for 4 years before that. During that time I've managed and hired remote workers.
The reality is remote work is not for everyone, and I think that is even more so for new grads. There is a lot of mentoring that happens early in someone's career, and that is difficult to pick up in a remote environment. I think over time the need for having that on-site mentoring decreases, but it's critical in the first 12 to 24 months.
The people I work with are not my friends. I despise most of them. This is true for every place I've worked. It's probably true for most people here. You don't chose your co-workers. And now you're forcing me to take my vacation with these people, who I put up with every day at work.
You may be puzzled reading this. "But my company is like a family." Some companies are really like this; everyone's your friend. But if every company was like this, we wouldn't have shows like "The Office."
It's also hard to expect everyone to go on a vacation. What if your kid has to go to school? What if your spouse has a job, and has to stay home. Can you ask people to leave their family behind for a week so they can bond with their co-workers?
Then you might say "fine, just make the vacation optional." You won't be fired for not going, but when it's time for performance reviews, who's gonna have "not a team player" on their report? The one person who didn't attend.
But you make a point. We're people. We need contact. My solution? Work at a co-working space a few times a week. Work out of a library or cafe every so often. And get everyone on your team to use video conferencing.
And if your team lives in a close vicinity, it's totally reasonable to schedule some day trips.
I was expecting someone to make that comment. I admit, I'm very selective about people who I consider my friend. But the notion that co-workers can be annoying is universally accepted. Otherwise, The Office, Office Space, Dilbert, and the like would not exist. Obviously they exaggerate: most people don't absolutely loathe the people they work with. But how many of your co-workers do you really want to vacation with? I bet most people would say "a few."
This is where you're going wrong. Personally, who I will be working with is one of the biggest factors in deciding where to work. A great team can make a tough job fun and a terrible team can make a great job unbearable.
> Can you ask people to leave their family behind for a week so they can bond with their co-workers?
Honestly, I think if you're a 100% remote company that's a totally reasonable demand. Even just counting commute time of 1 hour a day, that's already 250 hours of additional family time that's been returned to you—more than enough to make up for a single week of "working" non-stop.
You assume isolated hours are equivalent to long stretches of time. If I told my wife she wouldn't see me for an hour a day, she wouldn't bat an eye. But if I told her I had to leave her for a week, she'd miss the hell out of me. An hour isn't long enough to miss anyone.
Furthermore, you have less choice over your co-workers than you think. One interview is not enough time to know whether you can be friends with someone. Especially at a huge corporation, where hundreds of people may work, and constantly move departments. And unless you're the hiring manager, you have no control who will be hired after you.
> If I told my wife she wouldn't see me for an hour a day, she wouldn't bat an eye. But if I told her I had to leave her for a week, she'd miss the hell out of me.
I suppose as an unmarried young man I don't really understand that. It does seem like not being able to be apart for a week is a bit of a dependency issue.
Funnily enough, I'm also a hiring manager at a small startup—so I guess I do have more control over my coworkers than most people.
It's not that we can't be apart for a week. If I had to leave for my job, she would understand. But it would be difficult. When you live with someone, and see them every day, you notice their absence more.
Did you go to college? Or did you ever go away to camp? Didn't your parents miss you the first week you were away? Maybe you can relate to that better.
Also, If you're a hiring manager, you shouldn't be hiring people you'd like to work with. You should be hiring the best person for the job. Do you ever think you're passing on great talent because they aren't the sort of person you'd have a beer with?
> Did you go to college? Or did you ever go away to camp? Didn't your parents miss you the first week you were away? Maybe you can relate to that better.
Probably, but it was never a significant enough thing that it ever factored into our decisions. Then again, I'm someone who chose to attend boarding school and university halfway across the world.
> Also, If you're a hiring manager, you shouldn't be hiring people you'd like to work with. You should be hiring the best person for the job
Considering that I like to work with intelligent, kind, and motivated people I consider those mostly synonymous.
