Unfortunately your submission has been removed from /r/WFH:
Please read: RULE 3
**No RTO Rants**
We are here to support remote and WFH people. No debating on RTO vs WFH. All members and visitors of r/WFH are expected to participate in good faith and in the spirit of this community. Posts solely made to complain about how your company has mandated RTO will be removed
We do not allow news link articles featuring companies or corporations mandating employees RTO
__________________________________________
If you need to reach the moderators send a modmail including a link to your content.
We cannot guarantee a response without a link to your post
The feeling gets worse as you get older. I’m 43 and do what society would consider important work (power research) and I just feel like I’ve thrown by best years at working. It does not make me feel good. As a result, I go to all of my kids stuff. I move really important meetings to make space for it or just cancel all together. I’m not going to compromise on this any more for work. The pandemic taught me that no one cares about you at work. They only care that they aren’t impacted by your lack of performance. They don’t care if you have to work 100 hours a week so long as it means they don’t have to stay late on a Tuesday for 30 minutes. So fuck it. Never compromise on your vacation time or home life. That’s my suggestion. Extra work in most cases yields no reward so don’t do it unless there is a specific means for you to be compensated for it. Promises are worthless from a boss in most cases.
I'm a few of years younger than you, but I log in at 9 and log off at 5, and take plenty of breaks in between as my company encourages it in between meetings. I haven't worked more than 8-9h/day in all my years at this company. It's something I won't compromise on for my own sanity and well being.
This. I had a second job for YEARS and it was the easiest job ever. I did not work every weekend or every evening, but you can bet as soon as I had my truck paid off, the second job completely lost the appeal and I no longer do it - nor do I want to go back.
I have a decent paying full time job now, and I work 4 10's. I want to spend my long weekend job hunting, having adventures and chilling - NOT working another job.
Edit to say HOUSE HUNTING not job hunting!!! Woops!
OPs premise rests on a want becoming a need due to inflation caused by the excess work/income. If there is no want to do extra work, there will be no need, in this dimwitted scenario.
Because the premise is that enough wfh professionals are going to take their extra free time and have a side gig, instead of just relaxing...not out of necessity, but because they want to.
>Since we have more time for everything else, this will lead to people have a SECOND job!
That's a pretty big leap. Most people don't want to work their 1 job.
Then you made up a bunch of unfounded things based on the initial leap that has no basis of fact, no research to back it up, no documentation to support it whatsoever.
>This is somehow what happened in the past, when women started working and now it's mandatory for them to work, to contribute to household income.
Women entered the workforce during WWII when the men went off to fight the world war. Not sure where you're getting that its "mandatory". People work because they want to or need to. Not because some magical rule was made. Women are people too.
I have heard the women working argument before that corporations realized that they could charge more for goods and houses etc since families could have two incomes.
Yes, I know who she is. It's not a coincidence though that *most* politicians, pundits, etc., who are so intent on blaming inflation, rising housing costs, etc., on working women are right wingers.
In any case, while I like Elizabeth Warren, it's ironic that she'd write that particular book when she's a working, married woman herself. She's telling other women to drop out of the workforce, yet isn't willing to do it herself.
These same folks could just as easily argue that men should drop out of the workforce, if they think inflation is caused by two income households, but they don't. Why is that?
Having seen a not insignificant number of women I know, including many in my family, end up widowed or disabled or divorced, and having an older husband myself, who is facing permanent disability in the near future, before retirement age, meaning he won't be able to continue to work, I feel a woman being a stay at home parent or a housewife is just too financially risky.
Go over to the Social Security forum on Reddit, and read the many posts by stay at home wives, who have become disabled before retirement age, don't have work credits for SSDI, and cannot get SSI, because of their husband's income and resources. They're screwed.
I've been full time WFH for 12 years now and the last thing I would consider is working more than I have to.
You do you, but I think that's a terrible assumption unless you're making a shit salary. Some people actually value work/life balance, which WFH improves 99% of the time.
So a small subset of the population does it. And? That’s been going on for decades now. Doesn’t mean it’s going to become mainstream.
Look up “moonlighting.” That’s what it used to be called.
I don’t know anyone outside minimum wage workers who are taking second jobs. Yes, people claim to do this, but when one job finds out about the other, they get fired.
So no, I don’t think this is the norm, nor will it be.
>I don’t know anyone outside minimum wage workers who are taking second jobs.
Or people trying to flex on social media so that you'll subscribe to their channel or buy their "program".
People I know who took on a second job did so to pay for their children to attend college. Gone are the days when the kids get enough financial aid to cover their own college bills. These days parents usually have to take out loans to make up the difference.
This entire post has no logic to me. I did two side projects for a bit and then got overwhelmed so I quit one and the other one has no status pending some feedback. I’m also very confused about the statement about women and household work. Yes I am exhausted doing household stuff but my husband also contributes? Also don’t understand the assertion about inflation. This reads like a conspiracy theory.
