5 ms·

2-hour commute? I'll take the pay cut anytime, like is too short... (and maybe start looking for another job, easier to do with all that "extra" time)

by erinan 5y ago

Sharlin 5y ago
Yeah, it would be a total no-brainer. Especially given that we're likely talking about a six-figure salary in the first place…
sshagent 5y ago
totally. i did this back in 2009. 20% pay cut, to reclaim 50% of my day (in just travel time). And for that, they've got someone who rarely is off sick, isn't too bothered if work runs over my usual office hours...and I've rejected multiple "in the office" jobs for up to twice my wages.
krferriter 5y ago
Yeah no way I'm doing a 2 hr commute just for a 10% higher pay if there's another option available. That's months of life gone just on commuting that can be regained by paying 10% of pre-tax income? Seems like a no-brainer. Time is money.
- panda888888 5y ago
  It depends a lot on the mode of transportation. The Seattle employee referenced in the article may commute by ferry, which is about as relaxing of a commute as possible. The Seattle ferries are very nice; you can sit in a booth and eat breakfast and read the newspaper. Here's a photo of what it looks like: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/travel/vashon-island-near-seattle-a-rural-throwback.html https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/travel/vashon-island-near.... I'd totally be willing to do that for an hour every morning and evening.
  - mywittyname 5y ago
    We should probably assume that people commute via car unless noted otherwise, since it is by far the most common method.
    - panda888888 5y ago
      Generally speaking, I agree, but for three example locations that were given in the article, that's not the case. Google's offices tend to be in major cities, especially more liberal ones, and those often have good public transit. Both Seattle and NYC have more people who commute to the city center via public transit than by car; I'm not sure about the numbers for SF. I agree 100% that 2 hour commutes are crappy, but a 2-hour commute on a nice form of public transit is very different than 2 hours of being stuck in traffic and stressed out.
  - dragonsngoblins 5y ago
    But would you do it for 4? I thought when people said they had an X hour commute they typically meant that they traveled for X hours to work and X hours from work
    - panda888888 5y ago
      Good point. Where I am, people usually use "X hour commute" to mean the full amount in a day. I wonder what percentage of people interpret it to mean one way vs. both ways.
      - dragonsngoblins 5y ago
        Yeah I was wondering to what degree it is a regional thing. I'm from Australia and most people seem to mean it one way, but I've been wondering how many times I've misunderstood people online
BurningFrog 5y ago
I would too, but if you've committed 100% of your income to expenses, you don't have that freedom. Another argument for saving a little each month.
- BluePen8 5y ago
  Sure but in this scenario it's a high earning google employee. I'm sure there's something they can cut back on. For anyone average or lower earning, a 2 hour commute would cost you at least 10% of your income anyways (after tax).
lumost 5y ago
Some individuals have routines built into the commute that aren’t necessarily swapped when working from home. I read my email/catch-up on slack/read the newspaper during my 45 minute commute in the morning. While wfh I spend the time doing something pretty similar.
- Frost1x 5y ago
  Commutes wouldn't bother me if I could consider them work time and get paid for them. Instead, they're uncovered overhead costs of work I have to pay daily because I'm driving. That's why the more WFH I get, the less lost time I have driving, fuel/car maintenance/value depreciation costs, less time preparing (I just do hygiene at home, no dressing up to present myself because pajamas are great). The savings have been adding up in both time and money. Even if there was a great public transit option for my commute, I'd have to focus on aspects of work I could do because I get motion sickness pretty easily. Reading a laptop on a moving bus, train, or whatever is going to have me dizzy with a massive headache, then a lost hour recovering when I actually arrive. I do envy those who have the opportunity and capability to do this though.
  - _fat_santa 5y ago
    For me it was principle more than anything. As a programmer I know I can do my job anywhere, and I know my team can do their jobs anywhere. So coming into the office always sucked because you knew this work could just as easily be done at home without having to waste all morning getting ready and commuting.
    - greedo 5y ago
      I think for a lot of workers being coerced/forced back to the office, there will be a lot of resentment. In my company, only part of the IT staff will be in the office, the majority look to be fully remote. That will breed so much conflict/antagonism/resentment that management seems oblivious to.
- EspadaV9 5y ago
  That sounds like the commute is really mostly work time then, right? Do you get to clock in/out 45 minutes late/early?
jdavis703 5y ago
Depends on the commute mode. It sounds like these are people in expensive urban areas, so they probably have transit access. So if they’re commuting by train or bus the morning commute can be spent working and the evening commute streaming TV shows or scrolling through social media.
- Germanika 5y ago
  Is this supposed to be an argument in favour of the 2 hour commute? Because that still sounds like a miserable waste of time to me. I would take the pay cut, look for a new job, or move closer to work. No job in the world is worth putting up with that kind of a commute to me.
  - panda888888 5y ago
    A 2 hour commute isn't necessarily good, but it's also not necessarily horrible. The Seattle employee referenced in the article might commute by public ferry, which is very pleasant. A 10-minute drive to the ferry terminal, 5 mins waiting for the ferry, a 30 minute ferry ride, 5 mins disembarking, and 10 more mins to the office is not bad. Repeat for the evening commute. The ride is beautiful and the interior of the ferries are very nice; you can sit at a booth and drink coffee and eat breakfast. If you're lucky, you might see some orca whales while you're out on the water.
- saalweachter 5y ago
  I've been living upstate and commuting to NYC for the last ~10 years. A pay cut going full remote would basically cancel out my commuting costs. I might end up with slightly more money in my pocket once taxes and snacks are accounted for. That said, when things "get back to normal" I don't currently intend to apply for full remote. I didn't mind my commute two years ago. Maybe I will when I have to start doing it again.
- ghaff 5y ago
  As someone who can do a 90-120 minute door to door commute into our city office or an event in the city, it's still awful. I did it about half-time for about 18 months at another company. I would get up at 6am to drive to the train station, get to the office by about 8:30, get home 7ish--maybe somewhat later if I grabbed dinner in the city. Yes, I could read and so forth and it was better than driving, but it still meant I had maybe 3 hours to myself in the evening. It's OK as a very sometime thing but I'd certainly prefer not to do it even a couple days a week.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
fivefifty 5y ago
This is exactly right, I had a 1.5 hour each way commute before we switched to work from home last year. I calculated that I saved around AU$5000 a year just from not having to commute or buy food/coffee out let alone the massive time saved. Not to mention the reason I had such a long commute in the first place is that I chose to live further away from the city to save money and actually afford to buy a home. Plus as you say the 15 hours a week I get back on average, is basically another part time job or contract work I could pick up if I really wanted to earn some more on top.

