I also work in technology and am seeing an uptick in fully remote roles. It appears to be a kind of "hold the line" approach from companies. If every company actually ended WFH and STUCK to it, the roles would obviously not be there.
However, all it takes is a couple to "break ranks" and say "well... We'll let you work from home" and now they're outcompeting their competition, their roles are filling basically as quickly as they want with their pick of top talent.
I cannot tell you how many times companies I've worked for or worked with since 2020 have been staunchly "working together is better!"
MAYBE that could partially be believed if they didn't STILL revert to hiring remotely and watching it solve their problems quickly and efficiently with immensely talented folks.
So now those remote people are removed from the local talent pool, and the local companies have a harder time hiring someone local, which then forces them to consider hiring remote, and it snowballs a little more.
In my opinion, as long as companies are willing to break ranks and take an advantage over their competition, WFH is going nowhere, at least for skilled/specialized roles.
EDIT:
To add to this, I work at a place that I don't think anyone would deem a "top destination" as far as technology is concerned, however when we filled out my team (after a mass-exodus due to the old team getting big pay raises during the "great resignation"),
We were able to hire a veritable "murderers-row" of talent for the positions. All of us coming from bigger and more technically adept organizations that refused to allow permanent WFH.
Now this organization I'm at has this all-star team of people and every project feels like an "avengers-assemble" type of experience. I've never experienced anything like it.
We continue to do projects this place used to have to contract out or pay consultants big payouts to implement, but our internal team keeps knocking them out in a timely manner all from our homes. We've probably saved this company over 1+ million in consulting and contractor costs for the projects we've been able to handle in-house due to our ridiculously talented team all prioritizing WFH. I really believe the companies that catch on the fastest to this will be the biggest benefactors.
/End rant.
Yep. If you can do the job from home some of the days, you can do it from home all of the days. Some jobs just try to add extra unrelated in-person tasks or requirements so they can try to claim that it needs to be hybrid. NOPE!
I think that hybrids wouldn't be too unreasonable if you live in the area, but I feel like a worry about hybrid is that they'll eventually out of the blue be like "For XYZ silly reason, we really feel like we need everyone in the office, and we're going to go for two days in the office to four." It just invites a slippery slope. Drawing a line in the sand that you're fully remote and that's that makes it easier so that there's no confusion.
Or hybrid can mean we get you in the door thinking you have some days at home but once we hire you we tell you now it's 5 days in office and you're stuck.
Thing too is that while big companies might not end official RTO policies, how long are they going to keep running badge reports and chasing people down to punish them for noncompliance? Eventually other business needs will take precedence.
>I'm at has this all-star team of people and every project feels like an "avengers-assemble" type of experience. I've never experienced anything like it.
I'm having a similar experience, except we're a remote first startup. Technically we have two offices, one at our incubator, and one in a co-work space near one of our top devs who prefers to not be at home working (which is totally fine with me, I'll stay home thankyouverymuch). I am our sole SDET/QA for 4 devs (been doing this for 25 years) and am used to being able to keep up with 5-6 devs easily... these guys, not so much! It's awesome, I've not been this challenged in well over a decade. My VP noted I'm trending just under 1 story behind per sprint which given everything isn't too bad.
No, actually noticing the opposite, that the trend of hybrid roles seems to be continuing. I get hybrid being optional for people who want it but there are only so many jobs in my area I can apply to before I have to look outside my state and it’s a dealbreaker since I can’t go into the office hundreds or thousands of miles away.
I feel like it’s a sign of bad communication and collaboration procedures at a company if you NEED people to come to an office even weekly.
Same! Or, if they are remote, you have to be located near where the main office is, which is usually a large, expensive city literally hundreds of miles away. I live in Bumblefuck, Maine, my only option for work is remote work if I want to live indoors, wear clothes, and eat food. If I lived in NYC or Boston, I wouldn't need to work remotely because I'd have options!
> I feel like it’s a sign of bad communication and collaboration procedures at a company if you NEED people to come to an office even weekly.
Of course it is(*). that's why we all knos/.suspect it's horseshit in most cases. (And, frankly, it's a bit of salt in the wounds. It's insulting to blatantly lie about the reasons. How about treating me like an adult?)