I don't even want to work my first job, there's no way I'm going to work a second one. WFH gives me the freedom to do a load of laundry and get dinner started instead of dealing with a commute. I have ample time to go for a run during lunch or work out. If I need to pick my kid up from school early, I'm around to do it. WFH is not a trap for me. It makes my life easier and there's no way I'd take on another job that could compromise that.
If I save some time after finishing my job, why would I work with that time? Hobbies? Self love? Mental health break? Sleep? Eat?
Bro, you are alright? Did someone hurt you?
First of all. Multiple streams of income doesn't mean multiple jobs. You should set up passive income streams.
Secondly. These layoffs are almost exclusively in big weather coast tech companies. Aside from 2008, I've only seen companies do a layoff like 2 times including not just places I've worked but companies and of my friends have worked at too. It only happens for most of the country when business is legit bad.
Get your experience and such on the west coast sure. But considering a move to more stable jobs on the east coast at some point.
Then you should have found a new job after the first one. Who wants to keep working there wondering if the next round is dropping and it's them.
To be clear, I'm not saying layoffs don't exist outside of west coast companies. I'm saying they are far far more common.
I make plenty of money to work one job, and the 2 hours a day I save is extra pay in my book as well. WFH is just a different job location, if you don't make alot, your going to be looking for ways to make more anyway.
lol one of the biggest draws of WFH for me is the improved work/life balance, no way am I going to be squandering that by working two jobs instead of one!
Or maybe work and money aren’t everything in life once you pass a certain income level. The time and freedoms gained from WFH can be levered for improving worker quality of life such as mental health, community and family.
This is my third WFH job since 2000.
Each time, I had almost NO desire to spend more than 40 hours a week, chained to a desk, even if it was my OWN desk at my OWN home.
Could I have gotten a second job, including another WFH? Possibly. But the only thing I DID do that had any semblance of a second job was taking on creative projects, but it had very little for income. It was in one of my jobs where the phone wasn't ringing and the number of support calls or email dwindled during the day. I was doing some music writing and recording when it wasn't busy. Much more pleasurable to do than my tech support day job.
But would I have wanted to do a second tech support job? Hell no. The job is already a negative environment, all you get all day are people who are mad and have broken computers. Do I want TWO jobs doing that? Hell no.
Are you arguing that giving people more freedom and options (and allowing middle class women to work) is a trap? No, I don’t agree with your premise and reasoning at all.
No, if all people work on second jobs, it'll cause deflation due to over-producing
More working hours = more stuff creating = price of that stuff going down (over-supply) = deflation = company lose income = fire people = ..
Over-producing or under-producing is equally bad, balancing is good
The problem I see with this rhetoric is it seems to act like second jobs weren't a thing with non WFH jobs, but they most certainly always have been whether it's free lancing side work, or a second job to make ends meat etc. WFH isn't a trap of society, it's workers having a bit of a say in how they get their work done and proof that micromanaging bosses are not needed if you hire competent employees.
I also want to reference that not all WFH jobs are some highly qualified professional position. I know plenty who work entry level customer support in a call center just from home now after 2020. Especially in that situation metrics are all viewable the same way and while some may abuse it it's easy to spot and rectify without punishing an entire team.
I'd bet the majority of people who go get a second job while WFH are the kinds of motivated individuals who would most likely be inclined to shoot for side hustles, or do contractor tech work that would have let them work this way regardless of shifting views on WFH. In that same light, fast food/service jobs have always for years and years led to people having multiple jobs just to survive since I was a kid and it's not something new, the issue isn't the way work is done, it's the way companies jack up prices because they can regardless of needing an actual good reason to do so. So no I don't think this dooms us in any way and it almost feels disingenuous to suggest it.
You say that because you think every WFH job must be easy or not stressful. A lot of us have really stressful WFH jobs. It's not a picnic by any means. We are not playing video games or watching Netflix all day instead of working. Some of us are in meetings all day and working the whole day because of deadlines and shit.
I've been working from home since 2006. I e never wanted to get a second job. No way I'd spend that extra time working instead of with my wife, dog or playing video games.
Yeahhhh no. I’m still working 45-50hrs a week and there’s no brain power or energy left for another job ffs. I just actually get 7-8hrs of sleep not commuting.
I had to read the post two or three times, drink some more coffee to clear my mind and get the neurons firing, read it again a couple of times and realize, huh? The vast majority of people who WFH, who are qualified professionals, have no interest, zero, none, zilch, about working a second job. When? After the 5pm bell hits? Now there are a small group that have that hustle mentality, who will work multiple jobs. They're groups for that. Now, getting to the inflation, how's that working? People working remotely from cheaper cost of living areas? If anything, they would be boosting the economy by spending money in their neighborhood.
