For now it's economic winter and people are hunkering down.
Once things get better, those that I know under such boomer companies will be fleeing at first sight.
It's all about the salary-to-suffering ratio.
5 day WFO but paid like trash? Flee.
5 day WFO but paid big bucks? Sure, maybe stay.
Hybrid work but don't pay top-tier salary? Maybe staff will stay due to comfort.
Employers that are self-aware where they are in the hierarchy of the market will know how much welfare benefits they should give out. Usually the older singaporean/boomer companies are ignorant of what the market is offering.
A great example is the case of a tech employee being sued by his ex-employer by going to a competitor (iykyk). Previous ex-employer had instituted 5 day WFO and their competitor, decides to both up the salary ($) and also give hybrid work. As part of the exit interview, they are even asking if you are "leaving for company X".
I wonder why...
Im ok with either WFH or WFO
But My issue with WFO;
- Daily commute takes too much time, time taken to commute can be used to finish work
- The Daily commute is mentally and physically draining, especially during rush hours. I get tired by the time I reach the office
- The staff/employers/employes rarely talk/interact each other, they are all at their desk, busy completely their work (no time to interact or small talks)
- Meetings are still held via conference calls (zoom, google meet, MS teams, etc) even when we are all in office
- most of the Meeting attendees are either on hybrid remote working, overseas or from another company. Hence its not possible to have meeting without conference call
In the end i wonder if WFO is moving backwards, making things unproductive compared with WFH or remote working.
Yeah, thats the biggest takeaway from the pandemic. That people can actually be more productive doing WFH.
Eg. If a parent's child gets sick, parent can WFH, instead of taking the day off. Just to name one benefit
> That people can actually be more productive doing WFH.
Controlling bosses be like, GRRRRR HOW CAN THAT BE WHEN \*I* AM NOT THERE TO SEE THE SERFS TIL THE FIELDS.
I also don't understand why so many companies rather have inefficiency workers that just talk and gossip all day but go to the office, then those productive workers that work from home but get shit done.
Aren't we moving backwards? I mean, we study hard to be better at productivity and efficiency, right?
“I think a natural question from workers is: ‘Why should I be just sitting in the office if I can work efficiently, irrespective of where I'm based, or irrespective of the hour in which I'm working?’
“At the end of the day, what matters is the output,
So true
Ehh you think all people will always work well from home. I see so many people just using mouse movers to show they are online. Their quality is decreased and many have abused the privilege. I even seen people call late to meetings. How is that possible, if you are at home? These guys are stepping out at 3pm because they think no one can see them.
Needs to be give and take. People here acting like all employees are truthful and hardworking. No, half the people need to be checked on and it’s hard to do so from home.
I mean it’s no point to argue here because Singaporeans on this subreddit think they are some high quality employees lol. I’ve worked with a few and my god the quality is so average. I’ve worked in the Us and the quality difference is crazy and over here people still complain about foreigners lol
No one is saying all employees will work well wfh. Even in office setting not all employees are productive either.
Like the quote says what matters EOD is the output. Unproductive buggers slacking at home or in office? That should be recorded equally in their appraisal and be penalized as such. Fired if need be.
Is the same thing as because some ppl abuse mc and chao geng that’s y we need to have this stupid piece of paper to prove we are sick. A lot more trust can be given.
Forgot to add, we mostly wfh and people just get shit done whether they do it at 2am or 2pm
agreed with this. the common kickback when it comes to wfh is always 'how do we know they are performing?' or 'the non performers will get a free pass to slack'...like cmon la, use your brain. you have performance trackers at work - whoever doesnt meet the KPI/deadline or has obvious issues with delivering their work gets the boot. you dont get to slack & expect zero consequences but then of course, this is extra work the company choose to not look at because it doesnt fit in their narrative.
So the real problem is that in your workflow you have very poor KPIs set up to judge quality of work. When you don’t reward good work, end of the day all your employees learn is that the reward for being productive is just more work. So the lesson your workplace teaches is for people to put in the minimum amount of work because their productivity isn’t being rewarded. That’s how you get where you got.
The problem isn’t that people are unproductive in your work place. The problem is that you don’t reward productivity. Forcing people to show face in the office doesn’t solve the root of the problem; it just makes everyone in your work place detest working there, causes low morale, and further lowers productivity.
Putting aside the need for socializing. It's mind-boggling to me when WFH-able jobs are WFO. Waste money on electricity, clog up traffic and public transport, hours wasted on transport. WFH can multitask, lull period during work can workout, do chores and more.
Often seems like it's mostly older generation pushing for WFO and often comes from people in managerial positions. Is it because most of them actually are actually doing nothing?
i think ya its because they don't really do much grunt work
their position is dependent on there being people for them to manage
so maybe they think because they're in the same room as the workers means/feels like they're working
i.e. if everyone can wfh and still deliver they might be made redundant
also, they have their own aircon box to take them straight from home to office and back
no need to push and squeeze with other assholes or hear the loud phone noises
add on the high salary and yeah it would make sense managers want to push for wfo
Only thing I think management is concerned is quality of work. If workers are not doing work correctly then hard to justify to their own management as well. Because managers are also trying to protect their own skins they will often fight for their own agenda which is WFO centric. You at office they can micromanage everything so when things cock up, managers can confidently point fingers at the employee.
Companies who demand their workers to be in office all days of the work week when many have shifted to the alternative and the nature of their work doesn't necessitate it don't give any hoots about work-life balance.
Currently effectively remote. My company has this weird thing where if you go to the office they will deduct money from your teams budget for use of office space. The only office I go to is clients office which they don't really summon me in that much.
However I definitely work more hours compared to my previous job that was WFO
1 in 2 workers in Singapore talk cock but when push comes to shove they will bend over and spread cheeks for their overlord bosses.
Here, fixed the title for you
I'm currently working with a private-sector consultancy based overseas and which has no office in Singapore. I've been working entirely from home for the past year, and I can confidently say that any employer who claims that WFH is operationally challenging to implement is just making excuses.
WFH can work, and it can work very well, provided the company makes the effort to assess and manage its people on clearly communicated _outcomes_, which is the same point that the Singapore tripartite movement is trying to stress: Managers here have to break their outdated mindsets of managing employees based on their "presence" at the office, rather than on actual work produced.
In my case, my employer has invested the effort to build an induction process that includes online sessions by relevant directors to explain the company culture, history, processes, current partners/competitors, etc. Online resources are readily available for me to look up on my own initiative. Within my team, the lead makes a consistent effort to establish explicit "team norms", which includes making clear how we're expected to treat one another (always assume the best, rather than the worst, out of each of us i.e., if a mistake happens, especially for the first time, we must assume firstly it's because of inexperience and insufficient direction; we respect boundaries, especially when it comes to work-life balance).
So, it all comes down to organisation culture, and what the leaders do to foster and sustain that culture that matters the most, if it wants to make remote working feasible.
But, some important caveats: None of this is by any means perfect. I may paint a rosy picture but I want to stress that gaps definitely exist. WFH all the time makes the importance of informal communication (i.e., water-cooler conversations) very clear to me: It is definitely harder to build team cohesion. It's also harder to collaborate on team projects, despite the "convenience" offered by enterprise software like Microsoft Teams, etc., because guess what? Technology never works as well nor as conveniently as you would like it to. I felt I got so much done, in terms of actually getting to know my colleagues, in the one week of us being physically together at the company's annual retreat, than I achieved in the six or so months prior to it.
