Dearest readers, looks like employers out there are not getting the five day return to office back fast enough or easy enough for their liking. Who knew? Except every intellectually honest adult who has suffered office culture long enough. That said, I decided it was finally time to talk to a family friend who has worked remotely within Canada for decades, with his first work from home job back in his late teen years. He is in his 40's, so needless to say he was remote working before it was mainstream- way before. In his own words, DSL high speed Internet was around for a short time only, 56K modems were still around, and Windows Mobile and Palm PDA's were in people's pockets alongside cell phones before smartphones were a thing (and on and on and on, haha). Anywho, we went into this deep caffeine fueled conversation about the evolution of remote work in North America and his tips and tricks as well as his overall paradigm on how it is done right, negotiated right etc.
Without further ado, let me share what I believe is the best of what he shared with me that you may find useful- either as a reinforcement of your beliefs on the topic or something new that you can apply to your hybrid or remote work situation.
The first thing he said is that employers like to confuse employees by conflating remote work with telecommuting. True remote work means you never go into the office. Telecommuting, or what is now called hybrid work, means that you have to come into the office now and then on a scheduled basis. Employers like to make employees believe that that they are being equally generous when they give them the option to telecommute and work remotely, but he says that simply is not true. Telecommuting forces you to stay in an area relatively close to the physical place of work, whereas remote work does not. The cost of doing work (his version of the cost of doing business) varies significantly between the two and employers should not be surprised when employees do not wish to value both equally.
The second thing he said is that remote workers need to negotiate employment offers and/or contracts much more carefully than in-office employees. This point was, in my estimate, pure gold! He said that companies are still stuck in the past and/or lack experience when drafting remote work contracts and so it is up to them to get better at it, but also up to remote workers to realize this is the case and to be armed with sufficient knowledge and to put themselves in a position where they can negotiate their employment terms. Case in point, location-based compensation. In a normal situation, a large nation-wide company may have different pay ranges for different states/provinces and cities, based on local costs of living. So, we have already had many examples of companies such as FAANG decreasing remote workers' salaries if they move to cheaper areas but stay in the same country. This, my friend says, is never to be allowed by the employees. He says that companies must open their eyes to the dire situation when it comes to employment, compensation, and the cost property ownership and rent. For many people who want to, for example, one day own any sort of home in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area, their only hope to do so- despite having done everything right in life in their 20's and/or 30's- is to leave the cities and towns they know, their families and friends, and spend years making a Toronto salary in a remote small town, away from everyone they care about, so that they can save up enough to return to where they want to live and be able to afford a property. I did remark that not everyone plans to do that and many people may be saying that is their plan just to get a big city salary in a small town. His response was that it does not matter as long as the employee lived in, for example, the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area at the time of signing the offer of employment. Also, there might be laws against changing people's compensation like that. Fair point. After all, we need people to be able to buy houses and to use every legal hack, lever and advantage they can get their hands on because shit is hitting the fan and a nation of renters, while clearly a fever dream of a certain Forum, is not a winning formula because it never was and never will be. A nation with renters- sure. A nation of renters- no thank you.
The third thing he said was to pay close attention to negotiating employment offers or temporary contracts. Most remote workers, he said, develop a high level of self-management, professionalism and an entrepreneurial attitude because they do not have to conform to office culture. As such, they quickly realize that job descriptions and time management methods that in-office workers take for granted are often outdated, predatory or just plain bad. He has never accepted key loggers, any tracking through webcams or any other form of activity tracking that has become popular during COVID. He never accepts an offer of employment that has an open-ended job description with lines such as "other duties as assigned". While he recognizes there might be random things that pop up here and there, putting that in an offer of employment means you agree with an almost unlimited amount of these random bits of work that do nothing to further your core work, skills and expertise; someone else can say yes to those. In addition, he says that he often negotiates a slightly lower salary in return for an employer's commitment to maximum work hours per week at 40-42; he ensures that the employer knows he will not be working any more hours at the same pay even if there are metaphorical fires to put out. I was a little surprised at this because so many people, employees and bosses alike, enjoy talking about being a team member, a family, everyone pitching in as long as it takes to get some sort of a job done and so on. My friend remarked that yes, this is indeed the case until you are able to live below your means long enough to build up a safety net that you can let opportunities go if the employer is unwilling to see the error of their ways and work with you on much more reasonable, moral terms of employment. Touche!