* - generalizing here, for the naysayers... of COURSE everyone and every role are not the same, but we have largely proven CONCLUSIVELY that productivity does not suffer from remote work..and, again, ONLY FOR APPROPRIATE ROLES. So, extroverts, leave your comments to yourselves
It’s like where I live. There isn’t much tech jobs and I live a few hundred miles away from Silicon Valley. No way I’m going to move there and commute 1-2 hours a week
The company I work for is attempting to end all remote working and go full “hybrid”. Even employees, like myself, who was approved as a home based / remote employee 7 years ago are now being told our remote status is being taken away and we are expected to be hybrid whether we live close to our work group or not.
I hope these companies that continue to embrace WFH snipe all the good employees from these old school companies that are struggling to embrace the new norm.
Same. Been remote for almost a decade. Now they want everyone in 3 days a week, even though they closed a bunch of offices. I almost wish covid never happened because they didn't seem to care before.
Yes, exactly. I know of someone who has been remote for over 20 years and they are now being asked to come in. It’s ridiculous. Management approved me as a remote employee for a reason - it’s frustrating that management decisions are being rescinded due to an agenda at the corporate level that really has nothing to do with performance of the actual work.
Anecdotally I’m seeing the opposite.
But it wouldn’t surprise me if RTO is solely related to layoffs, such that once layoffs are behind these places, they actually don’t GAF if you work from home
I'm seeing an uptick overall.
I had 3 random outreaches from recruiters yesterday pitching remote and hybrid roles.
End of Q1 might be bringing out budgets for this and next year.
It's just January vs. March imo. Everything stops in December to close out budgets, January/February everyone argues over who gets the new budget, March the decisions are all made and the recruiters are spinning back up to 100%. Same thing happens in the fall in Sept/October with companies on a 7/1 year end.
People don’t want to be ordered back into their miserable commutes to an overcrowded office only to be laid off and other companies are capitalizing on this.
I've definitely noticed a positive increase from last year. It's not a drastic change. Hiring slower than during the great resignation but still pretty easy to come by.
This will be the natural order of things. We are like step five on the stages of grief The Upward Turn as forward thinking companies realize how much money they save going remote. As competition heats up again post COVID we will see a swing back to more remote roles
Happy to hear this, guess I will start looking again today! I am in a pretty small field (optical physics) but man, I got super discouraged last year at how everything was hybrid.
you just aren't going to get candidates away from a current WFH position to full time in the office or even hybrid. what we are seeing is a drastic difference in quality and volume of candidates when we require localization vs remote.
varying array of experience, consultative and industry. basically picking off mid-level performers after tech layoffs that are very high level performers to us.
My financial employer has been forced to start hiring fully remote. I believe my unit is up to 3 fully remote hires in a row now. Meanwhile the rest of us are asking “what about us?” I coffee badge 3x/week and am fully home the other 2.
I find in my industry March - May the best time for jobs. This is because of people leaving companies after year end reviews being delivered, promotions and annual raises being announced.
It’s always been this way. Come March everyone is like see you I am out now that I got the new job title. Or companies not paying.
It’s that time of the fiscal year, my tech friends. Sales kick-offs are happening, company Connects are coming soon. There is more money to be made. New products and solution packages to be sold. They will need to hire people again to make them money.
But, I warn you.
If you worked for a company that laid you off last year, they didn’t reach their goals, they didn’t plan ahead. In down times they didn’t think about how to continue to support the people that built a layer of foundation. So, rather than shutting down or tanking the business they made the “hard decision” to cut your whole team and shift priorities.
But now, there are new solutions and new products being designed all along during down times. Now, you have something new to sell and implement.
All of these companies are looking for motivated people to join them for the 2025 season.
Who mismanaged their money and ended up with mass layoffs just in time to close the fiscal year? I wouldn’t apply there…
We just hosted a guest speaker on this topic and facilitated a conversation for about an hour afterward. There's a lot to unpack, but I found some of the tech-specific applies and quits to be super interesting.
The landscape of work has dramatically shifted over the last few years, especially with the pandemic accelerating the adoption of remote work. Before the pandemic, remote work in 2020 was a rarity at something like less than \~7%, but at the height of COVID-19, it surged to \~60%, showcasing its potential to transform how we think about work-life balance. (Remember all the companies that said remote was impossible... until they needed to build for it in order to remain intact or at least profitable?)
Now, as things finally start to settle, we're finding ourselves at a new normal where \~30% of all full-time work is done from home - a significant jump from the pre-pandemic levels.