> Do you ever think you're passing on great talent because they aren't the sort of person you'd have a beer with?
Nope. Whether I'd have a beer with them isn't my test. Plenty of my favorite colleagues definitely aren't my drinking buddies. Rather, I ask myself if I'd like working with them on a daily basis and whether their presence would positively contribute to the office environment. If I suspect they'd be a negative influence, I don't see any reason to hire them—even i they're a brilliant coder.
Fortunately, that's rarely a choice. Most of the great developers I know are also fundamentally kind and humble people.
I think we can all agree that hiring intelligent, kind people, and motivated people is the right thing to do. I'm asking a different question. Would you pass on a great developer because they don't have anything in common with you? Would you pass on someone because they had an annoying quirk that bothered you? Would you pass on someone because they seemed boring, despite being a great developer? Being a good hiring manager, you probably don't. But it also makes for the kind of team that you wouldn't want to hang out with after work.
You say that plenty of your favorite colleagues definitely are not your drinking buddies. Can I presume that you also wouldn't want to go on long trips with them?
> You don't chose your co-workers. And now you're forcing me to take my vacation with these people, who I put up with every day at work.
It's not a vacation. Think of it as a company-specific conference. Yes, you can ask people to leave their family behind for a week (or pay for them to join you) if you tell them when offering the job.
Let's say you have a favorite person that you really enjoy being with all the time, at most you'll probably manage to get 50 hrs a week in with them. Way less if you do any of the following (and more) alone: exercise, study, side projects, home renovations, reading, movies, etc..
Most people spend at least 30 hours a week with their coworkers. 3/5 ratio is insane for people you hate! How do you think that shapes your attitude, personality, etc.. and how does that impact your happiness?
My company is absolutely not like a family, it is very much so work. But, if I hated everyone, or even most of them, it wouldn't work out!
Company vacations (or whatever you want to call them) are silly (IMO) if you're already seeing those people 30+ hours a week. I don't think it is very silly if you're seeing them < 8 hrs a week.
You're not picking up on my hyperbole. I don't actively hate everyone around me. I'm saying there's no guarantee the people I work with are gonna be the same people I'd hag out with outside of work. I feel I have to say this, because I notice so many articles and comments on HN consisting of founders calling their start-up a family and stressing culture fit. This is a bad idea for a host of reasons.
In most workplaces, you aren't obligated to like your coworkers. Just to tolerate them, and work as a team. Making me go away with them for a week doesn't sound like a "vacation." It sounds like a ton of work. It seems you agree with me on that point, but reckon it's ok for remote workers. That's where we disagree. I don't take jobs that require me to travel, and that wouldn't change for remote work.
I should point out that even if you tolerate most of your coworkers, there's probably one you really hate. Maybe they have an annoying laugh, microwave fish in the break room, and constantly make bad jokes. Imagine taking a vacation with that person!
But hey, part of life is learning to work with people who are different than you. I hope we don't lose that as people shift into remote working situations.
Yes, I think that's a reasonable time to start thinking about working remotely, depending on what sort of career path you're looking for. I think it's difficult to do management for the first time in a remote environment, although it isn't impossible.
If you want to freelance, remote work is ideal. And, if you can freelance for a 100% distributed company, you almost fit right into the culture.
Absolutely not. You gain vital experience working in a real office with real more experienced people. Don't forgot about that benefit when you're just starting out.
I've been working in Montréal for 2 years, walking 10 minutes to the office. It's only a hard commute when it's freezing/snowing.
Now that I'm back in a big city and I have to take the subway for 45 minutes twice a day, I'm not depressed.
Sure, I miss enjoying the sun once in a while, but at least now I have time to read.
It's going to be tough getting a remote job as a new grad. Not impossible, but tough. If I could give any advice it would be to get a decent location-dictated job first.
I worked for a little less than one year at my first job before jumping ship and finding my first (and current) remote job. PM me if you have any questions.