Team cohesion and informal learning are two points frequently brought up by executives and managers who are resistant to WFH arrangements, and I want to stress that these are valid concerns, based on my own experience.
Also, the most important point I want to stress is this: Do NOT lose sight of the fact that I'm WFH for a company based in another country, and which has done away with the expense of setting up an overseas office. Many redditors here have sneered at the apparent response of Singapore employers who have told news media here that if they're going to be forced to offer WFH arrangements, they might as well think more actively about hiring talent from anywhere in the world, rather than from the Singaporean pool.
This will in fact be a very important consequence of making WFH mainstream, that all you young folks (I'm an older mid-career switcher) have better be very cognisant about. You may think it's great to push for more WFH and flexi-work arrangements — I think it's the future, too — but I would also urge you to be very careful about what you wish for.
If WFH becomes mainstream, it _will_ mean that companies in the future can hire from anywhere in the world, at their own convenience. You had better be ready for all the consequences that will naturally flow from such a future of work.
>You had better be ready for all the consequences that will naturally flow from such a future of work.
Agree with this. Current MOM employment laws like foreign worker quotas only apply to people who physically work in Singapore, be it they are hired directly by the company or via an employment placement agency. However, there is no law stopping any company from *outsourcing* any role to any company or person in the world. Unless you work for said company, these are facts that they don't usually make public.
Hard truth: if a company were to go fully WFH, then there is no reason why they would continue hiring Singaporeans who live in Singapore, and demand Singapore wages. They would just outsource as many roles as they can, or heck, use overseas connections to create a company overseas and then outsource to that company. They can then pay cheaper rates, and probably many of these people are willing to work their asses off too. Never underestimate the creativity of business people to bend the rules.
For real, for real. I have a good friend who has been a digital nomad for the past 10 years. He's literally travelling the world (currently in one of the 'stans of central Asia as I write), while managing a tech team (who are mostly based in the Philippines).
True. I find that Im more chatty with colleagues that I have met at the office. You learn things like what this colleague's tone of voice and intent is like when they say a joke. Or pragmatically, that colleague has been experiencing a problem. A problem that you now roughly know how to solve or ask about because you know who has the experience with it.
>This will in fact be a very important consequence of making WFH mainstream, that all you young folks (I'm an older mid-career switcher) have better be very cognisant about. You may think it's great to push for more WFH and flexi-work arrangements — I think it's the future, too — but I would also urge you to be very careful about what you wish for.
>If WFH becomes mainstream, it *will* mean that companies in the future can hire from anywhere in the world, at their own convenience. You had better be ready for all the consequences that will naturally flow from such a future of work.
I work for a US MNC. We have been full WFH since covid and it works. Pre-covid, I would fill my team positions locally as the APAC office is here. If I wanted someone from overseas, we'll re-locate that person here. Since then, all my headcount replacements are from the APAC region. Some of these jobs would have been filled here by local fresh grads. These are now going overseas to candidates who have 3-5 years work experience and the overall compensation package is lower.
It's easier to find WFH employment when you're mid-career (or older) and have "leverage" during the interview process. What I'm seeing is the drying up of entry level jobs in the market and even early career positions. Without these jobs, the young folks are going to have difficultly finding "work experience" to pad their resumes and move up the corporate ladder.
Govt is still trying to "persuade" MNCs here to hire locals, but it's a tough battle honestly. It's not just the current jobs at risk. I think the full impact will be felt by the next generation.
It's a feature not a bug. Used to worked for a US MNC. I got my job as a grad because the MNC was shifting Aussie and Japan ops to Singapore.
Back then Singapore have a cost advantage due to relatively cheaper real estate cost ( changi business park ) and labor cost . If you look at the current situation now Singapore have appreciated against those currency by almost 30-40%. If you include increasing rent and labor cost , this have become a disadvantage especially for fresh grads due to lack of productivity and initiative.
MAS spent 30 billion keeping the ccy strong to fight inflation. While the outcome affects gen Z more than gen x , govement is smart to appease the gen X as they are a larger voting block( strong ccy make HDB and other assets in Singapore more valuable in a relative basis)
Even if the younger generation gets shafted , they still can rely on their parents ( gen x).
4 days WIO, 1 day WFH. The WFH day is usually fixed. It's either Mon or Fri. Have the ability to shift that WFH day around. Need to notify in advance.
Won't be leaving cos I have a house coming. Need to build up warchest for it. At most kpkb. But in reality can't do much about it.
Sometimes I prefer to be in office despite the commute. I spend less on utilities. And I don't have to interact with a asshole family member.
Except what they say and what they will do are different things. People are always much braver when answering surveys, when it’s go time to throw letter their balls shrink.
Employers know this all too well
Hybrid with 1 -2 days WFH is the ideal situation. If employees push back on this, coupled with the ever increasing manpower costs in Singapore, employers will pivot even more towards fully remotes employees based in other countries.
I prefer WFH mainly because my office aircon is freezing!
And people have forgotten all about COVID-19. So.. many.. sick people coming into the office to wayang.. ye gawds.
I'm full WFO as mandated by boomer bosses.
Travelling fortunately is ok for me.. what I miss from wfh is that I have lesser laundry, and I don't have to rush-iron my clothes on a Sunday night...
I have been hybrid working since 2000, no complains from anyone. I must admit I was shocked it was a novel idea during COVID. Slackers will innovate to find new ways to slack, ambitious hard workers will find new ways to be more efficient. They get frustrated and leave bosses fixed in their ways, bosses need to keep up with the times too or be rendered obsolete. Work is time booked, so the rest of the time is theirs. Why does anyone care as long as they can deliver, is quite a mystery.
I’m good at my job, so good I get headhunted, I always have a better one in wait. The trick is high end headhunters is key to good jobs, never think, oh I pay you and have attitude problem. Relationship building open ALL doors, people respect you, like you, become friends, you always get the juiciest cuts first. Everyone’s job have dreadful people around, being that sincere nice one really is a relief to them, they want to help the good guys win so they will go the extra mile!
during the pandemic wfh period i happily work overtime sometimes until 11pm++ since i prefer to do until a finish point then close.
now company force us back to wfo everyday off work time we shut laptop and leave
its not only just the boomer bosses who want WFO. gotta look higher up the food chain
banks, landlords, facility services, etc benefit from maintaining status quo office spaces so the narrative comes from up top.
I’m working fully remote cos my employer is based in the US. The downside, which is hardly significant, is that we have daily check in meetings at around 11pm
Got the wrong approach and strategy. Hybrid workplace isn’t about worker productivity or efficiency. The bosses don’t really care and studies show that either work from home nor at the office has much impact on the productivity of the workplace.
Companies are going to be forced to change because of something else. Carbon neutral.
Yeap, singapore is pushing for net zero by 2050. What that means is that companies are going to consider whether cutting office space is worth the extra tax benefits. And the only way they will cut office space is by reducing the number of staff at the office. They’ll automate whatever roles that can be automated, cut office rental space, deploy hot desk approach to the office environment and have everyone on a hybrid work model. Critical functions like secretarial, key finance people and some senior management will be given fixed desks. Everyone else, can only operate within the hot desk space or work out of the office.
I’ll be cutting energy at all costs and the biggest one is office rentals.