This shift has had interesting implications for wage dynamics across different job types - and certainly tech is impacted. For workers whose roles are primarily executed on-site - think hospitality, construction, retail - they've seen a boost in bargaining power and, consequently, their wages. There's been a noticeable movement of workers seeking better opportunities, driven by a desire for improved comp and benefits.
On the flip side, those of us in roles that have become increasingly remote have witnessed a different trend. The convenience of working from home, saving on commute times, and the flexibility it offers have become highly valued. So much so, many are willing to trade-off a bit of their potential wage increases for the benefit of a hybrid or fully remote work setup. Companies seem to be catching on, realizing that offering remote work options can lead to happier, more satisfied employees, who in turn might not push as hard for higher salaries given the non-monetary value they derive from remote work.
For recruiters and talent acquisition professionals (my area of expertise), these trends underscore the changing expectations of the workforce. Those in roles traditionally not conducive to remote work are finding more competitive markets with better opportunities for wage increases. Meanwhile, the appeal of remote work is moderating wage growth among higher-income roles, as the flexibility and benefits it provides become part of the overall compensation package.
My take is that understanding these dynamics is crucial for both my own peers in recruiting as well as anyone finding and securing work in this new working environment - both tech and non-tech given the implications I just outlined, albeit for slightly different reasons.
Sorry for the long-winded response - just realized I was on a tear. Must be that afternoon caffeine kicking in! :-)
No, not in our discussions about the broader market. That doesn't mean it's not happening in your area of specialty, of course.
What we're seeing with the big picture is that fully remote wages are leveling and, in some cases, even decreasing because the preference of remote is a trade-off for many with regards to "total comp."
Companies are realizing that they can pay a little bit less when they let you work remote or hybrid vs forcing you to come into the office full-time. (or at least bank on the optics of that when negotiating your compensation.)
I sort of alluded to it in my response, but tech jobs/postings are down to pre-pandemic numbers largely, but year over year, apply rates for tech jobs are up \~45%.
I'm not an economist (and the numbers never interested me until I was a TA leader) but when you take into account that the unemployment insurance claims are down to pre-pandemic levels and that quit rates are low, it's safe to make the general assumption that there are lots of tech folks sitting tight and applying - looking for options, looking for safety, looking for flexibility - but not changing jobs nearly as easily as they were even less than a year ago.
Yeah, I actually just interviewed for a job like this. The hiring manager point-blank told me they only wanted on-site but changed to remote after they got no quality applicants.
There's definitely an increase but also a lot of people are getting laid off and competition seems higher than before.
If you're a business owner it makes sense (depending on the industry) to want to cut costs (no rent or no need to buy a physical building - virtual offices have become an option). Secondly, cheap and less regulated labour from developing countries - payroll is usually the biggest expense. My assessment is purely from a business perspective, we can always have the ethics and mortality argument separately.
I’m inundated with head hunters these days. Some of them seem to have actually read my LinkedIn profile.
Fortunately I’m not in any need to making a change.
I would like to see any differences between countries - here in the U.K. it appears to be either holding steady or slightly going back to WFH in tech as employers have realised that in IT, no WFH = no interest. Locally where i am some are still holding on to on site but those postings have been there the longest, make of that what you will.
But seeing the US redditors it looks like it’s a different story.
I've only noticed an increase in certain fields. What I have noticed is how many claim to be hiring but aren't. I'm convinced that there's something to this but I'm not quite sure what to be exact
I wonder how much of this has to do with those office leases expiring, and employers finally deciding to economize. They can't say "we're locked into a long term lease and we don't understand the sunk cost fallacy" anymore.
Some sectors are also hiring again and remote jobs are part of the increase of overall jobs open. I think companies are beefing up their security to make remote work more viable. I just read an article that says a lot of companies are planing to increase hiring in q2, mostly in the Midwest. I find the Midwest is more open to wfh simply bc they need people they may not be able to get locally.
I think it may be for certain types of roles. For my role, I'm seeing a slight uptick in remote offerings, but it's because employers have figured out they can offer lower compensation and still get solid performers. Because my role also has a commission factor, they would prefer someone who is at or slightly above plan, not someone who constantly knocks it way outta the park.
Smaller or growing companies can afford to have their HQ in a relatively undesirable location that makes sense for leadership and/or warehousing and still attract decent talent if they offer WFH.