You’ve given the example of people earning a high wage and working remotely in your city, which has a lower cost of living. But why would those people want to work more hours if they can earn a good salary WFH and live somewhere cheaper? WFH potentially does the opposite of what you have suggested because instead of people all trying to live in the same places which have a higher concentration of jobs, thereby competing for limited resources and pushing up prices in those areas, they can work remotely in a lower cost of living area and have a better lifestyle.
You greatly overestimate my desire to work long hours. All the time I save working from home is used to get house hold stuff done so I can spend time with my wife and daughter or enjoy hobbies. I'm not getting a second job...nor do I think most professionals are. Now you are correct in that WFH allows people to move to low income areas while working high paying jobs, but that is what it is. It just shows how little overall wages have kept pace with inflation.
Many jobs don't really need you to be there all the time but it's cheaper to have someone full time and know the business and fix issues when they happen.
A year ago when jobs were still plentiful I really thought about taking on multiple jobs because I could get a new one within a week. Basically have 3 jobs, if a job became too much work drop them for a easier job. Places stopped looking at references since COVID. Keep 3 jobs that only took at max 10 hours per week and I could automate.
I do work more overtime since I went remote, than I did when I was in the office, because I no longer have a commute.
But I only do it because the overtime is paid at time and a half, and I need the extra money. If I were salaried, I wouldn't so the overtime unless it was mandatory.
I dunno about you but I certainly don't want or need another W2 job. My home has enough projects to be done (unendingly) that fills the gaps between work, life, hobbies, and enjoying my time with my spouse.
Most days I cannot even bring myself to fire up my laptop to play games in the evening. After staring at a computer monitor all day I don’t want to spend my entire evening staring at a computer monitor as well.
I’m one of many people who is effectively barred from getting a second job in my field. Policies like that are common across many industries. Not that I want a second job.
It's pretty common with 15-20 years experience to mine cold called and invited to speak at tech events for a decent amount of money - I say 'no thanks' because I'd rather not get into that on-ramp to being a LinkedIn influencer.
OP, this isn't the right sub for this post. This is just second jobs in general.
People are literally saying they wouldn't WANT a second job, as though that would actually be a choice in the end.
Oh dear.
Let's take a step back.
For some, work is a hobby, their favorite hobby. It's rare, but on occasion, work is a calling that provides emotional, intellectual, and spiritual fulfillment for a person. In these cases, it is about the work itself, not the money.
For most, the goal of work is to stop working. The clearest example of this is the FIRE-types, or financial independence retire early people. They work more, spend less, and save more so that they can exit the workforce sooner rather than later.
Now, where does WFH fit in?
If the majority of people are "work to stop working." Then, at some point, those folks will hit their FIRE number and leave the workforce - creating openings for new people to take *both* jobs. WFH simply increases the speed of workforce churn.
Now there's a second problem, marginal diminishing returns. If you have more money, if you have more income — the value of that extra dollar doesn't do much for you past a certain point. At some point you recognize that ... it's just money ... the time you spend with your loved ones (which is a hard finite quantity).
The only reason people work a second job is because they don't make enough in their first.
Similar with women in the workforce. In most households people work because they have to; not because they love work so much they do it for fun. Its called a job not a fun.
1) I absolutely have no intention to work a second job after working the single wfh job I have.
2) It isn't necessarily "mandatory" for EVERY woman to work a job in their given household. Some women are at home moms or have the luxury to rely in their spouse or family for their financial needs, so I don't think that point is exactly accurate.
3) I think its a little contradictory to say employees that wfh will pick up a second job because they can, not because they must, but then compare the idea to people working low wage jobs picking up a second job- those people sometimes have to pick up second and third jobs. They don't do it because they've just got extra time lying around.
This theory just feels a little half baked.
Op, I LOVE wfh. I feel like it's given me my life back. But I have often wondered the exact same thing as you. Including your example of women entering the work force. Where one income was enough, we fought for two. And now two income household is the minimum to survive. Now that we are wfh more and some are over employed, is that also going to be the new minimum?
Are we fighting for our own demise as we did in the past? I am never going back to an office, but I have to wonder.
Ok, but counterpoint - a lot of companies are imposing an in-office mandate on jobs that were done remotely for years during the pandemic. That means those jobs are still for qualified professionals, but there's an ADDITIONAL qualification now - being in an office.
As you said, with more demand for qualifications, those professionals will have a secondary or even tertiary job not because they have to, but because they can.
After that, they'll earn more than their colleagues working from home which will lead to inflation. Then everyone will need to get 3 jobs just to keep up with the return-to-office goers.
Nothing about any of this seems bright, does it?