From firsthand experience, I would strongly suggest not working remotely as a new grad. I had a lot of experience before and during college, and then just happened to fall into a remote job with a company that is completely remote when I graduated this past spring. I was intrigued by the idea of having no commute and working from home/wherever, but I'm finding that I don't absorb as much information being remote as I have in my previous jobs. Work-related communication is great because my company works hard at that, but it's all the other stuff that I don't get when I'm not sitting near other developers - stuff like best practices, new technologies worth trying, active brainstorming, and development tools. Earlier this week my coworker mentioned a browser add-on he'd been using for 6 months that is incredibly useful to our job and I had never heard of it; I think if we were working in the same location then that tool would have been mentioned a lot sooner and everyone on the team would have been using it 6 months ago.
The ultimate goal as a fresh grad is to learn and absorb as much information as possible, as quickly as possible, and I think that working remotely hinders that.
Also as others have suggested, it's important to find a mentor(s) when you're a new grad, and that's harder to do as a remote worker.
I'm not one of these "I hate daylight savings time" people. But I will say it is a massive pain in the arse that DST starts and stops at different times in different places.
So instead of you being for example 8 hours difference you might be 9, or 7, and so on. It is really super annoying and avoidable with a little cooperation.
Great Pros/Cons on remote working. I've definitely felt cabin fever. I find a balance by going to a co-working spot once or twice a week.
Timezones can also be hard. We've struggled with getting our team together for daily standup meetings in the AM, which led us to build our own tool (http://heyflock.com).
I lead a 100% distributed team for a subsidiary of NYSE:KAR [US-based] and have worked remotely for 5 years. I think this post is very accurate - although we don't have a fancy video-conferencing system, good communication and skype are paramount to remote success (along with VOIP phones, wikis, github enterprise, email and rest of the usual suspects).
Additionally, it takes the right personality -- a self-starter who can work a dedicated day with minimal oversight. That means: not playing xbox in the middle of the day or running around taking your kids to soccer practice (though, a little of that is understood, just not blowing off 5 hours a day).
For me personally, no commute (did the bay area thing for years) and raising my kids where I want to is ultra important. Hope that more companies will realize the benefits of remote engineers. I agree with a comment made here re: lamenting the lack of skilled engineers, but not hiring remote. Rings hollow to me too.
Good writeup, I experienced all of this working from home for about 4 years. I was living on the US west coast working for a company on the east coast, so I worked a pretty early schedule, but there's really nothing like being done with your day at 1:30-2:30pm.
A few months back I got a new job where I work in the office, and the commute is hands-down the worst part. Second worst is the loss of privacy - I mean just think how much nicer it is to use your own bathroom than a public one. All in all, however, I think remote and in the office is a mixed bag, I don't think one is clearly better than the other. There is something to be said for being in a physical place with smart people, interacting in meatspace, having lunch together, etc.
One thing rarely noted when discussing this issue: when you work in the office, your employer pays for the office space. When you work from home, you pay for it. You will probably want a bigger or more nicely-appointed place since you're going to be there basically all the time. You will pay for that. Another thing, if you're at a place where very few people are remote, you will be seen as having "lucked out" or having it easier than others. That perception can bite you.
I worked remotely for around two years, and the most helpful tool was https://www.sqwiggle.com/ . You colleagues feel just a little closer that way. It even makes it easy to listen in to a conversation that happens in an office with multiple people.
That said, quite a few people found it creepy, and we allowed anyone to opt out.
I think the takeaway from this is that remote is harder than folks make it sound. Not just anybody can do it. Running a company that is fully remote is even more difficult especially when you're trying to establish things like a coherent company culture. Big remote-work fan but it should be clear to everyone that Colocating everyone to a physical space definitely has its benefits, especially when you're starting out.
How is this handled at the administrative/legal level?
Does the company (US based, in this case) have to create subsidiaries in all the countries where the employees are? Or do they have to register themselves as freelancers and have a contractor contract?