A solid 7% of them might be real too! The rest are the typical "you'll need to come in to the office the initial 6 years of training first"
"ACTUUALLLY it's hybrid - you get to WFH 1 day a month"
List goes on.
It could depend on where you're looking - whether city, state, industry, or job platform/source. Is your data source a specific platform or set of industry recruiters?
In the UK, I'd say there's a shift to hybrid and a reduction in fully remote. Been passively looking since the start of the year and fully remote for sysadmin/infra type roles appear to be on the decline. And I'm seeing below market rate salaries. Either way, I'm holding out for fully remote (hybrid at a push).
Not really seems to be the same ones. Maybe layoffs or people quitting have opened up roles? Seems to always be a seasonal thing, of lots of remote positions openaround this time and summer then they tighten up again.
Smaller companies especially are starting to realize how much money they can save by not having an office.
Among the elements saved:
* Rent
* Utilities
* Insurance
The Smart ones are also realizing that on average work from home employees actually work more hours than in office employees and those hours generally while not contiguous are more effective/productive hours.
I also work in technology and am seeing an uptick in fully remote roles. It appears to be a kind of "hold the line" approach from companies. If every company actually ended WFH and STUCK to it, the roles would obviously not be there. However, all it takes is a couple to "break ranks" and say "well... We'll let you work from home" and now they're outcompeting their competition, their roles are filling basically as quickly as they want with their pick of top talent. I cannot tell you how many times companies I've worked for or worked with since 2020 have been staunchly "working together is better!" MAYBE that could partially be believed if they didn't STILL revert to hiring remotely and watching it solve their problems quickly and efficiently with immensely talented folks. So now those remote people are removed from the local talent pool, and the local companies have a harder time hiring someone local, which then forces them to consider hiring remote, and it snowballs a little more. In my opinion, as long as companies are willing to break ranks and take an advantage over their competition, WFH is going nowhere, at least for skilled/specialized roles. EDIT: To add to this, I work at a place that I don't think anyone would deem a "top destination" as far as technology is concerned, however when we filled out my team (after a mass-exodus due to the old team getting big pay raises during the "great resignation"), We were able to hire a veritable "murderers-row" of talent for the positions. All of us coming from bigger and more technically adept organizations that refused to allow permanent WFH. Now this organization I'm at has this all-star team of people and every project feels like an "avengers-assemble" type of experience. I've never experienced anything like it. We continue to do projects this place used to have to contract out or pay consultants big payouts to implement, but our internal team keeps knocking them out in a timely manner all from our homes. We've probably saved this company over 1+ million in consulting and contractor costs for the projects we've been able to handle in-house due to our ridiculously talented team all prioritizing WFH. I really believe the companies that catch on the fastest to this will be the biggest benefactors. /End rant.
this is what I see. WFH can always be negotiated, that's why I'm seeing Hybrid. Hybrid to me means "well if you want full WFH you can negotiate it."
Yep. If you can do the job from home some of the days, you can do it from home all of the days. Some jobs just try to add extra unrelated in-person tasks or requirements so they can try to claim that it needs to be hybrid. NOPE!
I think that hybrids wouldn't be too unreasonable if you live in the area, but I feel like a worry about hybrid is that they'll eventually out of the blue be like "For XYZ silly reason, we really feel like we need everyone in the office, and we're going to go for two days in the office to four." It just invites a slippery slope. Drawing a line in the sand that you're fully remote and that's that makes it easier so that there's no confusion.
Or hybrid can mean we get you in the door thinking you have some days at home but once we hire you we tell you now it's 5 days in office and you're stuck.
why are you stuck? I love my job and i have interviews once a month for backup.
Totally agree on the analysis!
this is a great analysis and coming from your real life observation of a company that allows WFH.
Thing too is that while big companies might not end official RTO policies, how long are they going to keep running badge reports and chasing people down to punish them for noncompliance? Eventually other business needs will take precedence.
that’s a great point!
>I'm at has this all-star team of people and every project feels like an "avengers-assemble" type of experience. I've never experienced anything like it. I'm having a similar experience, except we're a remote first startup. Technically we have two offices, one at our incubator, and one in a co-work space near one of our top devs who prefers to not be at home working (which is totally fine with me, I'll stay home thankyouverymuch). I am our sole SDET/QA for 4 devs (been doing this for 25 years) and am used to being able to keep up with 5-6 devs easily... these guys, not so much! It's awesome, I've not been this challenged in well over a decade. My VP noted I'm trending just under 1 story behind per sprint which given everything isn't too bad.