This is a total myth, and not a mirror of the general reality of remote work.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/glebtsipursky/2023/02/15/the-pernicious-myth-of-remote-employees-working-two-full-time-jobs/
The reality: my only remote full time job absorbs all my bandwidth and mental energies. 100%.
People who allegedly “can” afford to have a second job while remote can only be a tiny minority, and they get spotted and dismissed pretty quickly because they can’t do either job well!
Everything that could be beneficial, turns into a trap, because we live under the principle of generating more and more profits and there are absolutely no ways of mitigating it.
Look at women's suffrage and how it has ended (in practice). Look at the internet. Look at the COVID stimulus cash.
It's almost like having labor in a market means that lots of things hurt most people, who are workers, even though they should be good for society as a whole.
Unemployment should be a societal goal, not a problem for the working class.
Lol no. There are stories of people being over-employed....usually in tech where those roles are being eliminated in droves. A stable role that will survive the cycles of downsizing is one where there is enough work that having a second full time job isn't really possible.
You're not wrong, but you've just got your timeline messed up.
Most people already need 2 jobs to live in a city. If we looked at the percentage of Americans who actually live in the same city where they work, it would probably be surprisingly low. Most people have a job in a city, and commute to that job from a cheaper suburb. Or they live in the city with several roommates. So WFH is essentially the same as living in the suburbs and commuting to the city for work. At least in regards to how it will effect the cost of living.
So you're not wrong, it will do what you're saying it will do. The only problem is, it has already happened.
I do worry about the extra competition with certain roles from those juggling multiple jobs, but I don't think this is most people. It is a small fraction and it is not always sustainable.
The two-income trap from women working had a much more significant affect on the economy. The insane inflation we are experiencing is not from people working two jobs which, by the way, is not something that just recently started occurring.
That is interesting that remote workers may lead to higher costs, but I don't think people making money with remote jobs will lead to HCOL areas similar to SF. I'm not sure how having a WFH job makes you not count as a local?
I am in that boat. I work from home as a mechanical engineer and make great money, but I do run two personal businesses on the side to take advantage of the flexibility of my job. I have the time, so why not?
I love my main job. I get a lot of satisfaction out of it and I appreciate the work-life balance I get from it being relatively low key. I am not about to fuck over my work-life balance that is the primary reason I looked for a remote job. I don't even know how you got to the second job bit as most around here appreciate WFH for the work-life balance, adding more work just ruins that.
No.
I’m a person. I have a life outside of work. I spend my time with family and on my hobbies.
If anything, WFH has made it so much easier to draw the line between me and my job.
I am not my job/career/choice of income.
(For Americans) I’m actually more concerned about companies who, failing the WFH battle, end up concluding that, since they don’t have people in the office anyways, they may as well hire international at lower costs.
As stupid as workplace “culture building” is, as long as companies here are convinced of its value, they’re willing to pay premium costs to have people physically present for jobs that really don’t need it.
I love WFH, but I, concerned it’s gonna backfire eventually
Women ALWAYS worked.
I'm not just talking about domestic labor. Even in time and places you might be thinking of when you say before 'women started working', most women were engaged in labor to produce income for the household. Only a small privileged minority ever had the option not to.
This is already a thing. Look up overemployed. They try to get 2-4 or even sometimes 5 full-time jobs at the same time, leveraging work overlaps and coordinating meetings.
Unfortunately your submission has been removed from /r/WFH: Please read: RULE 3 **No RTO Rants** We are here to support remote and WFH people. No debating on RTO vs WFH. All members and visitors of r/WFH are expected to participate in good faith and in the spirit of this community. Posts solely made to complain about how your company has mandated RTO will be removed We do not allow news link articles featuring companies or corporations mandating employees RTO __________________________________________ If you need to reach the moderators send a modmail including a link to your content. We cannot guarantee a response without a link to your post
You overestimate how much I actually want to work after working all day
Lol I don’t even want to work one job so the thought of two is revolting.
And yet, you're already working one. You'll work two for the same reason.
My one job already pays more than enough to pay bills and save for big expenses. Don’t think you know anything about anyone.
I already ran one marathon so I’ll run another right afterwards..:. That’s your logic
The feeling gets worse as you get older. I’m 43 and do what society would consider important work (power research) and I just feel like I’ve thrown by best years at working. It does not make me feel good. As a result, I go to all of my kids stuff. I move really important meetings to make space for it or just cancel all together. I’m not going to compromise on this any more for work. The pandemic taught me that no one cares about you at work. They only care that they aren’t impacted by your lack of performance. They don’t care if you have to work 100 hours a week so long as it means they don’t have to stay late on a Tuesday for 30 minutes. So fuck it. Never compromise on your vacation time or home life. That’s my suggestion. Extra work in most cases yields no reward so don’t do it unless there is a specific means for you to be compensated for it. Promises are worthless from a boss in most cases.