I know, I know we're not lawyers here. But anyone has some pointers?
I have my own LLC where I'm employed and just send an invoice every month. I found its the easiest way to handle taxes, health insurance and business expenses.
67 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 119 ms ] threadYou said you are the only guy outside US. Have you tries looking for something "nearby"?
This subject is near and dear to me, as I live in a rural area and I'd like to find another full-time remote position. I'm frustrated by the opposition to remote devs from so many tech companies, who ought to be the last ones to resist this obvious solution. Many of the reasons ring hollow when the same companies lament the lack of qualified candidates to fill their positions -- they're essentially saying that they'd rather do without than deal with the potential downsides of remote workers.
The business is already global, soon or later they'll have to accept this.
So I understand why some companies are reluctant to bring on remote members. It requires your entire company culture to change if you want a remote team member and not just someone used as basically contract labor. For a team used to making decisions and having conversations in person, it's a big change to have to move everything online to include the remote person/s. It can breed resentment on both sides. In my negative experience I would find out decisions had been made days ago while the on-site team was out to lunch together, and no one had informed those of us working remotely.
Change is not easy. Companies that started with a remote workflow or commit fully to embracing a remote workflow can make teams located anywhere work. Adding on remote team members without a culture change to support it is a recipe for disaster.
I believe I've seen some companies requiring quarterly travel, and this places a burden on devs with families, pets, etc.
Even then, would those who opt-out be treated differently? ("Well Jon has no problem traveling to the office, why do you?")
Was the rest of the team local to each other? That can be difficult because the team may be accustom to conducting all communication verbally, where you need it to be electronic. I was a new-comer to the team when I became the remote lead, and one of the things I did was focus on getting folks to communicate electronically. Luckily for me, they were in individual offices spread around the building and two were in other buildings, so they were already using IM, chat, and email. I just needed to reinforce it.
Also from the beginning, I've focused on team cohesion and team communication. The team was in a bad state when I joined, so again lucky for me, it was something I knew needed extra attention. As a team lead, it's an important factor that you need to pay attention to, but perhaps don't have to spend a lot of time on when everyone is local. As a remote team lead, you need to spend a non-trivial amount of time on it.
And face time is still important. I travel twice a month for a day or two and try to meet with everyone during that time. I also conduct a daily standup where the rest of the team is in the room and I'm on the phone. It can be difficult to follow the conversations in the room from the phone, but really the goal is to make sure the team is talking to each other, and isn't about my control of the conversation or of the team.
Where in FL are you?
My team was entirely new. It was built around a core of two people: myself and a systems admin. We directed the bulk of the technical decisions.
Looking back, the problem was a cult of personality driven by both of us. We were the go-to guys for everything. The rest of the team didn't get, or expect much say in the overarching design. I tried to ease myself out of the cult leader into more of a director when I moved.
That easing didn't work. People just kinda drifted off. Things got done, but details were over looked.
We had stand ups everyday, but most people wouldn't give granular enough responses to figure out the burn down, etc. As a tech lead I didn't have much pull on trying to get them to be more scrum-y.
The ethos of the team seems to be more like the Mangalores from 5th Element. Without a tangible head, fiefdoms arose.
The last time people got together for a project kickoff a few years back they just sat around a conference table all on webex. I stayed home.
Unfortunately new management is taking away the remote option for new hires for the most part. Also some people based on where they live had to go back into the office.
For myself, I never felt a difference in work, other than I didn't have to have headphones on all the time to try and get any work done in a cube and no tie. I did find that it can lead you to feel 'alone' during the day when wife is at work and kids at school I guess. Though after getting a dog who wants to play and go out it's not as bad :-).
When I move on from this job, it will be VERY hard to not work at least some days remotely. There aren't a lot of jobs around here that offer that. That is a downside of doing this so long, it just becomes how you work and how your day is supposed to be. I've tuned my life around it.