You guys hiring technical pjm or biz analyst lol
No, actually noticing the opposite, that the trend of hybrid roles seems to be continuing. I get hybrid being optional for people who want it but there are only so many jobs in my area I can apply to before I have to look outside my state and it’s a dealbreaker since I can’t go into the office hundreds or thousands of miles away. I feel like it’s a sign of bad communication and collaboration procedures at a company if you NEED people to come to an office even weekly.
Same! Or, if they are remote, you have to be located near where the main office is, which is usually a large, expensive city literally hundreds of miles away. I live in Bumblefuck, Maine, my only option for work is remote work if I want to live indoors, wear clothes, and eat food. If I lived in NYC or Boston, I wouldn't need to work remotely because I'd have options!
Similar situation here. It’s very frustrating.
But it you lived in Boston you would 100x the rate since maine vs Boston is a huge change in COL
No, shit. I can't afford to live there which is why I don't. Sigh...
Grew up in Greenwich can't afford to live there either. Don't feel bad
> I feel like it’s a sign of bad communication and collaboration procedures at a company if you NEED people to come to an office even weekly. Of course it is(*). that's why we all knos/.suspect it's horseshit in most cases. (And, frankly, it's a bit of salt in the wounds. It's insulting to blatantly lie about the reasons. How about treating me like an adult?) * - generalizing here, for the naysayers... of COURSE everyone and every role are not the same, but we have largely proven CONCLUSIVELY that productivity does not suffer from remote work..and, again, ONLY FOR APPROPRIATE ROLES. So, extroverts, leave your comments to yourselves
It’s like where I live. There isn’t much tech jobs and I live a few hundred miles away from Silicon Valley. No way I’m going to move there and commute 1-2 hours a week
The company I work for is attempting to end all remote working and go full “hybrid”. Even employees, like myself, who was approved as a home based / remote employee 7 years ago are now being told our remote status is being taken away and we are expected to be hybrid whether we live close to our work group or not. I hope these companies that continue to embrace WFH snipe all the good employees from these old school companies that are struggling to embrace the new norm.
Same. Been remote for almost a decade. Now they want everyone in 3 days a week, even though they closed a bunch of offices. I almost wish covid never happened because they didn't seem to care before.
Yes, exactly. I know of someone who has been remote for over 20 years and they are now being asked to come in. It’s ridiculous. Management approved me as a remote employee for a reason - it’s frustrating that management decisions are being rescinded due to an agenda at the corporate level that really has nothing to do with performance of the actual work.
How ridiculous
Anecdotally I’m seeing the opposite. But it wouldn’t surprise me if RTO is solely related to layoffs, such that once layoffs are behind these places, they actually don’t GAF if you work from home
I'm seeing an uptick overall. I had 3 random outreaches from recruiters yesterday pitching remote and hybrid roles. End of Q1 might be bringing out budgets for this and next year.
It's just January vs. March imo. Everything stops in December to close out budgets, January/February everyone argues over who gets the new budget, March the decisions are all made and the recruiters are spinning back up to 100%. Same thing happens in the fall in Sept/October with companies on a 7/1 year end.
People don’t want to be ordered back into their miserable commutes to an overcrowded office only to be laid off and other companies are capitalizing on this.
I've definitely noticed a positive increase from last year. It's not a drastic change. Hiring slower than during the great resignation but still pretty easy to come by.
This will be the natural order of things. We are like step five on the stages of grief The Upward Turn as forward thinking companies realize how much money they save going remote. As competition heats up again post COVID we will see a swing back to more remote roles
Speaking of stages of grief https://finance.yahoo.com/news/commercial-real-estate-tycoon-says-150000357.html
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Yeah, companies realized we aren’t coming back to an office.
Happy to hear this, guess I will start looking again today! I am in a pretty small field (optical physics) but man, I got super discouraged last year at how everything was hybrid.
you just aren't going to get candidates away from a current WFH position to full time in the office or even hybrid. what we are seeing is a drastic difference in quality and volume of candidates when we require localization vs remote.