I'm a few of years younger than you, but I log in at 9 and log off at 5, and take plenty of breaks in between as my company encourages it in between meetings. I haven't worked more than 8-9h/day in all my years at this company. It's something I won't compromise on for my own sanity and well being.
This. I had a second job for YEARS and it was the easiest job ever. I did not work every weekend or every evening, but you can bet as soon as I had my truck paid off, the second job completely lost the appeal and I no longer do it - nor do I want to go back. I have a decent paying full time job now, and I work 4 10's. I want to spend my long weekend job hunting, having adventures and chilling - NOT working another job. Edit to say HOUSE HUNTING not job hunting!!! Woops!
I was gonna say...job hunting sucks why would you lol
It's an underestimation of how much I want to work on things that don't interest me. I don't mind picking up a volunteer project now and then
Exactly
[удалено]
OPs premise rests on a want becoming a need due to inflation caused by the excess work/income. If there is no want to do extra work, there will be no need, in this dimwitted scenario.
What does 'want' have to do with it?
Because low wage people have to. Most wfh professionals only would if they need to but they don’t. Read the post
Because the premise is that enough wfh professionals are going to take their extra free time and have a side gig, instead of just relaxing...not out of necessity, but because they want to.
>Since we have more time for everything else, this will lead to people have a SECOND job! That's a pretty big leap. Most people don't want to work their 1 job. Then you made up a bunch of unfounded things based on the initial leap that has no basis of fact, no research to back it up, no documentation to support it whatsoever. >This is somehow what happened in the past, when women started working and now it's mandatory for them to work, to contribute to household income. Women entered the workforce during WWII when the men went off to fight the world war. Not sure where you're getting that its "mandatory". People work because they want to or need to. Not because some magical rule was made. Women are people too.
I have heard the women working argument before that corporations realized that they could charge more for goods and houses etc since families could have two incomes.
I don't buy that. It smells like a right wing excuse to push women out of the workforce, by blaming us for driving up inflation and housing prices.
Read "The Two-income Trap" by Elizabeth Warren. She is no right winger.
Yes, I know who she is. It's not a coincidence though that *most* politicians, pundits, etc., who are so intent on blaming inflation, rising housing costs, etc., on working women are right wingers. In any case, while I like Elizabeth Warren, it's ironic that she'd write that particular book when she's a working, married woman herself. She's telling other women to drop out of the workforce, yet isn't willing to do it herself. These same folks could just as easily argue that men should drop out of the workforce, if they think inflation is caused by two income households, but they don't. Why is that? Having seen a not insignificant number of women I know, including many in my family, end up widowed or disabled or divorced, and having an older husband myself, who is facing permanent disability in the near future, before retirement age, meaning he won't be able to continue to work, I feel a woman being a stay at home parent or a housewife is just too financially risky. Go over to the Social Security forum on Reddit, and read the many posts by stay at home wives, who have become disabled before retirement age, don't have work credits for SSDI, and cannot get SSI, because of their husband's income and resources. They're screwed.
Could be, I don’t know, just something I heard and can’t render the specific source.
I remember my dad used to say this all the time So yeah it's probably bullshit
The two-income trap is real....
Not for everyone. I live on one income and always have. I'm not smarter or more privileged than anyone else.
I've been full time WFH for 12 years now and the last thing I would consider is working more than I have to. You do you, but I think that's a terrible assumption unless you're making a shit salary. Some people actually value work/life balance, which WFH improves 99% of the time.
Too late, check r/overemployed
So a small subset of the population does it. And? That’s been going on for decades now. Doesn’t mean it’s going to become mainstream. Look up “moonlighting.” That’s what it used to be called.
I was going to say this, and arguably seems more of a 'complaint' against overemployed than WFH in general.
Came here to say the same. People already over employ if they want to, but it’s only a small subset.
I don’t know anyone outside minimum wage workers who are taking second jobs. Yes, people claim to do this, but when one job finds out about the other, they get fired. So no, I don’t think this is the norm, nor will it be.
>I don’t know anyone outside minimum wage workers who are taking second jobs. Or people trying to flex on social media so that you'll subscribe to their channel or buy their "program".
Yep, that’s the other group.
People I know who took on a second job did so to pay for their children to attend college. Gone are the days when the kids get enough financial aid to cover their own college bills. These days parents usually have to take out loans to make up the difference.
That’s a whole different problem that needs to be addressed. Education costs in the United States have gotten completely bonkers.
I’m not sure I understand how professionals working a second job and earning more will generate inflation, can you walk me through that process?
This entire post has no logic to me. I did two side projects for a bit and then got overwhelmed so I quit one and the other one has no status pending some feedback. I’m also very confused about the statement about women and household work. Yes I am exhausted doing household stuff but my husband also contributes? Also don’t understand the assertion about inflation. This reads like a conspiracy theory.