In an effort to attract and keep more talent the company for which I work allows working remotely more and more. Without that option the turn over rate for engineers would have doubled in the last year.
The specific reasons they no longer want to go remote has not been shared with us other than the usual 'we want more teamwork'.
It's a shame. I tried to apply to other internal jobs, but they won't allow me to work remotely because of the new policy. So now they've severely limited their candidate pool and may have to look outside the bank and incur the costs that brings.
With the state of public transport in London, it can't be long before they start looking at how much money they lose on a prticularly bad day of thier employees being stuch on a train somewhere!
Also jealousy issues... Realize that most people can't stand those things and it tends to turn into a test of personality, who will kiss up no matter how awful the experience, or who has the guts to admit the emperor has no clothes... In my wife's work at home experience there was some jealousy that she got to avoid teambuilding by default, while the office people were punished by having to attend. How come I have to go to the Christmas party on my day off and (VLM's wife) doesn't have to?
Oh and another jealousy issue... in this day and age not so many people smoke, but the smokers did not like that my wife could theoretically smoke at her desk but they can not (thankfully she doesn't smoke)
And discipline issues... "(VLM's wife) gets to pick up a sick kid at school without being formally written up for leaving work early because nobody notices, so why am I being written up?" and so forth. A lot of workplace BS exists so bosses can manufacture the reason to fire folks they can't just fire for no cause, and its going to collide with the obvious work at home differences.
At medium size corporations you can also run into Dilbertian requirement problems. Small corporations ignore "corporatism" and big corporations already have remote training, but it can be a mystery how to check the checkbox for annual diversity training, or annual PCI/DSS compliance training, or however else HR tortures the employees. She usually combined this kind of stuff with the rare facility visit, so we'll all go to diversity class as a team in the morning and then hang out and talk about work (aka goof off) in the afternoon.
THIS.
I hated it...
but i do like that more and more companies allow working remotely. I'm from a smallish city in Germany with not many jobs available. Having the opportunity to find interesting work in the US without moving there is awesome. Last month alone, I collected 700 job listings from various job boards for my remote work newsletter. (http://remoteworknewsletter.com)
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-Webcam-Widescreen-Calling-Rec...
I've been working for the last 4 years with a 150 person software company that has no office whatsoever. Everybody is remote. As such, we get to remove the biggest land mine, which is being the "remote guy" on an otherwise onsite team, missing out on communication and finding yourself sidelined. Instead, everybody is forced through all the bullet points on the author's "communication" section, and the playing field is leveled.
It also kills off the "Sub Standard Treatment" and "Stopping Work" issues, since everybody is going through the same thing. I'm also 6+ hours ahead of most of my team, and there are only a handful of times a year when somebody forgets that and pings me at 10pm. And in those cases, since my work machine is out above the garage, I only find out about it the next morning.
The upsides the author touches on are just plain amazing. I'll often "commute" to work via an hour or so of mountain biking and bouldering. In the winter, I'll often simply up sticks and take the family to go live on a beach in the Caribbean because hey, they have internet there and it's actually a better time zone for the team. (That's where I am now, and will be through March).
In short, remote is the way forward. And Software is just ridiculously compatible with it. I'm amazed that there are any product companies left that force their employees to drive an hour each way to sit in a felt cube.
It's the future. If you're not remote, find a way to fix that.
Would you suggest this even for new grads looking for a first job?
I just know that commuting every day is going to be incredibly depressing but I haven't seen much in the way of remote opportunities for fresh grads.
Nope.
I've been a full-time remote worker for 6.5 years, and 1/2 time (2 days a week) for 4 years before that. During that time I've managed and hired remote workers.
The reality is remote work is not for everyone, and I think that is even more so for new grads. There is a lot of mentoring that happens early in someone's career, and that is difficult to pick up in a remote environment. I think over time the need for having that on-site mentoring decreases, but it's critical in the first 12 to 24 months.
People generally need some level of human contact, in person, to grow and form strong bonds with each other.
