I know this will vary a lot, so hypothetically let’s say you currently WFH/work remotely at least 3 days a week. Your commute to work takes an hour max (door to door) each way. If you were given the choice of a 4 day week working onsite, or a 5 day week WFH (or as many days as you’d like) for the same pay, which would you choose?
WFH. Unless I also get paid for commute time. Then, still WFH. Fuck traffic. This way, I’m neither dealing with it nor contributing to it.
I can go to the store or get some cleaning done on my lunch break, and I don’t have to spend time driving to do it. Fuck traffic.
Same for me. Time spend getting to work is basically also work time, which is usually not paid.
For a “fun” experiment just calculate how many hours you are on the way to work every year:
daily_travel_minutes * days_on_site / 60
Divide this by 8 to see how many holidays you get by switching to a fully/mostly remote job.
Don’t just count the actual journey time either - you have to factor in any extra time needed to get ready, parking, getting to or from the train and bus station, and any delays or traffic. If google maps tells you your commute takes 30 mins, it’s taking you 45 at least.
Yes, I described that unprecisely. You basically have to calc the difference between a full remote day and an on site day.
4 days in the office = 5 days remote considering getting ready + commute + not being able to do life admin in your breaks + cost of fuel and food…
The 4 day work week should be standard anyway, remote or not.
I’m pretty good on commute time. It was a 5-10 minute drive or a 25-30 minute walk. I’ve stuck there for years because working for any of their competitors are in the area and I’d have to go straight to an hour each way minimum.
I wouldn’t mind going back in part time, if the hybrid office environment itself wasn’t so hostile to actually working, with sterile hot desks and everyone having loud overlapping conversations in their respective virtual meetings.
I simply wouldn’t take a job with a one hour per way commute. Takes me 15-20 minutes max, and one less work day a week sounds sweet.
The commute time is kinda worse than work time, so the 4 days in the office are equal to 5 days WFH timewise. And I would still be missing out on benefits like cheaper lunch at home and wearing comfortable clothes, and not being tired all the time. On the other hand, I would always have 3 day weekends.
I work full time from home. Fridays almost never have any big meetings or important deadlines, so if you need to knock off early and beat the vacation traffic, it’s not a problem. And all the little things you usually reserve for a day off, like doctor’s or dentist’s appointments or a haircut, any of that can happen during the week without missing a beat. You don’t always need a 3 day weekend, but when you want one, you take one.
It’s the same for my partner. I don’t think he’s worked past 3pm on Fridays in the 7 months he’s been there. There’s just nothing going on.
Yeah, count time getting ready and you’re easily wasting 1.5-2 hrs a day going to an office.
When we started wfh, most people picked up overtime and still spent the same amount of time devoted to work with a significant pay increase.
It’s a lot of time and effort everyone was just used to giving up for free. Why go back to it?
Especially since it’s 2023 and we’re still getting new COVID waves.
The time spent getting ready would be a big factor for me.
I work in a job where working from an office doesn’t make sense. So I’ve always wfh. In my current role, I’d never work for any employer that required me to go to an office. It’s counter productive to the job.
In your scenario, if I had a job that made sense, I’d pick wfh because I won’t commute an hour. 15-30 is the tops I’ll commute.
I’ve seen a couple of people say they wouldn’t commute more than 20 mins - I wasn’t expecting that tbh. I’m from London and an hour commute, door to desk, is pretty standard. Even my journey to secondary school took 45mins at the very least!
30 is about as far as I’ll go. Maybe 45. I haven’t communted for work in years. I know people who commute hours and I’d never do it.
Time has value. If I’m spending hours commuting, that’s time lost.
lol
4 days on site, not even close.
WFH, no question.
After doing WFH for several years, I’ll only take a job on site as a last resort or for like double my pay. Then I would cut my time until FIRE roughly in half. I don’t hate doing work. I hate having a huge chunk of my time taken up by having to work 40 hours.
If work weeks were cut to 24 or even 32 hours, I might even reconsider the FIRE path.
What does FIRE stand for?
Basically earn a bunch of money, invest smart, and retire early.
A bunch of people want to act like it’s some secret new method and treat it like a fad diet, but people have been doing it forever.
Thanks! Sounds like calories in - calories out in weight loss.
Yeah, it’s overly simplified to the the point you’re missing out on valuable details.
Like, if just “spend less, save more” was easy, everyone would do it
I think the original FIRE was much more radical- basically the plan is to save up only like 700k or so, move to a low cost of living area, spend less than 20k a year, and try to live off of stock increases and interest.
But honestly that life sounds kinda shitty, so people stopped talking about FIRE what all the other conditions and it just became more “save, invest, retire eventually”
basically the plan is to save up only like 700k
Oh, that’s it?
I’ll knock this out this afternoon and let you know how well it works
Financial Independence, Retire Early
4 days on-site, same pay, same 40 hours per week? No. I don’t work 10hrs a day + 2hrs of driving. So 5 days remote in this case!
4 days on-site, same pay, 32 hours per week? Sure, why not? I’ll use the driving time with audio books or reading during a train commute.
