• Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Commutes are part of the work day if the employer does not allow WFH. How else is the employee supposed to show up for work?

    There is no reason to debate, it’s clear as day. But the greedy, rich assholes on the reins think everyone should be honored to waste their lives working under them.

    • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Commutes are part of the work day if the employer does not allow WFH. How else is the employee supposed to show up for work?

      This.

      Our country went mostly work-from-home for over a year, and people were more productive, not less. If you’re going to inconvenience your work force unnecessarily then you should pay for it, absolutely.

    • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It gets messy though. If I work 9-5 and the commute is part of the workday, meaning I would leave my house at 9am, I could move 4 hours from work. Drive to work, have some lunch, drive home. A full day’s work. When it’s time for promotions and lay offs, who do they promote and keep? Probably the people who live closest to the office, since they are the ones actually doing work that helps the company. That means we’ll just stop hiring people who live far away, even in the person is willing to make the commute.

      • nxdefiant@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sounds like commuting is an incredibly stupid and inefficient waste of time. Maybe this hypothetical company would get better performance from their employees if they didn’t have a commute. Maybe letting them work from home?

        • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I rented for a long time so I could always easily move close to wherever I was working. I don’t like long commutes, so I always kept it under 5 or 10 minutes. I know others that did something similar, but with homes.

          People can choose how long of a commute they are willing to put up with. It’s up to the company to put their office in a place where people actually want to live. They can’t expect to have people wanting to show up to an office in an area that no one likes… this is the issue my company has, because they are always looking for a deal.

      • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That means we’ll just stop hiring people who live far away, even in the person is willing to make the commute.

        No change from the status quo. As it stands, employees move next to their workplace because nobody is ok with a 4-hour commute. It’s impossible even if you give up on social life.

        • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I exaggerated to 4 hours to make a point. I’ve known many people who drove 2 hours per day. I also knew someone who drove 6 hours on Sunday night to work Monday morning, stayed locally during the week, then drove 6 hours home Friday night to spend 2 days at home.

          Some people put up with long commutes to live where they want to live.

            • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Pretty much. He was trying to avoid relocating. He did that for about 12-18 months, before the company lost steam in their whole “everyone needs to be in an office” bs.