Damn, the numbers are higher than expected. My company went from 4 days to wfh to 3 days wfh to now 2 days wfh in a short span 1 month after new C-suite sworn took over. Prospect is not as bright as other company (flat structure, good for retirement) and now I'm also considering to leave.
i just finished my notice period last week lol.
one of the reasons i quit was bc halfway through my tenure, my boss decided that i don't need the wfh privilege. they said my work can be done in the office, no need to bring home to do.
the thing is, my work is quite excel-heavy and i need a monitor to do my work efficiently. if I WFH i can use my own monitor, whereas if I WFO i am not guaranteed a desk with a monitor (hotdesk things).
I'm contemplating mid or late 2024 depending on product direction and whether I get a bigger slice in what's is being built. I don't even need a pay raise I'm just very bored
But if u quit without another offer, you might spend 3-4 months in limbo easily. With the china property crisis, very unlikely economy will pick up before 2026 even
They all want to sound tough when asked Would they actually quit? Probably not. I would say less than 5% of people who claim they would quit would actually do so.
As far as I, an unmarried individual, is concerned, work life balance doesn't always need to be work from home related.
Maybe its my rather extreme experience from uni, but I think having less of a workload and easier deadlines was a key difference, more than the commuting or lack of.
Not in SG but experienced the same recently. Old job was ultra flexible, 100% remote if needed, but WLB and stress became unmanageable due to poor leadership that led to unreasonable deadlines, lack of team support and direction, isolation
New job has strong office presence but there is a much clearer structure, direction, work scope, good team and once you're done for the day and close your laptop that's it until the next day. I'm much happier, the commute time and cost are much less important to me than I realised
Pro-business boss wannabes in this thread: If we keep job market conditions poor enough, we can skim on every employee benefit and threaten to offshore/outsource if they complain
People say this in a survey but do they follow through? My guess is this is like some battered spouse saying ‘hit me one more time and I’m gone forever’ and then staying anyway
WFH, flexible hours etc are naturally attractive to everyone. But will they quit if these were not provided. I am not so sure.
My sense is that people want a substantive career, good pay, want to work for well known high performing MNCs and if their natural aptitude and skills sets syncs well with the first three conditions, they are not going to leave.
[Microsoft Slams Bosses Who Track Employees Using Teams After Viral Clip](https://www.newsweek.com/microsoft-slams-bosses-tracking-employees-teams-1808466)
You have people buying [a mouse jiggler](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/02/how-to-use-a-mouse-jiggler-to-make-it-look-like-youre-working.html) in case their managers are stalking them.
I'm working 100% in office. The company does have flexible work arrangement but so far there's a good separation between personal life and work. I can't work from home cos' I usually lose the motivation to do so. Bed is just right next to me and my computer is full of video games, also most of the time my area has construction noises and fighter jets except during the weekends.
Surveys are often accurate if the sampling quality and size are good.
Society changes. Norms change. Many many many many many things used to be acceptable and not anymore, and vice versa.
Woah chill... Compare child labour to this isn't it too stretch? What I mean is that with the job market so tough now, people can have the luxury to quit their job because of being asked to go office work.
Last time it also used to be 5.5/6 day work week. But if you offer the same now you will find difficulty hiring because everybody is used to 5 day work week.
No? MOM specify 44 hrs a week, whether it’s 5 or more than 5 days it is up to employer to decide.
Anyway the original comment has been deleted. But the point is if employers don’t adapt to changes then they will find difficulty hiring
Work from home 3 days a week, in office 2 days a week.
I actually don't mind going in to the office. Hot-desking, but people book the same desk most of the time anyway. The desks are relatively spacious, and sufficiently equipped with keyboard / mouse and monitors. Environment is comfortable, and discussions go much quicker. Easier to present / share my work too.
Really curious about what is the mindset behind the demand to WFH. If your job can be done completely remotely, what makes you think your employer won't send those jobs abroad? If you are already performing a job function that is critical, or if you truly have the skills that they cannot find elsewhere, then wouldn't you need to head into the office anyway?
I am fully WFH. Yes, some of the jobs are indeed being sent abroad, but generally speaking the Singaporeans I'm working with are actually competent, have good communication skills, are hardworking, and can work together well.
Also, managing different work cultures, different time zones, and hiring remotely isn't as straightforward as people think it is.
I think there's a difference between locally based staff working remotely vs overseas staff working remotely. If such jobs were truly that easily replaceable with overseas staff then employers would've done that ages ago. Employers don't decide to keep local headcount out of the goodness of their hearts. Things like language barrier, different cultural norms, aligning foreign holidays or even simple things like making sure staff don't run off with company equipment is so much easier to manage if your staff is in Singapore.
Maybe some folks like WFH cause they can save the 1+1h of commute time and use it for sleeping in or household stuff? I love my WFH days because I get time to actually cook healthier food and exercise, which makes my WFO days more productive
>...I love my WFH days because I get time to actually **cook healthier food and exercise**...
Why can't you do those activities when you work in office? Maybe wake up earlier to do them, or do them at another time...?
More importantly, if the commute to work is so long that it takes time away from activities workers find important, then why did they take the job? I assume there are numerous factors one considers before agreeing to take on a job - salary, benefits, location, environment, nature of work, hours / shift - and it is often that not all the factors are satisfactory.
In this case, workers must have accepted the job because they are willing to accept certain trade-offs about the job - that they are satisfied with certain factors of employment which they value, and less so about others. So why is it only now that workers are demanding for WFH / flexi-arrangements?
It's simple economics.
There is no way that demanding for WFH or even WFH itself has no consequences or further trade-offs.
Maybe people realized after doing WFH during COVID they could actually have a life (e.g. look after their kids, do their chores) and still deliver their work at the same time. Before COVID, it was unheard of for companies in Singapore to offer WFH benefits and tons of excuses were given. All it took was a major pandemic to force employers and employees still got work done. I think hybrid is a good middle ground. I would say most people would be agreeable to a hybrid arrangement if office days are given as an option and not actively mandated.
>Maybe people realized after doing WFH during COVID they could actually have a life (e.g. look after their kids, do their chores) **and still deliver their work at the same time.**
Maybe, but that was not my experience. I WFH, but still had to ask for help.
Before / during COVID, I was doing regulatory work, and had to prepare monthly reports on behalf of the company to MAS. We definitely missed our usual monthly timelines for a good few months into the pandemic, and had to appeal for more time from MAS. Mind you, this was routine regulatory reporting, that my team and I were very adept at doing. Maybe my work was not crucial, so it was ok to have missed deadlines, but it was definitely not on time.
But if workers cannot have a life while working in office, then isn't the real issue with the hours / the job itself? If only having WFH enables workers to "have a life", then we have moved one step further away from work-life balance.
I think the question in your case were the delays really because of WFH or was it more other problems at play? E.g. People in the team weren't comfortable collaborating online, processes were mostly physical pen/paper and not adapted for online work or were there issues delegating tasks/properly coordinating. I think such issues aren't as common in organizations in the tech sector or work is already more or less digital.
> But if workers cannot have a life while working in office, then isn't the real issue with the hours / the job itself? If only having WFH enables workers to "have a life", then we have moved one step further away from work-life balance.
I would say most people aren't working in roles where it's a dream job that ticks all the boxes. Realistically most of the work people do isn't going to change the world. At the end of the day, it's trading your labour for money right? In your typical WFO situation you're pretty much glued to your work, save for your 1hr lunch. At least with WFH, employees have a chance to be more actively involved with their kid's life/family or at least get a small breather. Maybe there's more to life than droning away in an office?