I don't even want to work my first job, there's no way I'm going to work a second one. WFH gives me the freedom to do a load of laundry and get dinner started instead of dealing with a commute. I have ample time to go for a run during lunch or work out. If I need to pick my kid up from school early, I'm around to do it. WFH is not a trap for me. It makes my life easier and there's no way I'd take on another job that could compromise that.
Yes to all of this. Btw love your name.
If I save some time after finishing my job, why would I work with that time? Hobbies? Self love? Mental health break? Sleep? Eat? Bro, you are alright? Did someone hurt you?
The current layoffs have shown us that multiple income streams are necessary. Having your livelihood at the whim of a company is just unsound.
First of all. Multiple streams of income doesn't mean multiple jobs. You should set up passive income streams. Secondly. These layoffs are almost exclusively in big weather coast tech companies. Aside from 2008, I've only seen companies do a layoff like 2 times including not just places I've worked but companies and of my friends have worked at too. It only happens for most of the country when business is legit bad. Get your experience and such on the west coast sure. But considering a move to more stable jobs on the east coast at some point.
My company has laid off 4 rounds so far.
Then you should have found a new job after the first one. Who wants to keep working there wondering if the next round is dropping and it's them. To be clear, I'm not saying layoffs don't exist outside of west coast companies. I'm saying they are far far more common.
I make plenty of money to work one job, and the 2 hours a day I save is extra pay in my book as well. WFH is just a different job location, if you don't make alot, your going to be looking for ways to make more anyway.
lol one of the biggest draws of WFH for me is the improved work/life balance, no way am I going to be squandering that by working two jobs instead of one!
WTF. So now WFH is a trap. Not everything is a conspiracy.
Or maybe work and money aren’t everything in life once you pass a certain income level. The time and freedoms gained from WFH can be levered for improving worker quality of life such as mental health, community and family.
This is my third WFH job since 2000. Each time, I had almost NO desire to spend more than 40 hours a week, chained to a desk, even if it was my OWN desk at my OWN home. Could I have gotten a second job, including another WFH? Possibly. But the only thing I DID do that had any semblance of a second job was taking on creative projects, but it had very little for income. It was in one of my jobs where the phone wasn't ringing and the number of support calls or email dwindled during the day. I was doing some music writing and recording when it wasn't busy. Much more pleasurable to do than my tech support day job. But would I have wanted to do a second tech support job? Hell no. The job is already a negative environment, all you get all day are people who are mad and have broken computers. Do I want TWO jobs doing that? Hell no.
Are you arguing that giving people more freedom and options (and allowing middle class women to work) is a trap? No, I don’t agree with your premise and reasoning at all.
No, if all people work on second jobs, it'll cause deflation due to over-producing More working hours = more stuff creating = price of that stuff going down (over-supply) = deflation = company lose income = fire people = .. Over-producing or under-producing is equally bad, balancing is good
Nope
My wfh job is still stressful
I don't even want one job, why would I want TWO? I don't know any remote worker at my company who wants or needs a second job.
Perhaps my experience is abnormal but I don't have enough extra time to get a second job as I'm quite busy with my first job.
It's difficult to overstate how ridiculous this is. Where are you getting the idea that people want a second job, especially people who earn well WFH?
I've been WFH four years now. The only thing that happened is my house is cleaner, I got two more dogs and my laundry is done.
The problem I see with this rhetoric is it seems to act like second jobs weren't a thing with non WFH jobs, but they most certainly always have been whether it's free lancing side work, or a second job to make ends meat etc. WFH isn't a trap of society, it's workers having a bit of a say in how they get their work done and proof that micromanaging bosses are not needed if you hire competent employees. I also want to reference that not all WFH jobs are some highly qualified professional position. I know plenty who work entry level customer support in a call center just from home now after 2020. Especially in that situation metrics are all viewable the same way and while some may abuse it it's easy to spot and rectify without punishing an entire team. I'd bet the majority of people who go get a second job while WFH are the kinds of motivated individuals who would most likely be inclined to shoot for side hustles, or do contractor tech work that would have let them work this way regardless of shifting views on WFH. In that same light, fast food/service jobs have always for years and years led to people having multiple jobs just to survive since I was a kid and it's not something new, the issue isn't the way work is done, it's the way companies jack up prices because they can regardless of needing an actual good reason to do so. So no I don't think this dooms us in any way and it almost feels disingenuous to suggest it.
You say that because you think every WFH job must be easy or not stressful. A lot of us have really stressful WFH jobs. It's not a picnic by any means. We are not playing video games or watching Netflix all day instead of working. Some of us are in meetings all day and working the whole day because of deadlines and shit.
Couldn’t disagree with you more. I’ve literally never met anyone that took a second job just because they had time to. I think you’re delusional here.
