Wait a second before you applaud for permanent WFH

Whether your are an employee or employer. Take a moment to see the good, bad and ugly of #WFH

For a brief period in time, Airbnb was rated as the most attractive place to work in the whole world. They beat Google to claim the top spot. Last week, when they decided to lay off 25% of their workforce, the way in which they did was appreciated. The warm letter by the CEO won many hearts on Twitter and the likes. I’m sure, no one who received the pink slip was applauding. 

Then comes a series of tech first, digital native companies like Twitter, Shopify who are boldly announcing their decision to extend permanent work from home (WFH) option even beyond the mandatory lockdown period. Again, people are cheering as though a colonial era came to end. Some kind of liberation from tyrannical office?

With permanent WFH, a day may come when employees call out, that they have been geographically discriminated

There’s too many nuances as seen from POV of an employee, as well an employer.

First, let me tell you about the employee version if you opt for permanent WFH

The Good: Assuming your bai (maid) is back, you save money and time on fuel and commute woes; you can stay in those fluffy pajaymas and never have to dress up heavily on a daily basis. You can enjoy the finer comforts in life, eat home food, take a nap or a stroll after lunch, never have to attend a meeting that could have been an email, and so on. You can apply for any company in the world. How cool is that!  

The Bad: But here’s what you miss. Meeting new people, building rapport with your manager, subordinates, spontaneously discovering a new project some other team is working on, which you would love to be a part of. Most importantly, the freedom of working undisturbed from your home turn into a feeling of ‘am I being ignored in my office?’. Double this sentiment if your CEO (or even manager’s manger will do) doesn’t know you by your name when they last time met you at elevator. Quadruple it if you were hired remotely and never met the top brass. 

The Ugly: We have seen employees protesting, walking out, and calling out discriminations and harassment of all kinds. Heartening to see when justice is served, but more often than not, it is the employer who wins. With permanent WFH, a day may come when employees call out, that they have been geographically discriminated or received unfair appraisal vis-à-vis someone who works in-situ at office. This is highly likely, and when that day comes, remember, who chose the option of WFH, not who made that option available. 

When an employee is excommunicado, no matter how much whistle they blow or make a hue and cry, the world will see it as ‘disgruntled employee calling grapes as sour’. Some deeply researching journalist may feature your agony story, for the world at large to sympathize, and it is not going to help you get the lost time in your career progress. 

Now the employer version. 

The Good: as globalization progresses erasing country borders like a spilled packet of milk on rangoli, they get to cherry pick employees from any corner of the world. Those who previously could not apply for a job due to relocation will now be part of the consideration. Employer wins in many folds here. Pay at PPP rates, pay at lower dearness at par with remote location, save on immigration hassle and cost, reduced fixed costs including office rent. Just add a few more cents to dollars to underwrite the cost of your home internet and sponsor a chair. This is the next best thing to happen after gig economy. 

The Bad: Day after day in the Covid era, we see privately held / funded companies who once lobbied the hell out to make favorable regulations or pushed back government intervention are now going with big begging bowl to government to bail them out with taxpayer’s money. That being the case, Silicon Valley companies already compete with Indian companies due to free markets. That’s fair, but we enjoyed lower cost of doing business. Now imagine your employees are being poached by them. can you handle it? 

An immigrant engineer in US under any visa makes no less than $60,000 per year. Can you even match half of it here? If you do so, is it viable for you. For how long?

And if you thought you can hire from other cheaper markets, probably, SV companies are grazing those green fields already. 

The Ugly: There’s not much downside for employers except some initial attrition. Once dust settles, it’s all the same. 

What should you do?

Firstly, understand what no organization ever reveals to you. ‘Every employee is a resource’. That’s the department’s name if you see the unabbreviated form of HR. They can make it as fancy as it sounds, call it people first, talent, smart creatives, and so on. But in practice, every human working in a company, from CEO to janitor, are expendable. 

Second, companies exist to maximize shareholders wealth. They will keep pursuing every option to reduce cost and increase profits.

1. See where you fit in.
2. WFH for employee is not same as independent freelancing gigs / consultants.

Avoid the mass hysteria of job erosion. Avoid premature celebration of permanent WFH. Take a moment and sort your own priorities. Take everything with a pinch of salt, including this article. 

--

Sreeraman Thiagarajan is CEO of agrahyah & aawaz.com. He tweets at @sreeraman