Sorry, that wasn’t very clear. 32 hours a week in the office (plus ~8 hours a week commuting time) or 40 hours a week WFH for the same pay.
I think I’m the long run, if those were the only 2 options (unlikely) employers wins with the 4 day and employees win with the wfm. Why? Short term, employers will say it’s the same pay but eventually after a few reviews, they will claw back the raises citing the reduced work hours.
It’s just common sense if you put yourself in hr shoes reviewing the compensation numbers.
“claw back the raises”??
What? How? At least in my country an employer cannot unilaterally worsen a contract for the employee. You don’t have to agree to less pay and they’ll be bound by the original agreement. Sure an employer could “fire and rehire” you, but you also don’t have to agree to the rehiring.
If they do that you’ll get full unemployment, probably some severance and they are instantly a worker short.
Both. Studies have shown that WFH actually INCREASES productivity, and other studies have shown that a 4 day work week doesn’t decrease productivity at all either. It sounds unlikely but it’s true. So both are a win-win for the worker and company alike.
You wouldn’t have a preference either way?
I’m saying why even figure out a preference when both are good for everyone involved?
Because that’s my question? I’m interested in workers’ preferences, not which option is more productive. Like you say, both are better than 5 days a week on-site. But despite both equating to around the same amount of time in total for the same pay, in practice the two options are pretty different.
Because that’s my question?
You asked a question on the internet and didn’t expect an ’ inclusive or?’
You’re going to get a simple yes every time for top comment lol.
You’ll also get neithers. Then you’ll get trolly problems, then the politics… You know how it goes.
Which would you prefer; A or B?
-
Yes
-
A and B are stupid
-
OP is stupid
-
I hate A and B, and OP, and this website. Go fuck yourself.
Wonderful.
People liked to hate on reddit for it devolving into that. But the opposite extreme was Tildes which was all text based. Fediverse is thriving though which is the closest to reddit. Yes, comments will be like reddit. Pick and choose when people are open for discussion.
Puns and Memes will always be top content for a reason. Most people are looking for a quick 15 minute distraction, not a book club.
I moderate a couple of communities that fit that criteria - you can have a discussion but ultimately they’re just mildly amusing screenshot/photo communities. Initially the comment section was much much more friendly here than Reddit but I’ve definitely noticed a decline recently, say the last 2 weeks. Some of the messages I get when I warn people not to insult others are becoming unhinged. I know it’s bound to happen, lemmy is still the internet. But I had hoped for a place where people didn’t call each other fucking dickheads for having a different opinion.
-
I will never commute again, ever. I’d rather work four days a week in my pajama pants and one day pantsless (Casual Friday) than waste my time schlepping my brain through meatspace.
Oohh I might have to implement that pantsless Casual Friday policy.
I have done it both ways actually and I would take the 5 days WFH because I could still do the same amount of work in both scenarios and get paid the same. And on my “extra” 5th day of WFH I can just pretend to work and do whatever anyway.
Even if I had to actually work more, I’d still do WFH instead of commuting to the office because the commute and office + city experience just suck that much more.
In your scenario? WFH. I like my work and hate traffic.
If I lived five minutes away from the office like I used to? I’d go in, assuming they’d let me be flexible with my time. I like being in the office. My coworkers are great and if I get burned out on what I’m doing I can go play with the hardware in the lab.
In real life? I live 100 miles from the office and work from home. I miss the comradery and being able to just walk down the hall and kick a piece of malfunctioning equipment directly though.
Good point. If your 4 days a week onsite are flexible that might entice more people. I think it’s the rigidity that a lot of people dislike, because life just doesn’t work like that. But I can’t work myself so I can only imagine.
1 day doesn’t make much of a difference for me, so I’ll still take the 5 WFH days. It’s still a much better use of my time when you total all the time saved from commuting and being able to run errands/chores while WFH vs. being in the office for 4 days. 3 days though? Maybe I’ll consider it.
First of all, thanks for the question, I think it’s really interesting and I’m sorry that some people are responding with so much hostility.
If I commute 2 hours a day and work 5 days a week, that works out at 10 hours, which is more than a single day’s work - so for that reason alone I think the question is a little flawed.
However, the company I used to work for was a 5 minute or so commute for me. So if I could have a short commute like that and work 4 days from the office, I’d totally go for it. More time for me! If it was even as much as 20 minute commute (4.5 days work equivelent) then I’d rather work from home.
Thank you! I’m not able to work so I can’t say with certainty which one I’d choose. I think WFH because it just seems more flexible to me - and I don’t like people, or getting up early, or commuting. And it’s better for the environment and cheaper for me. But having a 3 day weekend every weekend sounds great! I wonder if my life would have a clearer home/work balance and if that would make me happier 🤷🏼♀️ I was just interested in what people who do work think, I didn’t expect any hostility from such an inoffensive question!
I’ve got pretty severe ADHD so WFH is a mixed bag, it’s great to have the flexibility but some days I dig myself a hole of not actually doing anything and putting myself under severe pressure to get stuff done in way less time than I would have, and so on. If anyone in the comments has any tips on overcoming this they would be gratefully received :D