I think remote works great, but it only works if you get to see some people you work with sometimes.
The money the company saves can be put into a fund to bring the team together a few times a year for team building/vacation.
The details (optional? mandatory? where? who?) are per company, but I think companies should start thinking differently.
Remote all the time, in person when needed. Not in person all the time, and remote during extremes (car breaks, weather, etc.)
The people I work with are not my friends. I despise most of them. This is true for every place I've worked. It's probably true for most people here. You don't chose your co-workers. And now you're forcing me to take my vacation with these people, who I put up with every day at work.
You may be puzzled reading this. "But my company is like a family." Some companies are really like this; everyone's your friend. But if every company was like this, we wouldn't have shows like "The Office."
It's also hard to expect everyone to go on a vacation. What if your kid has to go to school? What if your spouse has a job, and has to stay home. Can you ask people to leave their family behind for a week so they can bond with their co-workers?
Then you might say "fine, just make the vacation optional." You won't be fired for not going, but when it's time for performance reviews, who's gonna have "not a team player" on their report? The one person who didn't attend.
But you make a point. We're people. We need contact. My solution? Work at a co-working space a few times a week. Work out of a library or cafe every so often. And get everyone on your team to use video conferencing.
And if your team lives in a close vicinity, it's totally reasonable to schedule some day trips.
Doesn't sound like the problem is with your colleagues.
This is where you're going wrong. Personally, who I will be working with is one of the biggest factors in deciding where to work. A great team can make a tough job fun and a terrible team can make a great job unbearable.
> Can you ask people to leave their family behind for a week so they can bond with their co-workers?
Honestly, I think if you're a 100% remote company that's a totally reasonable demand. Even just counting commute time of 1 hour a day, that's already 250 hours of additional family time that's been returned to you—more than enough to make up for a single week of "working" non-stop.
Furthermore, you have less choice over your co-workers than you think. One interview is not enough time to know whether you can be friends with someone. Especially at a huge corporation, where hundreds of people may work, and constantly move departments. And unless you're the hiring manager, you have no control who will be hired after you.
I suppose as an unmarried young man I don't really understand that. It does seem like not being able to be apart for a week is a bit of a dependency issue.
Funnily enough, I'm also a hiring manager at a small startup—so I guess I do have more control over my coworkers than most people.
Did you go to college? Or did you ever go away to camp? Didn't your parents miss you the first week you were away? Maybe you can relate to that better.
Also, If you're a hiring manager, you shouldn't be hiring people you'd like to work with. You should be hiring the best person for the job. Do you ever think you're passing on great talent because they aren't the sort of person you'd have a beer with?
Probably, but it was never a significant enough thing that it ever factored into our decisions. Then again, I'm someone who chose to attend boarding school and university halfway across the world.
> Also, If you're a hiring manager, you shouldn't be hiring people you'd like to work with. You should be hiring the best person for the job
Considering that I like to work with intelligent, kind, and motivated people I consider those mostly synonymous.
> Do you ever think you're passing on great talent because they aren't the sort of person you'd have a beer with?
Nope. Whether I'd have a beer with them isn't my test. Plenty of my favorite colleagues definitely aren't my drinking buddies. Rather, I ask myself if I'd like working with them on a daily basis and whether their presence would positively contribute to the office environment. If I suspect they'd be a negative influence, I don't see any reason to hire them—even i they're a brilliant coder.
Fortunately, that's rarely a choice. Most of the great developers I know are also fundamentally kind and humble people.
You say that plenty of your favorite colleagues definitely are not your drinking buddies. Can I presume that you also wouldn't want to go on long trips with them?
It's not a vacation. Think of it as a company-specific conference. Yes, you can ask people to leave their family behind for a week (or pay for them to join you) if you tell them when offering the job.
Let's say you have a favorite person that you really enjoy being with all the time, at most you'll probably manage to get 50 hrs a week in with them. Way less if you do any of the following (and more) alone: exercise, study, side projects, home renovations, reading, movies, etc..