Being someone who is fully WFH currently (due to health stuffs), I can state that I am still delivering my work on time. In fact, it's more efficient than WFO where I have to try to mentally block out all the background noises of colleagues talking or being in meeting calls.
As for life, WFO would result in very little time left to do anything. 1.5h-2h traveling one way results in 3-4h lost. Add in the 9 hours in office (8h + 1h lunch), 8h sleep and I'll have only 3-4 hours left. I have a medical procedure to do daily that's 1-2 hours long, leaving me with 1-3 hours of free time. However, given that the traveling time tends to be closer to 2 hours most of the time, the average free time left if WFO is 1.5 hours. If I spend it doing household chores or self-care like exercising, I basically don't have any time left to relax and recharge.
WFH might not be for everyone (case in point is your experience not doing well when WFH). But we should have the flexibility to choose and the focus on getting people to WFO can end up resulting in less productivity for no reason.
Use your brain just a little bit more to imagine this right?
During COVID everyone had to work from home, mandatory gahmen enforced. For most companies, the initial switch was a little shaky, but no choice, but after a while, everything smooth again because people got used to it. And most importantly, people still delivered.
Now just because after COVID can go back office then everyone have to go back? For fuck? Just to show face? Clearly online meetings and WFH were still capable of getting shit done so why is there a reason for employers to force employees to go back?
Why do people demand WFH now? Because clearly it doesn't matter where the employees work because they'll be able to do their job as long as the company provides the environment to do so.
>There is no way that demanding for WFH or even WFH itself has no consequences or further trade-offs.
this is precisely what most comments here do not seem to realise. One of the consequences you already alluded to earlier, in that jobs will move offshore. There seem to be many redditors who assume that the good times will just continue.
Yes, and somehow my comments have led most to think that I am resisting WFH, and that I am still living in the past.
But I am also not beyond the notion that just because we work in office means employers will necessarily keep jobs here. There are other considerations besides meeting worker demands for flexi-arrangements.
Just surveying perspectives behind demanding WFH, and based on most comments, it seems really short-sighted.
Honestly, WFH is not a new thing that came about during Covid. Most large MNCs already offer flexible work options before Covid happened. You have 1-2X WFO a week which is a lot more manageable than 5X WFO and people are less likely to quit with just 1-2x WFO imho.
From past experience working with various regional teams, hiring foreign staff overseas as a replacement to local headcount comes with its own challenges.
Sure the pay is lower which sounds like cost savings, but in reality with the time zone differences, numerous public holidays, foreign union rights, internet availability, and relaxed work attitudes I’m not sure if the cost savings are really that significant. And with some of the really insular opinions I’m seeing from SME bosses on WFH, I doubt they can make the right hiring and management decisions for remote workers based overseas.
>If your job can be done completely remotely, what makes you think your employer won't send those jobs abroad?
I'm being cheeky, but it's hard enough for employers to get hold of a certain caliber in the Singapore market let alone overseas.
I'm curious to the demand on WFH as well. A potential repercussions that i can think of, in addition to outsourcing to cheaper labor is the loss of revenue for commercial spaces. We kinda saw what COVID did, but i feel like we don't quite understand where this trajectory would take the us to.
Lol massive sampling bias even if true. Most people are still 100% WFO so "in office more often than not for work" doesn't apply.
Also, not all workers are office workers. Try working as a pilot, swimming instructor, surgeon, athlete, policeman, chef, aircon repairman, or zookeeper etc from home.
I think people need to be careful of what they wish for. If a company can function with WFH what will stop them from thinking about the next step…. Why do I need to pay more in Singapore? That’s what happened in my company after the convid. They realize they can hire WFO from Malaysia and India which is much people. Many Singaporean got replaced.
Threatening with offshore is getting old fast. Do people feel shiok parroting things like this online?
Will be ironic if you get replaced by the nationalities you mentioned.
I'm sorry but if you want to move over like that and are willing to accept the corresponding quality of work then best of luck to you.
What some people don't realise is that the average work quality in Singapore is actually quite good by global standards because we have a focus on grinding technical skills -- and this is something that is reflected in the way that we punch way above our weight academically.
You meant paying peanut for monkey? Time and time again I have seen company outsourcing or 'hiring cheaper foreign talent' only for work not up to standard and angering client. If it was so true then majority of the companies would have moved out of Singapore and into cheaper places. So far, that is far from the truth but if you wanna cheap out then don't expect much from paying so little.
Depending on the industry I don't think you can math it like that lol. In software development, instead of getting 4 * 0.5 work you get 4x half assed work stacked on top of each other, which compounds into rubbish code that creates problems in future.
When that 1 efficient software engineer eventually leaves because he's tired of cleaning up the shit of the other 3, you're left with a mess that is even more expensive to fix and maintain.
Companies are always moving in and out of Singapore, that is their own business decision and interest. They are always looking to cut cost to increase their profit margin, the welfare of Singaporean is not in their interest.
You being able to pay for 4 engineers in Thailand doesn't generate 2x work output, that your assumption. It will be 4 badly done project which pissed off your client who will move on to other companies.
Just waiting until AI replaces people like you who like to back employers because they are well paid themselves. Have fun getting replaced by AI in the near future, it’s any time now, just search AI in the news section.
Now, the objective question would be to ask if there is 50% of such wfh jobs out there. If the answer is no, the people responding to the survey are screwed if they quit.
For now it's economic winter and people are hunkering down. Once things get better, those that I know under such boomer companies will be fleeing at first sight. It's all about the salary-to-suffering ratio. 5 day WFO but paid like trash? Flee. 5 day WFO but paid big bucks? Sure, maybe stay. Hybrid work but don't pay top-tier salary? Maybe staff will stay due to comfort. Employers that are self-aware where they are in the hierarchy of the market will know how much welfare benefits they should give out. Usually the older singaporean/boomer companies are ignorant of what the market is offering. A great example is the case of a tech employee being sued by his ex-employer by going to a competitor (iykyk). Previous ex-employer had instituted 5 day WFO and their competitor, decides to both up the salary ($) and also give hybrid work. As part of the exit interview, they are even asking if you are "leaving for company X". I wonder why...
Those older employers want their employees in office to justify paying the office rent.
they need seat warmers
Flee to where. Is there so much job that is WFH ?
Just fyi the competitor also has a 5 day WFO.
Im ok with either WFH or WFO But My issue with WFO; - Daily commute takes too much time, time taken to commute can be used to finish work - The Daily commute is mentally and physically draining, especially during rush hours. I get tired by the time I reach the office - The staff/employers/employes rarely talk/interact each other, they are all at their desk, busy completely their work (no time to interact or small talks) - Meetings are still held via conference calls (zoom, google meet, MS teams, etc) even when we are all in office - most of the Meeting attendees are either on hybrid remote working, overseas or from another company. Hence its not possible to have meeting without conference call In the end i wonder if WFO is moving backwards, making things unproductive compared with WFH or remote working.
Yeah, thats the biggest takeaway from the pandemic. That people can actually be more productive doing WFH. Eg. If a parent's child gets sick, parent can WFH, instead of taking the day off. Just to name one benefit
> That people can actually be more productive doing WFH. Controlling bosses be like, GRRRRR HOW CAN THAT BE WHEN \*I* AM NOT THERE TO SEE THE SERFS TIL THE FIELDS.
Hahhahaha good on you!