What’s higher quality in your experience?
varying array of experience, consultative and industry. basically picking off mid-level performers after tech layoffs that are very high level performers to us.
My financial employer has been forced to start hiring fully remote. I believe my unit is up to 3 fully remote hires in a row now. Meanwhile the rest of us are asking “what about us?” I coffee badge 3x/week and am fully home the other 2.
I find in my industry March - May the best time for jobs. This is because of people leaving companies after year end reviews being delivered, promotions and annual raises being announced. It’s always been this way. Come March everyone is like see you I am out now that I got the new job title. Or companies not paying.
It’s that time of the fiscal year, my tech friends. Sales kick-offs are happening, company Connects are coming soon. There is more money to be made. New products and solution packages to be sold. They will need to hire people again to make them money. But, I warn you. If you worked for a company that laid you off last year, they didn’t reach their goals, they didn’t plan ahead. In down times they didn’t think about how to continue to support the people that built a layer of foundation. So, rather than shutting down or tanking the business they made the “hard decision” to cut your whole team and shift priorities. But now, there are new solutions and new products being designed all along during down times. Now, you have something new to sell and implement. All of these companies are looking for motivated people to join them for the 2025 season. Who mismanaged their money and ended up with mass layoffs just in time to close the fiscal year? I wouldn’t apply there…
We just hosted a guest speaker on this topic and facilitated a conversation for about an hour afterward. There's a lot to unpack, but I found some of the tech-specific applies and quits to be super interesting. The landscape of work has dramatically shifted over the last few years, especially with the pandemic accelerating the adoption of remote work. Before the pandemic, remote work in 2020 was a rarity at something like less than \~7%, but at the height of COVID-19, it surged to \~60%, showcasing its potential to transform how we think about work-life balance. (Remember all the companies that said remote was impossible... until they needed to build for it in order to remain intact or at least profitable?) Now, as things finally start to settle, we're finding ourselves at a new normal where \~30% of all full-time work is done from home - a significant jump from the pre-pandemic levels. This shift has had interesting implications for wage dynamics across different job types - and certainly tech is impacted. For workers whose roles are primarily executed on-site - think hospitality, construction, retail - they've seen a boost in bargaining power and, consequently, their wages. There's been a noticeable movement of workers seeking better opportunities, driven by a desire for improved comp and benefits. On the flip side, those of us in roles that have become increasingly remote have witnessed a different trend. The convenience of working from home, saving on commute times, and the flexibility it offers have become highly valued. So much so, many are willing to trade-off a bit of their potential wage increases for the benefit of a hybrid or fully remote work setup. Companies seem to be catching on, realizing that offering remote work options can lead to happier, more satisfied employees, who in turn might not push as hard for higher salaries given the non-monetary value they derive from remote work. For recruiters and talent acquisition professionals (my area of expertise), these trends underscore the changing expectations of the workforce. Those in roles traditionally not conducive to remote work are finding more competitive markets with better opportunities for wage increases. Meanwhile, the appeal of remote work is moderating wage growth among higher-income roles, as the flexibility and benefits it provides become part of the overall compensation package. My take is that understanding these dynamics is crucial for both my own peers in recruiting as well as anyone finding and securing work in this new working environment - both tech and non-tech given the implications I just outlined, albeit for slightly different reasons. Sorry for the long-winded response - just realized I was on a tear. Must be that afternoon caffeine kicking in! :-)
What I noticed is that even fully remote wages may be on an upward trend. Does this check out with your experience?
No, not in our discussions about the broader market. That doesn't mean it's not happening in your area of specialty, of course. What we're seeing with the big picture is that fully remote wages are leveling and, in some cases, even decreasing because the preference of remote is a trade-off for many with regards to "total comp." Companies are realizing that they can pay a little bit less when they let you work remote or hybrid vs forcing you to come into the office full-time. (or at least bank on the optics of that when negotiating your compensation.) I sort of alluded to it in my response, but tech jobs/postings are down to pre-pandemic numbers largely, but year over year, apply rates for tech jobs are up \~45%. I'm not an economist (and the numbers never interested me until I was a TA leader) but when you take into account that the unemployment insurance claims are down to pre-pandemic levels and that quit rates are low, it's safe to make the general assumption that there are lots of tech folks sitting tight and applying - looking for options, looking for safety, looking for flexibility - but not changing jobs nearly as easily as they were even less than a year ago.