Most people spend at least 30 hours a week with their coworkers. 3/5 ratio is insane for people you hate! How do you think that shapes your attitude, personality, etc.. and how does that impact your happiness?
My company is absolutely not like a family, it is very much so work. But, if I hated everyone, or even most of them, it wouldn't work out!
Company vacations (or whatever you want to call them) are silly (IMO) if you're already seeing those people 30+ hours a week. I don't think it is very silly if you're seeing them < 8 hrs a week.
In most workplaces, you aren't obligated to like your coworkers. Just to tolerate them, and work as a team. Making me go away with them for a week doesn't sound like a "vacation." It sounds like a ton of work. It seems you agree with me on that point, but reckon it's ok for remote workers. That's where we disagree. I don't take jobs that require me to travel, and that wouldn't change for remote work.
I should point out that even if you tolerate most of your coworkers, there's probably one you really hate. Maybe they have an annoying laugh, microwave fish in the break room, and constantly make bad jokes. Imagine taking a vacation with that person!
But hey, part of life is learning to work with people who are different than you. I hope we don't lose that as people shift into remote working situations.
If you want to freelance, remote work is ideal. And, if you can freelance for a 100% distributed company, you almost fit right into the culture.
I've been working in Montréal for 2 years, walking 10 minutes to the office. It's only a hard commute when it's freezing/snowing. Now that I'm back in a big city and I have to take the subway for 45 minutes twice a day, I'm not depressed. Sure, I miss enjoying the sun once in a while, but at least now I have time to read.
I worked for a little less than one year at my first job before jumping ship and finding my first (and current) remote job. PM me if you have any questions.
and how difficult it was to get current job?
The ultimate goal as a fresh grad is to learn and absorb as much information as possible, as quickly as possible, and I think that working remotely hinders that.
Also as others have suggested, it's important to find a mentor(s) when you're a new grad, and that's harder to do as a remote worker.
Also, are there other companies that operate 100% remotely? I'd be interested in putting a list together.
So instead of you being for example 8 hours difference you might be 9, or 7, and so on. It is really super annoying and avoidable with a little cooperation.
Timezones can also be hard. We've struggled with getting our team together for daily standup meetings in the AM, which led us to build our own tool (http://heyflock.com).
I want to work remote too, but I'm from Germany and don't know anything about the financial implications.
Additionally, it takes the right personality -- a self-starter who can work a dedicated day with minimal oversight. That means: not playing xbox in the middle of the day or running around taking your kids to soccer practice (though, a little of that is understood, just not blowing off 5 hours a day).
For me personally, no commute (did the bay area thing for years) and raising my kids where I want to is ultra important. Hope that more companies will realize the benefits of remote engineers. I agree with a comment made here re: lamenting the lack of skilled engineers, but not hiring remote. Rings hollow to me too.
(oh, and I'm hiring!)
A few months back I got a new job where I work in the office, and the commute is hands-down the worst part. Second worst is the loss of privacy - I mean just think how much nicer it is to use your own bathroom than a public one. All in all, however, I think remote and in the office is a mixed bag, I don't think one is clearly better than the other. There is something to be said for being in a physical place with smart people, interacting in meatspace, having lunch together, etc.
One thing rarely noted when discussing this issue: when you work in the office, your employer pays for the office space. When you work from home, you pay for it. You will probably want a bigger or more nicely-appointed place since you're going to be there basically all the time. You will pay for that. Another thing, if you're at a place where very few people are remote, you will be seen as having "lucked out" or having it easier than others. That perception can bite you.
That said, quite a few people found it creepy, and we allowed anyone to opt out.
How is this handled at the administrative/legal level?
Does the company (US based, in this case) have to create subsidiaries in all the countries where the employees are? Or do they have to register themselves as freelancers and have a contractor contract?
I know, I know we're not lawyers here. But anyone has some pointers?