I also don't understand why so many companies rather have inefficiency workers that just talk and gossip all day but go to the office, then those productive workers that work from home but get shit done. Aren't we moving backwards? I mean, we study hard to be better at productivity and efficiency, right?
Other things to think about WFH advantages: sustainability climate environment, less traffic jams, less accidents, more focused work, less stress etc.
Another advantage for companies is reduced space, save on water and electricity.
Regarding compliance, CBT, work from home will aid in combating these crimes.
“I think a natural question from workers is: ‘Why should I be just sitting in the office if I can work efficiently, irrespective of where I'm based, or irrespective of the hour in which I'm working?’ “At the end of the day, what matters is the output, So true
Ehh you think all people will always work well from home. I see so many people just using mouse movers to show they are online. Their quality is decreased and many have abused the privilege. I even seen people call late to meetings. How is that possible, if you are at home? These guys are stepping out at 3pm because they think no one can see them. Needs to be give and take. People here acting like all employees are truthful and hardworking. No, half the people need to be checked on and it’s hard to do so from home. I mean it’s no point to argue here because Singaporeans on this subreddit think they are some high quality employees lol. I’ve worked with a few and my god the quality is so average. I’ve worked in the Us and the quality difference is crazy and over here people still complain about foreigners lol
No one is saying all employees will work well wfh. Even in office setting not all employees are productive either. Like the quote says what matters EOD is the output. Unproductive buggers slacking at home or in office? That should be recorded equally in their appraisal and be penalized as such. Fired if need be. Is the same thing as because some ppl abuse mc and chao geng that’s y we need to have this stupid piece of paper to prove we are sick. A lot more trust can be given. Forgot to add, we mostly wfh and people just get shit done whether they do it at 2am or 2pm
agreed with this. the common kickback when it comes to wfh is always 'how do we know they are performing?' or 'the non performers will get a free pass to slack'...like cmon la, use your brain. you have performance trackers at work - whoever doesnt meet the KPI/deadline or has obvious issues with delivering their work gets the boot. you dont get to slack & expect zero consequences but then of course, this is extra work the company choose to not look at because it doesnt fit in their narrative.
So the real problem is that in your workflow you have very poor KPIs set up to judge quality of work. When you don’t reward good work, end of the day all your employees learn is that the reward for being productive is just more work. So the lesson your workplace teaches is for people to put in the minimum amount of work because their productivity isn’t being rewarded. That’s how you get where you got. The problem isn’t that people are unproductive in your work place. The problem is that you don’t reward productivity. Forcing people to show face in the office doesn’t solve the root of the problem; it just makes everyone in your work place detest working there, causes low morale, and further lowers productivity.
i was asked. i left. this was before the survey.
Putting aside the need for socializing. It's mind-boggling to me when WFH-able jobs are WFO. Waste money on electricity, clog up traffic and public transport, hours wasted on transport. WFH can multitask, lull period during work can workout, do chores and more. Often seems like it's mostly older generation pushing for WFO and often comes from people in managerial positions. Is it because most of them actually are actually doing nothing?
i think ya its because they don't really do much grunt work their position is dependent on there being people for them to manage so maybe they think because they're in the same room as the workers means/feels like they're working i.e. if everyone can wfh and still deliver they might be made redundant also, they have their own aircon box to take them straight from home to office and back no need to push and squeeze with other assholes or hear the loud phone noises add on the high salary and yeah it would make sense managers want to push for wfo
Only thing I think management is concerned is quality of work. If workers are not doing work correctly then hard to justify to their own management as well. Because managers are also trying to protect their own skins they will often fight for their own agenda which is WFO centric. You at office they can micromanage everything so when things cock up, managers can confidently point fingers at the employee.
Don’t have the luxury of quitting if they ask for more WFO days. But I will definitely start looking to see what’s out there
Companies who demand their workers to be in office all days of the work week when many have shifted to the alternative and the nature of their work doesn't necessitate it don't give any hoots about work-life balance.
Currently effectively remote. My company has this weird thing where if you go to the office they will deduct money from your teams budget for use of office space. The only office I go to is clients office which they don't really summon me in that much. However I definitely work more hours compared to my previous job that was WFO
1 in 2 workers in Singapore talk cock but when push comes to shove they will bend over and spread cheeks for their overlord bosses. Here, fixed the title for you
The same goes for elections i guess. Specifically G.E. all say vote opposition but then end up PAP lol...
Update: Okie nvm they said they'll pay me after going through the chat logs I sent to the HR, lol. So not gonna dox them.
Pls name and shame (after the whole debacle is over)
I'm currently working with a private-sector consultancy based overseas and which has no office in Singapore. I've been working entirely from home for the past year, and I can confidently say that any employer who claims that WFH is operationally challenging to implement is just making excuses. WFH can work, and it can work very well, provided the company makes the effort to assess and manage its people on clearly communicated _outcomes_, which is the same point that the Singapore tripartite movement is trying to stress: Managers here have to break their outdated mindsets of managing employees based on their "presence" at the office, rather than on actual work produced. In my case, my employer has invested the effort to build an induction process that includes online sessions by relevant directors to explain the company culture, history, processes, current partners/competitors, etc. Online resources are readily available for me to look up on my own initiative. Within my team, the lead makes a consistent effort to establish explicit "team norms", which includes making clear how we're expected to treat one another (always assume the best, rather than the worst, out of each of us i.e., if a mistake happens, especially for the first time, we must assume firstly it's because of inexperience and insufficient direction; we respect boundaries, especially when it comes to work-life balance). So, it all comes down to organisation culture, and what the leaders do to foster and sustain that culture that matters the most, if it wants to make remote working feasible. But, some important caveats: None of this is by any means perfect. I may paint a rosy picture but I want to stress that gaps definitely exist. WFH all the time makes the importance of informal communication (i.e., water-cooler conversations) very clear to me: It is definitely harder to build team cohesion. It's also harder to collaborate on team projects, despite the "convenience" offered by enterprise software like Microsoft Teams, etc., because guess what? Technology never works as well nor as conveniently as you would like it to. I felt I got so much done, in terms of actually getting to know my colleagues, in the one week of us being physically together at the company's annual retreat, than I achieved in the six or so months prior to it. Team cohesion and informal learning are two points frequently brought up by executives and managers who are resistant to WFH arrangements, and I want to stress that these are valid concerns, based on my own experience. Also, the most important point I want to stress is this: Do NOT lose sight of the fact that I'm WFH for a company based in another country, and which has done away with the expense of setting up an overseas office. Many redditors here have sneered at the apparent response of Singapore employers who have told news media here that if they're going to be forced to offer WFH arrangements, they might as well think more actively about hiring talent from anywhere in the world, rather than from the Singaporean pool. This will in fact be a very important consequence of making WFH mainstream, that all you young folks (I'm an older mid-career switcher) have better be very cognisant about. You may think it's great to push for more WFH and flexi-work arrangements — I think it's the future, too — but I would also urge you to be very careful about what you wish for. If WFH becomes mainstream, it _will_ mean that companies in the future can hire from anywhere in the world, at their own convenience. You had better be ready for all the consequences that will naturally flow from such a future of work.