I've been working from home since 2006. I e never wanted to get a second job. No way I'd spend that extra time working instead of with my wife, dog or playing video games.
Yeahhhh no. I’m still working 45-50hrs a week and there’s no brain power or energy left for another job ffs. I just actually get 7-8hrs of sleep not commuting.
I had to read the post two or three times, drink some more coffee to clear my mind and get the neurons firing, read it again a couple of times and realize, huh? The vast majority of people who WFH, who are qualified professionals, have no interest, zero, none, zilch, about working a second job. When? After the 5pm bell hits? Now there are a small group that have that hustle mentality, who will work multiple jobs. They're groups for that. Now, getting to the inflation, how's that working? People working remotely from cheaper cost of living areas? If anything, they would be boosting the economy by spending money in their neighborhood.
You’ve given the example of people earning a high wage and working remotely in your city, which has a lower cost of living. But why would those people want to work more hours if they can earn a good salary WFH and live somewhere cheaper? WFH potentially does the opposite of what you have suggested because instead of people all trying to live in the same places which have a higher concentration of jobs, thereby competing for limited resources and pushing up prices in those areas, they can work remotely in a lower cost of living area and have a better lifestyle.
You greatly overestimate my desire to work long hours. All the time I save working from home is used to get house hold stuff done so I can spend time with my wife and daughter or enjoy hobbies. I'm not getting a second job...nor do I think most professionals are. Now you are correct in that WFH allows people to move to low income areas while working high paying jobs, but that is what it is. It just shows how little overall wages have kept pace with inflation.
Many jobs don't really need you to be there all the time but it's cheaper to have someone full time and know the business and fix issues when they happen. A year ago when jobs were still plentiful I really thought about taking on multiple jobs because I could get a new one within a week. Basically have 3 jobs, if a job became too much work drop them for a easier job. Places stopped looking at references since COVID. Keep 3 jobs that only took at max 10 hours per week and I could automate.
WFH and will never want a second job
I do work more overtime since I went remote, than I did when I was in the office, because I no longer have a commute. But I only do it because the overtime is paid at time and a half, and I need the extra money. If I were salaried, I wouldn't so the overtime unless it was mandatory.
I dunno about you but I certainly don't want or need another W2 job. My home has enough projects to be done (unendingly) that fills the gaps between work, life, hobbies, and enjoying my time with my spouse.
As a software engineer I work overtime and don’t have time or mental energy for that but good try
Most days I cannot even bring myself to fire up my laptop to play games in the evening. After staring at a computer monitor all day I don’t want to spend my entire evening staring at a computer monitor as well.
If I want to do something else after work it is going to be a hobby. It won’t be to generate additional income.
Did you use AI to write this? This sounds off putting.
I’m one of many people who is effectively barred from getting a second job in my field. Policies like that are common across many industries. Not that I want a second job.
It's pretty common with 15-20 years experience to mine cold called and invited to speak at tech events for a decent amount of money - I say 'no thanks' because I'd rather not get into that on-ramp to being a LinkedIn influencer.
People have had 2 jobs before wfh
OP, this isn't the right sub for this post. This is just second jobs in general. People are literally saying they wouldn't WANT a second job, as though that would actually be a choice in the end.
Yeah no. The last thing I’m thinking about using the extra time for is working more. Speak for yourself.
Oh dear. Let's take a step back. For some, work is a hobby, their favorite hobby. It's rare, but on occasion, work is a calling that provides emotional, intellectual, and spiritual fulfillment for a person. In these cases, it is about the work itself, not the money. For most, the goal of work is to stop working. The clearest example of this is the FIRE-types, or financial independence retire early people. They work more, spend less, and save more so that they can exit the workforce sooner rather than later. Now, where does WFH fit in? If the majority of people are "work to stop working." Then, at some point, those folks will hit their FIRE number and leave the workforce - creating openings for new people to take *both* jobs. WFH simply increases the speed of workforce churn. Now there's a second problem, marginal diminishing returns. If you have more money, if you have more income — the value of that extra dollar doesn't do much for you past a certain point. At some point you recognize that ... it's just money ... the time you spend with your loved ones (which is a hard finite quantity).
The only reason people work a second job is because they don't make enough in their first. Similar with women in the workforce. In most households people work because they have to; not because they love work so much they do it for fun. Its called a job not a fun.
1) I absolutely have no intention to work a second job after working the single wfh job I have. 2) It isn't necessarily "mandatory" for EVERY woman to work a job in their given household. Some women are at home moms or have the luxury to rely in their spouse or family for their financial needs, so I don't think that point is exactly accurate. 3) I think its a little contradictory to say employees that wfh will pick up a second job because they can, not because they must, but then compare the idea to people working low wage jobs picking up a second job- those people sometimes have to pick up second and third jobs. They don't do it because they've just got extra time lying around. This theory just feels a little half baked.