2-hour commute? I'll take the pay cut anytime, like is too short... (and maybe start looking for another job, easier to do with all that "extra" time)

by erinan 5y ago

2-hour commute? I'll take the pay cut anytime, like is too short... (and maybe start looking for another job, easier to do with all that "extra" time)

Sharlin 5y ago

Yeah, it would be a total no-brainer. Especially given that we're likely talking about a six-figure salary in the first place…

sshagent 5y ago

totally. i did this back in 2009. 20% pay cut, to reclaim 50% of my day (in just travel time). And for that, they've got someone who rarely is off sick, isn't too bothered if work runs over my usual office hours...and I've rejected multiple "in the office" jobs for up to twice my wages.

krferriter 5y ago

Yeah no way I'm doing a 2 hr commute just for a 10% higher pay if there's another option available. That's months of life gone just on commuting that can be regained by paying 10% of pre-tax income? Seems like a no-brainer. Time is money.

panda888888 5y ago
It depends a lot on the mode of transportation. The Seattle employee referenced in the article may commute by ferry, which is about as relaxing of a commute as possible. The Seattle ferries are very nice; you can sit in a booth and eat breakfast and read the newspaper. Here's a photo of what it looks like: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/travel/vashon-island-near-seattle-a-rural-throwback.html https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/travel/vashon-island-near.... I'd totally be willing to do that for an hour every morning and evening.
- mywittyname 5y ago
  We should probably assume that people commute via car unless noted otherwise, since it is by far the most common method.
  - panda888888 5y ago
    Generally speaking, I agree, but for three example locations that were given in the article, that's not the case. Google's offices tend to be in major cities, especially more liberal ones, and those often have good public transit. Both Seattle and NYC have more people who commute to the city center via public transit than by car; I'm not sure about the numbers for SF. I agree 100% that 2 hour commutes are crappy, but a 2-hour commute on a nice form of public transit is very different than 2 hours of being stuck in traffic and stressed out.
- dragonsngoblins 5y ago
  But would you do it for 4? I thought when people said they had an X hour commute they typically meant that they traveled for X hours to work and X hours from work
  - panda888888 5y ago
    Good point. Where I am, people usually use "X hour commute" to mean the full amount in a day. I wonder what percentage of people interpret it to mean one way vs. both ways.
    - dragonsngoblins 5y ago
      Yeah I was wondering to what degree it is a regional thing. I'm from Australia and most people seem to mean it one way, but I've been wondering how many times I've misunderstood people online

BurningFrog 5y ago

I would too, but if you've committed 100% of your income to expenses, you don't have that freedom. Another argument for saving a little each month.