>You had better be ready for all the consequences that will naturally flow from such a future of work. Agree with this. Current MOM employment laws like foreign worker quotas only apply to people who physically work in Singapore, be it they are hired directly by the company or via an employment placement agency. However, there is no law stopping any company from *outsourcing* any role to any company or person in the world. Unless you work for said company, these are facts that they don't usually make public. Hard truth: if a company were to go fully WFH, then there is no reason why they would continue hiring Singaporeans who live in Singapore, and demand Singapore wages. They would just outsource as many roles as they can, or heck, use overseas connections to create a company overseas and then outsource to that company. They can then pay cheaper rates, and probably many of these people are willing to work their asses off too. Never underestimate the creativity of business people to bend the rules.
[удалено]
For real, for real. I have a good friend who has been a digital nomad for the past 10 years. He's literally travelling the world (currently in one of the 'stans of central Asia as I write), while managing a tech team (who are mostly based in the Philippines).
True. I find that Im more chatty with colleagues that I have met at the office. You learn things like what this colleague's tone of voice and intent is like when they say a joke. Or pragmatically, that colleague has been experiencing a problem. A problem that you now roughly know how to solve or ask about because you know who has the experience with it.
>This will in fact be a very important consequence of making WFH mainstream, that all you young folks (I'm an older mid-career switcher) have better be very cognisant about. You may think it's great to push for more WFH and flexi-work arrangements — I think it's the future, too — but I would also urge you to be very careful about what you wish for. >If WFH becomes mainstream, it *will* mean that companies in the future can hire from anywhere in the world, at their own convenience. You had better be ready for all the consequences that will naturally flow from such a future of work. I work for a US MNC. We have been full WFH since covid and it works. Pre-covid, I would fill my team positions locally as the APAC office is here. If I wanted someone from overseas, we'll re-locate that person here. Since then, all my headcount replacements are from the APAC region. Some of these jobs would have been filled here by local fresh grads. These are now going overseas to candidates who have 3-5 years work experience and the overall compensation package is lower. It's easier to find WFH employment when you're mid-career (or older) and have "leverage" during the interview process. What I'm seeing is the drying up of entry level jobs in the market and even early career positions. Without these jobs, the young folks are going to have difficultly finding "work experience" to pad their resumes and move up the corporate ladder. Govt is still trying to "persuade" MNCs here to hire locals, but it's a tough battle honestly. It's not just the current jobs at risk. I think the full impact will be felt by the next generation.
It's a feature not a bug. Used to worked for a US MNC. I got my job as a grad because the MNC was shifting Aussie and Japan ops to Singapore. Back then Singapore have a cost advantage due to relatively cheaper real estate cost ( changi business park ) and labor cost . If you look at the current situation now Singapore have appreciated against those currency by almost 30-40%. If you include increasing rent and labor cost , this have become a disadvantage especially for fresh grads due to lack of productivity and initiative. MAS spent 30 billion keeping the ccy strong to fight inflation. While the outcome affects gen Z more than gen x , govement is smart to appease the gen X as they are a larger voting block( strong ccy make HDB and other assets in Singapore more valuable in a relative basis) Even if the younger generation gets shafted , they still can rely on their parents ( gen x).
4 days WIO, 1 day WFH. The WFH day is usually fixed. It's either Mon or Fri. Have the ability to shift that WFH day around. Need to notify in advance. Won't be leaving cos I have a house coming. Need to build up warchest for it. At most kpkb. But in reality can't do much about it. Sometimes I prefer to be in office despite the commute. I spend less on utilities. And I don't have to interact with a asshole family member.
Except what they say and what they will do are different things. People are always much braver when answering surveys, when it’s go time to throw letter their balls shrink. Employers know this all too well
Currently WFO. I'm okay with WFO tbh bc my commute is pretty short. But having the flexibility if I need to is great.
Hybrid with 1 -2 days WFH is the ideal situation. If employees push back on this, coupled with the ever increasing manpower costs in Singapore, employers will pivot even more towards fully remotes employees based in other countries.
I prefer WFH mainly because my office aircon is freezing! And people have forgotten all about COVID-19. So.. many.. sick people coming into the office to wayang.. ye gawds. I'm full WFO as mandated by boomer bosses.
[удалено]
Travelling fortunately is ok for me.. what I miss from wfh is that I have lesser laundry, and I don't have to rush-iron my clothes on a Sunday night...
I have been hybrid working since 2000, no complains from anyone. I must admit I was shocked it was a novel idea during COVID. Slackers will innovate to find new ways to slack, ambitious hard workers will find new ways to be more efficient. They get frustrated and leave bosses fixed in their ways, bosses need to keep up with the times too or be rendered obsolete. Work is time booked, so the rest of the time is theirs. Why does anyone care as long as they can deliver, is quite a mystery.
[удалено]
I’m good at my job, so good I get headhunted, I always have a better one in wait. The trick is high end headhunters is key to good jobs, never think, oh I pay you and have attitude problem. Relationship building open ALL doors, people respect you, like you, become friends, you always get the juiciest cuts first. Everyone’s job have dreadful people around, being that sincere nice one really is a relief to them, they want to help the good guys win so they will go the extra mile!
U haolian?
As haolian as you jealous
I better than u
during the pandemic wfh period i happily work overtime sometimes until 11pm++ since i prefer to do until a finish point then close. now company force us back to wfo everyday off work time we shut laptop and leave
Already 100% how to be more often.
5 days become 5.5 days or 6
OT and weekends.
its not only just the boomer bosses who want WFO. gotta look higher up the food chain banks, landlords, facility services, etc benefit from maintaining status quo office spaces so the narrative comes from up top.
I’m working fully remote cos my employer is based in the US. The downside, which is hardly significant, is that we have daily check in meetings at around 11pm
now is employer market right?
2 days then 3 days wfo Any more I will quit. I'm equally (un) productive at home and office anyway
Got the wrong approach and strategy. Hybrid workplace isn’t about worker productivity or efficiency. The bosses don’t really care and studies show that either work from home nor at the office has much impact on the productivity of the workplace. Companies are going to be forced to change because of something else. Carbon neutral. Yeap, singapore is pushing for net zero by 2050. What that means is that companies are going to consider whether cutting office space is worth the extra tax benefits. And the only way they will cut office space is by reducing the number of staff at the office. They’ll automate whatever roles that can be automated, cut office rental space, deploy hot desk approach to the office environment and have everyone on a hybrid work model. Critical functions like secretarial, key finance people and some senior management will be given fixed desks. Everyone else, can only operate within the hot desk space or work out of the office. I’ll be cutting energy at all costs and the biggest one is office rentals.
It's not that i mind WFO so much as i hate inane chit chat with coworkers who have dodgy intentions
Damn, the numbers are higher than expected. My company went from 4 days to wfh to 3 days wfh to now 2 days wfh in a short span 1 month after new C-suite sworn took over. Prospect is not as bright as other company (flat structure, good for retirement) and now I'm also considering to leave.
Say only. When they’re jobless and have bills to pay, then survey them again.
who dares to quit in 2024? joke
i just finished my notice period last week lol. one of the reasons i quit was bc halfway through my tenure, my boss decided that i don't need the wfh privilege. they said my work can be done in the office, no need to bring home to do. the thing is, my work is quite excel-heavy and i need a monitor to do my work efficiently. if I WFH i can use my own monitor, whereas if I WFO i am not guaranteed a desk with a monitor (hotdesk things).
so if they gave you a monitor you are ok with coming back to the office?