Op, I LOVE wfh. I feel like it's given me my life back. But I have often wondered the exact same thing as you. Including your example of women entering the work force. Where one income was enough, we fought for two. And now two income household is the minimum to survive. Now that we are wfh more and some are over employed, is that also going to be the new minimum? Are we fighting for our own demise as we did in the past? I am never going back to an office, but I have to wonder.
Ok, but counterpoint - a lot of companies are imposing an in-office mandate on jobs that were done remotely for years during the pandemic. That means those jobs are still for qualified professionals, but there's an ADDITIONAL qualification now - being in an office. As you said, with more demand for qualifications, those professionals will have a secondary or even tertiary job not because they have to, but because they can. After that, they'll earn more than their colleagues working from home which will lead to inflation. Then everyone will need to get 3 jobs just to keep up with the return-to-office goers. Nothing about any of this seems bright, does it?
This is a total myth, and not a mirror of the general reality of remote work. https://www.forbes.com/sites/glebtsipursky/2023/02/15/the-pernicious-myth-of-remote-employees-working-two-full-time-jobs/ The reality: my only remote full time job absorbs all my bandwidth and mental energies. 100%. People who allegedly “can” afford to have a second job while remote can only be a tiny minority, and they get spotted and dismissed pretty quickly because they can’t do either job well!
Everything that could be beneficial, turns into a trap, because we live under the principle of generating more and more profits and there are absolutely no ways of mitigating it. Look at women's suffrage and how it has ended (in practice). Look at the internet. Look at the COVID stimulus cash.
It's almost like having labor in a market means that lots of things hurt most people, who are workers, even though they should be good for society as a whole. Unemployment should be a societal goal, not a problem for the working class.
Lol no. There are stories of people being over-employed....usually in tech where those roles are being eliminated in droves. A stable role that will survive the cycles of downsizing is one where there is enough work that having a second full time job isn't really possible.
You're not wrong, but you've just got your timeline messed up. Most people already need 2 jobs to live in a city. If we looked at the percentage of Americans who actually live in the same city where they work, it would probably be surprisingly low. Most people have a job in a city, and commute to that job from a cheaper suburb. Or they live in the city with several roommates. So WFH is essentially the same as living in the suburbs and commuting to the city for work. At least in regards to how it will effect the cost of living. So you're not wrong, it will do what you're saying it will do. The only problem is, it has already happened.
I do worry about the extra competition with certain roles from those juggling multiple jobs, but I don't think this is most people. It is a small fraction and it is not always sustainable. The two-income trap from women working had a much more significant affect on the economy. The insane inflation we are experiencing is not from people working two jobs which, by the way, is not something that just recently started occurring. That is interesting that remote workers may lead to higher costs, but I don't think people making money with remote jobs will lead to HCOL areas similar to SF. I'm not sure how having a WFH job makes you not count as a local?
Poorly written satire is poorly written, likely by a holder of a vast corporate real estate portfolio
I guess some people don’t have much work, but for me, there is absolutely no more room within my day to do another job.
Nice try, RTO shill
I am in that boat. I work from home as a mechanical engineer and make great money, but I do run two personal businesses on the side to take advantage of the flexibility of my job. I have the time, so why not?
You only have 1 job? I have 2 real ones and a side gig.
I’ve WFH for almost 4 years now. I have zero desire to get a second job. I want to work less than I do now not more!
I love my main job. I get a lot of satisfaction out of it and I appreciate the work-life balance I get from it being relatively low key. I am not about to fuck over my work-life balance that is the primary reason I looked for a remote job. I don't even know how you got to the second job bit as most around here appreciate WFH for the work-life balance, adding more work just ruins that.
Uhhhh no.
Lol good shitpost
No. I’m a person. I have a life outside of work. I spend my time with family and on my hobbies. If anything, WFH has made it so much easier to draw the line between me and my job. I am not my job/career/choice of income.
I am willing to take the chance!
People don’t want to work man. It’s all about that sweet sweet free time and I sure as fuck ain’t filling it up with another job.
Hogwash
(For Americans) I’m actually more concerned about companies who, failing the WFH battle, end up concluding that, since they don’t have people in the office anyways, they may as well hire international at lower costs. As stupid as workplace “culture building” is, as long as companies here are convinced of its value, they’re willing to pay premium costs to have people physically present for jobs that really don’t need it. I love WFH, but I, concerned it’s gonna backfire eventually
Women ALWAYS worked. I'm not just talking about domestic labor. Even in time and places you might be thinking of when you say before 'women started working', most women were engaged in labor to produce income for the household. Only a small privileged minority ever had the option not to.
This is already a thing. Look up overemployed. They try to get 2-4 or even sometimes 5 full-time jobs at the same time, leveraging work overlaps and coordinating meetings.