BluePen8 5y ago
Sure but in this scenario it's a high earning google employee. I'm sure there's something they can cut back on. For anyone average or lower earning, a 2 hour commute would cost you at least 10% of your income anyways (after tax).

lumost 5y ago

Some individuals have routines built into the commute that aren’t necessarily swapped when working from home. I read my email/catch-up on slack/read the newspaper during my 45 minute commute in the morning. While wfh I spend the time doing something pretty similar.

Frost1x 5y ago
Commutes wouldn't bother me if I could consider them work time and get paid for them. Instead, they're uncovered overhead costs of work I have to pay daily because I'm driving. That's why the more WFH I get, the less lost time I have driving, fuel/car maintenance/value depreciation costs, less time preparing (I just do hygiene at home, no dressing up to present myself because pajamas are great). The savings have been adding up in both time and money. Even if there was a great public transit option for my commute, I'd have to focus on aspects of work I could do because I get motion sickness pretty easily. Reading a laptop on a moving bus, train, or whatever is going to have me dizzy with a massive headache, then a lost hour recovering when I actually arrive. I do envy those who have the opportunity and capability to do this though.
- _fat_santa 5y ago
  For me it was principle more than anything. As a programmer I know I can do my job anywhere, and I know my team can do their jobs anywhere. So coming into the office always sucked because you knew this work could just as easily be done at home without having to waste all morning getting ready and commuting.
  - greedo 5y ago
    I think for a lot of workers being coerced/forced back to the office, there will be a lot of resentment. In my company, only part of the IT staff will be in the office, the majority look to be fully remote. That will breed so much conflict/antagonism/resentment that management seems oblivious to.
EspadaV9 5y ago
That sounds like the commute is really mostly work time then, right? Do you get to clock in/out 45 minutes late/early?

jdavis703 5y ago

Depends on the commute mode. It sounds like these are people in expensive urban areas, so they probably have transit access. So if they’re commuting by train or bus the morning commute can be spent working and the evening commute streaming TV shows or scrolling through social media.

Germanika 5y ago
Is this supposed to be an argument in favour of the 2 hour commute? Because that still sounds like a miserable waste of time to me. I would take the pay cut, look for a new job, or move closer to work. No job in the world is worth putting up with that kind of a commute to me.
- panda888888 5y ago
  A 2 hour commute isn't necessarily good, but it's also not necessarily horrible. The Seattle employee referenced in the article might commute by public ferry, which is very pleasant. A 10-minute drive to the ferry terminal, 5 mins waiting for the ferry, a 30 minute ferry ride, 5 mins disembarking, and 10 more mins to the office is not bad. Repeat for the evening commute. The ride is beautiful and the interior of the ferries are very nice; you can sit at a booth and drink coffee and eat breakfast. If you're lucky, you might see some orca whales while you're out on the water.
saalweachter 5y ago
I've been living upstate and commuting to NYC for the last ~10 years. A pay cut going full remote would basically cancel out my commuting costs. I might end up with slightly more money in my pocket once taxes and snacks are accounted for. That said, when things "get back to normal" I don't currently intend to apply for full remote. I didn't mind my commute two years ago. Maybe I will when I have to start doing it again.
ghaff 5y ago
As someone who can do a 90-120 minute door to door commute into our city office or an event in the city, it's still awful. I did it about half-time for about 18 months at another company. I would get up at 6am to drive to the train station, get to the office by about 8:30, get home 7ish--maybe somewhat later if I grabbed dinner in the city. Yes, I could read and so forth and it was better than driving, but it still meant I had maybe 3 hours to myself in the evening. It's OK as a very sometime thing but I'd certainly prefer not to do it even a couple days a week.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

fivefifty 5y ago

This is exactly right, I had a 1.5 hour each way commute before we switched to work from home last year. I calculated that I saved around AU$5000 a year just from not having to commute or buy food/coffee out let alone the massive time saved. Not to mention the reason I had such a long commute in the first place is that I chose to live further away from the city to save money and actually afford to buy a home. Plus as you say the 15 hours a week I get back on average, is basically another part time job or contract work I could pick up if I really wanted to earn some more on top.