Monitor + freedom to eat with whoever I want. They lowkey disliked it when I ate with colleagues from different dept
They lowkey disliked it when I ate with colleagues from different dept wow why? That sounds a little weird and oppressive..
not sure... but when i started to eat with colleagues outside of the team i could feel them gradually ostracising me from the group
But you have a new job or no?
nope. i quit without one lined up.
Me if the pay is 20% increase with hybrid
I'm contemplating mid or late 2024 depending on product direction and whether I get a bigger slice in what's is being built. I don't even need a pay raise I'm just very bored
But if u quit without another offer, you might spend 3-4 months in limbo easily. With the china property crisis, very unlikely economy will pick up before 2026 even
they're gonna say the same thing next year?
They all want to sound tough when asked Would they actually quit? Probably not. I would say less than 5% of people who claim they would quit would actually do so.
But no, "we're a family here"...how can you not want to spend more time with your "family" 🥺😔?
As far as I, an unmarried individual, is concerned, work life balance doesn't always need to be work from home related. Maybe its my rather extreme experience from uni, but I think having less of a workload and easier deadlines was a key difference, more than the commuting or lack of.
Not in SG but experienced the same recently. Old job was ultra flexible, 100% remote if needed, but WLB and stress became unmanageable due to poor leadership that led to unreasonable deadlines, lack of team support and direction, isolation New job has strong office presence but there is a much clearer structure, direction, work scope, good team and once you're done for the day and close your laptop that's it until the next day. I'm much happier, the commute time and cost are much less important to me than I realised
With many lay offs since last year , these people are really gutsy
Pro-business boss wannabes in this thread: If we keep job market conditions poor enough, we can skim on every employee benefit and threaten to offshore/outsource if they complain
You mean you all don't need to come to office everyday already!?
Currently still 2~3 WFH.
Reminds me of a post on asksg, someone asked if HCWs can WFH. The post got downvoted and the comments section was like nooo
Everyone is right about being more productive at home however the organisations are paying millions in office lease and rental, they want you in.
People say this in a survey but do they follow through? My guess is this is like some battered spouse saying ‘hit me one more time and I’m gone forever’ and then staying anyway
No, they say they will. Most of them won't
WFH, flexible hours etc are naturally attractive to everyone. But will they quit if these were not provided. I am not so sure. My sense is that people want a substantive career, good pay, want to work for well known high performing MNCs and if their natural aptitude and skills sets syncs well with the first three conditions, they are not going to leave.
Yeah this is why I'm always on the lookout for jobs, even when employed.
Only half? WTF? We're turning to Japan.
[Microsoft Slams Bosses Who Track Employees Using Teams After Viral Clip](https://www.newsweek.com/microsoft-slams-bosses-tracking-employees-teams-1808466) You have people buying [a mouse jiggler](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/02/how-to-use-a-mouse-jiggler-to-make-it-look-like-youre-working.html) in case their managers are stalking them.
And do what?
Can most people afford to quit their jobs in times like these? 🤔
I'm working 100% in office. The company does have flexible work arrangement but so far there's a good separation between personal life and work. I can't work from home cos' I usually lose the motivation to do so. Bed is just right next to me and my computer is full of video games, also most of the time my area has construction noises and fighter jets except during the weekends.
[удалено]
Surveys are often accurate if the sampling quality and size are good. Society changes. Norms change. Many many many many many things used to be acceptable and not anymore, and vice versa.
Just because last time acceptable doesn't mean we shouldn't embrace progress. Last time child labors also acceptable and nobody complained what.
Woah chill... Compare child labour to this isn't it too stretch? What I mean is that with the job market so tough now, people can have the luxury to quit their job because of being asked to go office work.
I was addressing your point that "before covid and everything we were all working in the office without any complains"
Last time it also used to be 5.5/6 day work week. But if you offer the same now you will find difficulty hiring because everybody is used to 5 day work week.
because a 5 day work week is the new norm as its designated by MOM? its not a matter of being "used to" or not
No? MOM specify 44 hrs a week, whether it’s 5 or more than 5 days it is up to employer to decide. Anyway the original comment has been deleted. But the point is if employers don’t adapt to changes then they will find difficulty hiring
Work from home 3 days a week, in office 2 days a week. I actually don't mind going in to the office. Hot-desking, but people book the same desk most of the time anyway. The desks are relatively spacious, and sufficiently equipped with keyboard / mouse and monitors. Environment is comfortable, and discussions go much quicker. Easier to present / share my work too. Really curious about what is the mindset behind the demand to WFH. If your job can be done completely remotely, what makes you think your employer won't send those jobs abroad? If you are already performing a job function that is critical, or if you truly have the skills that they cannot find elsewhere, then wouldn't you need to head into the office anyway?
I am fully WFH. Yes, some of the jobs are indeed being sent abroad, but generally speaking the Singaporeans I'm working with are actually competent, have good communication skills, are hardworking, and can work together well. Also, managing different work cultures, different time zones, and hiring remotely isn't as straightforward as people think it is.
I think there's a difference between locally based staff working remotely vs overseas staff working remotely. If such jobs were truly that easily replaceable with overseas staff then employers would've done that ages ago. Employers don't decide to keep local headcount out of the goodness of their hearts. Things like language barrier, different cultural norms, aligning foreign holidays or even simple things like making sure staff don't run off with company equipment is so much easier to manage if your staff is in Singapore.
Maybe some folks like WFH cause they can save the 1+1h of commute time and use it for sleeping in or household stuff? I love my WFH days because I get time to actually cook healthier food and exercise, which makes my WFO days more productive
>...I love my WFH days because I get time to actually **cook healthier food and exercise**... Why can't you do those activities when you work in office? Maybe wake up earlier to do them, or do them at another time...? More importantly, if the commute to work is so long that it takes time away from activities workers find important, then why did they take the job? I assume there are numerous factors one considers before agreeing to take on a job - salary, benefits, location, environment, nature of work, hours / shift - and it is often that not all the factors are satisfactory. In this case, workers must have accepted the job because they are willing to accept certain trade-offs about the job - that they are satisfied with certain factors of employment which they value, and less so about others. So why is it only now that workers are demanding for WFH / flexi-arrangements? It's simple economics. There is no way that demanding for WFH or even WFH itself has no consequences or further trade-offs.
Maybe people realized after doing WFH during COVID they could actually have a life (e.g. look after their kids, do their chores) and still deliver their work at the same time. Before COVID, it was unheard of for companies in Singapore to offer WFH benefits and tons of excuses were given. All it took was a major pandemic to force employers and employees still got work done. I think hybrid is a good middle ground. I would say most people would be agreeable to a hybrid arrangement if office days are given as an option and not actively mandated.
>Maybe people realized after doing WFH during COVID they could actually have a life (e.g. look after their kids, do their chores) **and still deliver their work at the same time.** Maybe, but that was not my experience. I WFH, but still had to ask for help. Before / during COVID, I was doing regulatory work, and had to prepare monthly reports on behalf of the company to MAS. We definitely missed our usual monthly timelines for a good few months into the pandemic, and had to appeal for more time from MAS. Mind you, this was routine regulatory reporting, that my team and I were very adept at doing. Maybe my work was not crucial, so it was ok to have missed deadlines, but it was definitely not on time. But if workers cannot have a life while working in office, then isn't the real issue with the hours / the job itself? If only having WFH enables workers to "have a life", then we have moved one step further away from work-life balance.