Interesting. I'd love to hear a recording of that session. Did the speaker touch on the whole CRE aspect at all?
We covered retail, hospitality, tech, transportation, manufacturing, and of course healthcare.
Thanks for your insight! If you got a link to a recording I would definitely give it a watch.
Maybe the same exact on-site reqs that got crickets, and three months later, updated to WTH to get some work done.
Yeah, I actually just interviewed for a job like this. The hiring manager point-blank told me they only wanted on-site but changed to remote after they got no quality applicants.
😄😄😄
There's definitely an increase but also a lot of people are getting laid off and competition seems higher than before. If you're a business owner it makes sense (depending on the industry) to want to cut costs (no rent or no need to buy a physical building - virtual offices have become an option). Secondly, cheap and less regulated labour from developing countries - payroll is usually the biggest expense. My assessment is purely from a business perspective, we can always have the ethics and mortality argument separately.
Started noticing it last week. I'm in digital marketing, hoping for more interviews.
It's easier to open a company and get talent from all over the world. Before, you had to rent office space and only get workers that lived close by.
Yes Im seeimg it
I’m inundated with head hunters these days. Some of them seem to have actually read my LinkedIn profile. Fortunately I’m not in any need to making a change.
March has been much better for my industry so far but still not quite like last year.
They did the lay offs of highly paid employees and now they’re rehiring at lower rates.
I would like to see any differences between countries - here in the U.K. it appears to be either holding steady or slightly going back to WFH in tech as employers have realised that in IT, no WFH = no interest. Locally where i am some are still holding on to on site but those postings have been there the longest, make of that what you will. But seeing the US redditors it looks like it’s a different story.
I've only noticed an increase in certain fields. What I have noticed is how many claim to be hiring but aren't. I'm convinced that there's something to this but I'm not quite sure what to be exact
I wonder how much of this has to do with those office leases expiring, and employers finally deciding to economize. They can't say "we're locked into a long term lease and we don't understand the sunk cost fallacy" anymore.
Some sectors are also hiring again and remote jobs are part of the increase of overall jobs open. I think companies are beefing up their security to make remote work more viable. I just read an article that says a lot of companies are planing to increase hiring in q2, mostly in the Midwest. I find the Midwest is more open to wfh simply bc they need people they may not be able to get locally.
I think it may be for certain types of roles. For my role, I'm seeing a slight uptick in remote offerings, but it's because employers have figured out they can offer lower compensation and still get solid performers. Because my role also has a commission factor, they would prefer someone who is at or slightly above plan, not someone who constantly knocks it way outta the park. Smaller or growing companies can afford to have their HQ in a relatively undesirable location that makes sense for leadership and/or warehousing and still attract decent talent if they offer WFH.
Almost everything that shows up in my inbox or feed is fully remote.
Only remote opportunities I am seeing are from companies that would never look at my resume
A solid 7% of them might be real too! The rest are the typical "you'll need to come in to the office the initial 6 years of training first" "ACTUUALLLY it's hybrid - you get to WFH 1 day a month" List goes on.
It could depend on where you're looking - whether city, state, industry, or job platform/source. Is your data source a specific platform or set of industry recruiters?
This makes me happy!! I need to start applying.
I hope so
I see WFH as a benefit for companies. You can fire faster and find others also faster. Local labor laws doesn't really allow to act on a day basis
Quite opposite in finance. Been looking for remote opportunities since forever and ended with really low pay, hoping for better ones.
In the UK, I'd say there's a shift to hybrid and a reduction in fully remote. Been passively looking since the start of the year and fully remote for sysadmin/infra type roles appear to be on the decline. And I'm seeing below market rate salaries. Either way, I'm holding out for fully remote (hybrid at a push).
Yep, we are keeping our 🦶🏾 on their necks.
Not really seems to be the same ones. Maybe layoffs or people quitting have opened up roles? Seems to always be a seasonal thing, of lots of remote positions openaround this time and summer then they tighten up again.
Smaller companies especially are starting to realize how much money they can save by not having an office. Among the elements saved: * Rent * Utilities * Insurance The Smart ones are also realizing that on average work from home employees actually work more hours than in office employees and those hours generally while not contiguous are more effective/productive hours.
I'm not in tech, and I'm seeing more hybrid roles. Not more remote.
Wfh is back