this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
1323 points (99.0% liked)

World News

33302 readers
638 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I would rather make 50k WFH than 100k in an office.

[–] Xenxs 27 points 2 years ago (1 children)

For double the salary, I'd need to think long and hard about it tbh.

[–] moriquende 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

For me it would heavily depend on where the office is located relative to my apartment, and how long my commute would turn out to be. More than 15-20 minutes by bike is a no-go (I live in Europe).

Also assuming the requirement to be in the office isn't a huge red flag for bad management in the first place.

[–] Xenxs 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Well obviously the commute should be within a reasonable distance, I wouldn't spend 5 hours a day in a car or train for it. But let's say the total time spend back and forth is about 1,5 - 2 hours total. I feel that's worth the time spend for a hypothetical double salary.

Obligatory presence in the office is indeed a red flag if it doesn't actually provide a benefit to the role. To clarify, I'm 100% WFH in Denmark so I'm not advocating to push people into an office building but there's definitely a point where nearly everyone would go into the office full-time, if salary and benefits are high enough.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

50K isn't worth 10+ hours extra hours per week going solely toward work.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

Lol, my family can't afford to live on $50k a year. So that's a hard no for me.