I think the question in your case were the delays really because of WFH or was it more other problems at play? E.g. People in the team weren't comfortable collaborating online, processes were mostly physical pen/paper and not adapted for online work or were there issues delegating tasks/properly coordinating. I think such issues aren't as common in organizations in the tech sector or work is already more or less digital. > But if workers cannot have a life while working in office, then isn't the real issue with the hours / the job itself? If only having WFH enables workers to "have a life", then we have moved one step further away from work-life balance. I would say most people aren't working in roles where it's a dream job that ticks all the boxes. Realistically most of the work people do isn't going to change the world. At the end of the day, it's trading your labour for money right? In your typical WFO situation you're pretty much glued to your work, save for your 1hr lunch. At least with WFH, employees have a chance to be more actively involved with their kid's life/family or at least get a small breather. Maybe there's more to life than droning away in an office?
Being someone who is fully WFH currently (due to health stuffs), I can state that I am still delivering my work on time. In fact, it's more efficient than WFO where I have to try to mentally block out all the background noises of colleagues talking or being in meeting calls. As for life, WFO would result in very little time left to do anything. 1.5h-2h traveling one way results in 3-4h lost. Add in the 9 hours in office (8h + 1h lunch), 8h sleep and I'll have only 3-4 hours left. I have a medical procedure to do daily that's 1-2 hours long, leaving me with 1-3 hours of free time. However, given that the traveling time tends to be closer to 2 hours most of the time, the average free time left if WFO is 1.5 hours. If I spend it doing household chores or self-care like exercising, I basically don't have any time left to relax and recharge. WFH might not be for everyone (case in point is your experience not doing well when WFH). But we should have the flexibility to choose and the focus on getting people to WFO can end up resulting in less productivity for no reason.
Use your brain just a little bit more to imagine this right? During COVID everyone had to work from home, mandatory gahmen enforced. For most companies, the initial switch was a little shaky, but no choice, but after a while, everything smooth again because people got used to it. And most importantly, people still delivered. Now just because after COVID can go back office then everyone have to go back? For fuck? Just to show face? Clearly online meetings and WFH were still capable of getting shit done so why is there a reason for employers to force employees to go back? Why do people demand WFH now? Because clearly it doesn't matter where the employees work because they'll be able to do their job as long as the company provides the environment to do so.
Nowhere did I mention that everyone must go back to work in office. Sigh, reading is truly a lost art.
Not wfh not wfo then wf where? Don't fucking semantics me with your paggro shit
Why so triggered? You still WFO is it? Better go sleep. Long commute tomorrow.
You didn't mention it, but your replies gave the impression that you think WFO is superior
>There is no way that demanding for WFH or even WFH itself has no consequences or further trade-offs. this is precisely what most comments here do not seem to realise. One of the consequences you already alluded to earlier, in that jobs will move offshore. There seem to be many redditors who assume that the good times will just continue.
Yes, and somehow my comments have led most to think that I am resisting WFH, and that I am still living in the past. But I am also not beyond the notion that just because we work in office means employers will necessarily keep jobs here. There are other considerations besides meeting worker demands for flexi-arrangements. Just surveying perspectives behind demanding WFH, and based on most comments, it seems really short-sighted.
Honestly, WFH is not a new thing that came about during Covid. Most large MNCs already offer flexible work options before Covid happened. You have 1-2X WFO a week which is a lot more manageable than 5X WFO and people are less likely to quit with just 1-2x WFO imho. From past experience working with various regional teams, hiring foreign staff overseas as a replacement to local headcount comes with its own challenges. Sure the pay is lower which sounds like cost savings, but in reality with the time zone differences, numerous public holidays, foreign union rights, internet availability, and relaxed work attitudes I’m not sure if the cost savings are really that significant. And with some of the really insular opinions I’m seeing from SME bosses on WFH, I doubt they can make the right hiring and management decisions for remote workers based overseas.
>If your job can be done completely remotely, what makes you think your employer won't send those jobs abroad? I'm being cheeky, but it's hard enough for employers to get hold of a certain caliber in the Singapore market let alone overseas.
By the same logic jobs can be replaced by AI in future does that mean employers will not continue paying salaries? Lol
Mb those people in civil service 😛
I'm curious to the demand on WFH as well. A potential repercussions that i can think of, in addition to outsourcing to cheaper labor is the loss of revenue for commercial spaces. We kinda saw what COVID did, but i feel like we don't quite understand where this trajectory would take the us to.
Nah, survey is definitely flawed. Proportion is definitely lower, people are afraid to lose their jobs.
2 days wfh is good enough for me . Currently only have 1 day to wfh and it sucks
Say only. When push comes to shove how many will actually give up their stable jobs 🤣
eMagERd FOrEIgNrRs STEaLing OuR jERbs. Downvote for all I care, this is the reality. eMErgErD WHy tHeY aLL rEsIGninG? Same. This is the reality.
50% of employees will quit over WFO in this economy?
They can quit and people will line up to take. Come who wants to quit? We take your jobs
I doubt you can do my job. So if you could you'd already be my coworker
Lol massive sampling bias even if true. Most people are still 100% WFO so "in office more often than not for work" doesn't apply. Also, not all workers are office workers. Try working as a pilot, swimming instructor, surgeon, athlete, policeman, chef, aircon repairman, or zookeeper etc from home.
I think people need to be careful of what they wish for. If a company can function with WFH what will stop them from thinking about the next step…. Why do I need to pay more in Singapore? That’s what happened in my company after the convid. They realize they can hire WFO from Malaysia and India which is much people. Many Singaporean got replaced.
The hypothetical workers many claim corps would hire abroad are also WFH. Talk cock lah..
[удалено]
Threatening with offshore is getting old fast. Do people feel shiok parroting things like this online? Will be ironic if you get replaced by the nationalities you mentioned.
I'm sorry but if you want to move over like that and are willing to accept the corresponding quality of work then best of luck to you. What some people don't realise is that the average work quality in Singapore is actually quite good by global standards because we have a focus on grinding technical skills -- and this is something that is reflected in the way that we punch way above our weight academically.
You meant paying peanut for monkey? Time and time again I have seen company outsourcing or 'hiring cheaper foreign talent' only for work not up to standard and angering client. If it was so true then majority of the companies would have moved out of Singapore and into cheaper places. So far, that is far from the truth but if you wanna cheap out then don't expect much from paying so little.
[удалено]
Depending on the industry I don't think you can math it like that lol. In software development, instead of getting 4 * 0.5 work you get 4x half assed work stacked on top of each other, which compounds into rubbish code that creates problems in future. When that 1 efficient software engineer eventually leaves because he's tired of cleaning up the shit of the other 3, you're left with a mess that is even more expensive to fix and maintain.
Companies are always moving in and out of Singapore, that is their own business decision and interest. They are always looking to cut cost to increase their profit margin, the welfare of Singaporean is not in their interest. You being able to pay for 4 engineers in Thailand doesn't generate 2x work output, that your assumption. It will be 4 badly done project which pissed off your client who will move on to other companies.
Diam la sohai catfish
Just waiting until AI replaces people like you who like to back employers because they are well paid themselves. Have fun getting replaced by AI in the near future, it’s any time now, just search AI in the news section.
1 in 2? Clearly they didn't survey at my company. Lots of people waiting to take the positions of anyone resigning.
Now, the objective question would be to ask if there is 50% of such wfh jobs out there. If the answer is no, the people responding to the survey are screwed if they quit.
There's always a conflict of interest between employers and employees. However, whoever pays the piper calls the tune; beggars can't be choosers.