The fourth thing he said is that, with remote work, full-time employment at 40 hours per week means something different. In the world of professional, highly skilled remote work, 40 hours means up to 40 hours (haha!). He called articles about people getting 2-3 full-time jobs working remotely but doing them right yet still the article calls them scammers are plain wrong, toxic and they push misinformation. He said that he routinely picks up part-time temporary contracts alongside his full-time remote job, and nothing gets affected negatively. He says ok, so let us say that a certain position can be done by me better in less time than someone else. Should I be penalized for it? Should the company hire someone who needs more than 40 hours to do a worse job than me? This is why overtime is often so necessary in many companies out there- people not negotiating their employment terms well AND people not being good at their jobs so as to finish them within 40 hours per week or less. Or, should there be a bidding system where I say I can do it in 30 hours per week and demand the same salary and then they get the sticker shock because they are effectively giving me a higher hourly pay rate? Bottom line, people who can do it faster often do it better too because speed and expertise go hand in hand; discouraging this or tracking this for the wrong reasons and thinking that will do your company more good than harm, according to him, is ridiculous and short sighted. In fact, someone who can do the same job a bit better and in 30 hours versus 40 hours per week should be paid more, right? Well, companies are not willing to do that. So, the remote worker must have the freedom to pick up extra work to get proper compensation, as long as the quality of their work does not (noticeably) suffer and that is that. I have to say I once again agreed with him after hearing the full explanation.
We talked about more things related to remote work, but I think I will end it at these four. Bottom line, I had a revelation after the conversation. For each major point he said and then explained, I initially had a negative reaction and was caught off guard, and then got totally converted by the end of his explanation. Am I gullible, or have we been indoctrinated for decades based on the fact that in many sectors in North America, we have predominantly had an employers' job market, not the job seekers' employment market? Are companies afraid of the tables being turned on them once their employees are no longer on their own turf, but rather fully equipped, professional, strong and proud in their own home offices? Does this kind of decentralization mean we will spread the power around a little more as well, instead of having the power a little too concentrated? I know I am not an office employee these days, but I do not live in a bubble and know that my life and everyone else's will always be affected by matters and issues like this one. The rest I leave to you.
Have a great week, Mwah!
Without further ado, let me share what I believe is the best of what he shared with me that you may find useful- either as a reinforcement of your beliefs on the topic or something new that you can apply to your hybrid or remote work situation.
The first thing he said is that employers like to confuse employees by conflating remote work with telecommuting. True remote work means you never go into the office. Telecommuting, or what is now called hybrid work, means that you have to come into the office now and then on a scheduled basis. Employers like to make employees believe that that they are being equally generous when they give them the option to telecommute and work remotely, but he says that simply is not true. Telecommuting forces you to stay in an area relatively close to the physical place of work, whereas remote work does not. The cost of doing work (his version of the cost of doing business) varies significantly between the two and employers should not be surprised when employees do not wish to value both equally.
The second thing he said is that remote workers need to negotiate employment offers and/or contracts much more carefully than in-office employees. This point was, in my estimate, pure gold! He said that companies are still stuck in the past and/or lack experience when drafting remote work contracts and so it is up to them to get better at it, but also up to remote workers to realize this is the case and to be armed with sufficient knowledge and to put themselves in a position where they can negotiate their employment terms. Case in point, location-based compensation. In a normal situation, a large nation-wide company may have different pay ranges for different states/provinces and cities, based on local costs of living. So, we have already had many examples of companies such as FAANG decreasing remote workers' salaries if they move to cheaper areas but stay in the same country. This, my friend says, is never to be allowed by the employees. He says that companies must open their eyes to the dire situation when it comes to employment, compensation, and the cost property ownership and rent. For many people who want to, for example, one day own any sort of home in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area, their only hope to do so- despite having done everything right in life in their 20's and/or 30's- is to leave the cities and towns they know, their families and friends, and spend years making a Toronto salary in a remote small town, away from everyone they care about, so that they can save up enough to return to where they want to live and be able to afford a property. I did remark that not everyone plans to do that and many people may be saying that is their plan just to get a big city salary in a small town. His response was that it does not matter as long as the employee lived in, for example, the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area at the time of signing the offer of employment. Also, there might be laws against changing people's compensation like that. Fair point. After all, we need people to be able to buy houses and to use every legal hack, lever and advantage they can get their hands on because shit is hitting the fan and a nation of renters, while clearly a fever dream of a certain Forum, is not a winning formula because it never was and never will be. A nation with renters- sure. A nation of renters- no thank you.
