this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
1045 points (97.8% liked)

Work Reform

9976 readers
2 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jumbodumbo@lemmynsfw.com 39 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I doubt the people that care about people working from home are the same that care about emissions

[–] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you implying people who dont want to sit in 2 hours of traffic and would prefer to spend that time with their family are somehow unconcerned about polluting the environment for future generations?

[–] jumbodumbo@lemmynsfw.com 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've said the exact opposite of that. Profit driven business owners aren't concerned about emissions, is what I said.

[–] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You did, I misread. I’ll take my downvotes.

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe it's because I'm on Kbin instead of Lemmy, but I've seen a delightful lack of downvoting people who say something incorrect, then acknowledge it and recant. Definitely a positive difference from the other place.

[–] Snekeyes@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Yet. Here you are.

[–] Blank@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

They love to pretend/say they do though! You know, part of the "culture" after all.

[–] derf82@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I work for a city that constantly preaches sustainability, sends the mayor and council people to climate conferences, and is even buying fleets of electric vehicles for city use.

But we office workers (engineers, attorneys, accountants, HR, etc) have to work in office 5 days a week. Why? Because the city wants to encourage in office work because they decided to raise most of their revenue through local income taxes, which mostly hits commuters from the suburbs.

Of course, most companies don’t care about the example the city sets. If anything, the 2.5% tax is a massive incentive to keep working from home.

[–] GrindingGears@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sounds just like my city (Calgary, Canada). Exact same culture and tax problem too, but here it's mostly oil and gas companies, so they don't give a shit about the environment, they just want to justify their real estate holdings downtown. Which in itself is just a big circlejerk between a bunch of oil drenched executive. Definitely goes against the mayor and council, who declared a climate emergency and there's a bunch of ESG initiatives underway.

I found myself a remote job, and thankfully it's still remote. I make way more than I did downtown too, with none of the overhead (parking, food, years off my life spent commuting).

[–] FUCKRedditMods@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

These companies are paying (now even more) out the ass for leases and property maintenance. It also harms adjacent businesses (like restaurants) placed specifically in complexes with other businesses. I’ve seen it in person, a mom and pop dumpling restaurant was booming pre-pandemic and now only does sustainable levels of revenue on the days that the nextdoor offices require people to come in.

On a micro/personal level I love wfh. If everyone was 80-100% wfh that might solve the insane housing cost crisis we’re in. Buy a home in montana and work for a company in northern virginia for example.

On a macro level I can see the concerns. WFH is the future but these businesses needed a period of time to phase into it. This particular economic climate is NOT conducive to a harmless transition in many cases.

[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Damn I guess I'm not supporting the ma-and-pa places next to my apartment when I eat there literally 7 days a week. Time to go back into the office for this bullshit argument

[–] FUCKRedditMods@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

I’m just talking about what I have seen personally.. the only argument I made is FOR wfh or did you not read that part

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We should already have mixed used spaces instead of the nightmare of "homes over there, fun over there, work over there"

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We did. If you look at aerial photos of American cities, they were built mixed use until the early 1900s. Between 1900 and 1970 you can watch as those mixed use buildings got demolished, and 75% of our city spaces got paved into parking lots. The song was serious. They paved paradise, and put up a parking lot.

The oil and auto companies enslaved the entire country.

[–] dudewitbow@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

Hence the movement of converting business zoning to residential homes is required in the transition. Its one of the best ways to avoid nimbys stopping the construction (as the building already exists) and increase practical housing, and reintroduce people back into its local economy.

[–] vivavideri@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Montana's COL is absolutely buttfucked right now, sadly. Most of the natives are being priced out of their own towns. If you ask them they'll blame rich californians/people buying summer homes up here alongside a sprinkle of bonus hostility. Like, rent here is insane. Like east coast city insane. In my field at least, remote positions are slim to none. Gonna have to be in-office. If you do move out here and snag a good remote job, though, bring a good coat and hit me up, lol

[–] FarFarAway@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago

Looked into moving there close to after everything opened up. Yeah...those prices are astronomical.

[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

New office buildings will be like new malls or new nuclear power plants. No one will want to build them, since businesses know WFH is cheaper. Just right now, they have a lease and they have to keep up the act but as soon as they can, they will cash out. After a generation, population growth will be enough to get the reduced office use back up to full, and then the people of this generation will swoop in with a office downsizing buzzword trend that will make "de-office-ing" the rad new thing once the leases terms are up and the company stands to SAVE money.

[–] ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub 7 points 1 year ago

We won't be seeing population growth, partially why the economy is going to be getting progressively worse over the next few years