The third thing he said was to pay close attention to negotiating employment offers or temporary contracts. Most remote workers, he said, develop a high level of self-management, professionalism and an entrepreneurial attitude because they do not have to conform to office culture. As such, they quickly realize that job descriptions and time management methods that in-office workers take for granted are often outdated, predatory or just plain bad. He has never accepted key loggers, any tracking through webcams or any other form of activity tracking that has become popular during COVID. He never accepts an offer of employment that has an open-ended job description with lines such as "other duties as assigned". While he recognizes there might be random things that pop up here and there, putting that in an offer of employment means you agree with an almost unlimited amount of these random bits of work that do nothing to further your core work, skills and expertise; someone else can say yes to those. In addition, he says that he often negotiates a slightly lower salary in return for an employer's commitment to maximum work hours per week at 40-42; he ensures that the employer knows he will not be working any more hours at the same pay even if there are metaphorical fires to put out. I was a little surprised at this because so many people, employees and bosses alike, enjoy talking about being a team member, a family, everyone pitching in as long as it takes to get some sort of a job done and so on. My friend remarked that yes, this is indeed the case until you are able to live below your means long enough to build up a safety net that you can let opportunities go if the employer is unwilling to see the error of their ways and work with you on much more reasonable, moral terms of employment. Touche!
The fourth thing he said is that, with remote work, full-time employment at 40 hours per week means something different. In the world of professional, highly skilled remote work, 40 hours means up to 40 hours (haha!). He called articles about people getting 2-3 full-time jobs working remotely but doing them right yet still the article calls them scammers are plain wrong, toxic and they push misinformation. He said that he routinely picks up part-time temporary contracts alongside his full-time remote job, and nothing gets affected negatively. He says ok, so let us say that a certain position can be done by me better in less time than someone else. Should I be penalized for it? Should the company hire someone who needs more than 40 hours to do a worse job than me? This is why overtime is often so necessary in many companies out there- people not negotiating their employment terms well AND people not being good at their jobs so as to finish them within 40 hours per week or less. Or, should there be a bidding system where I say I can do it in 30 hours per week and demand the same salary and then they get the sticker shock because they are effectively giving me a higher hourly pay rate? Bottom line, people who can do it faster often do it better too because speed and expertise go hand in hand; discouraging this or tracking this for the wrong reasons and thinking that will do your company more good than harm, according to him, is ridiculous and short sighted. In fact, someone who can do the same job a bit better and in 30 hours versus 40 hours per week should be paid more, right? Well, companies are not willing to do that. So, the remote worker must have the freedom to pick up extra work to get proper compensation, as long as the quality of their work does not (noticeably) suffer and that is that. I have to say I once again agreed with him after hearing the full explanation.
We talked about more things related to remote work, but I think I will end it at these four. Bottom line, I had a revelation after the conversation. For each major point he said and then explained, I initially had a negative reaction and was caught off guard, and then got totally converted by the end of his explanation. Am I gullible, or have we been indoctrinated for decades based on the fact that in many sectors in North America, we have predominantly had an employers' job market, not the job seekers' employment market? Are companies afraid of the tables being turned on them once their employees are no longer on their own turf, but rather fully equipped, professional, strong and proud in their own home offices? Does this kind of decentralization mean we will spread the power around a little more as well, instead of having the power a little too concentrated? I know I am not an office employee these days, but I do not live in a bubble and know that my life and everyone else's will always be affected by matters and issues like this one. The rest I leave to you.
Have a great week, Mwah!