when can I ask a potential employer about working remotely?

by Alison Green on November 11, 2024

A reader writes:

I currently have a job that is hybrid/remote, with emphasis on remote. I go into the office when needed, but that may be once every couple of weeks. I fell into this during Covid and I love it for so many reasons, from the lack of a commute to the vastly improved work-life balance. I don’t want to go back to office life. But I am job searching.

During the interview process, when should I raise the question of remote work or a hybrid schedule? Remote work is a deal-breaker for me, so part of me wants to broach it immediately so I’m not wasting their time or mine. On the other hand, maybe they would consider it for a candidate they really want and I won’t be that candidate unless I get to the end.

Does it depend if the ad mentions remote work as a possibility? What if it doesn’t?

Since it’s a deal-breaker for you, raise it early on, whether the ad mentions it or not — ideally in the phone screen if there is one, or in the first interview if there’s not. There’s no point in going through multiple interviews if they’re not open to remote work and you’re not open to the job otherwise.

There is a school of thought that, as you said in your letter, maybe by going through the interview process you could win them over so much that they would make an exception, and so therefore you should wait to ask about it until the end of the process when you’ve wowed them and they really want to hire you. I don’t recommend doing that for a couple of reasons:

First, there’s a decent chance they’ll just say no and you’ll have gone invested all that time for nothing. You might figure you’re willing to take that risk, but it’s likely to be pretty annoying to them that you didn’t bother to mention such a significant deal-breaker earlier. You might figure you don’t care about annoying them, which is your prerogative, but it could end up mattering if there’s ever another opening there you want in the future. Of course, if they’re still not remote, that may not matter.

Second, and probably more importantly, it’s not good for you to be the only remote person on a team, particularly if you start out remote (as opposed to working on-site for a while, becoming a known quantity, and then going remote). Too often, teams that make a lone exception aren’t set up to support remote employees very well, and it can be difficult to build relationships, get the information you need, and make your work visible, and you can suffer from “out of sight, out of mind” in a way that affects what opportunities you get … all of which ultimately harms you professionally. There’s also a higher risk that they’ll decide the arrangement isn’t working well and end it.

You’re better off landing in a company that’s set up for and supportive of remote work and, if they are, it’s going to be okay to ask about it early on.

You may also like:
{ 97 comments }

{ 97 comments… read them below or add one }

  1. chiffonades*

    I have a feeling that it will be very difficult to find a job with a remote forward hybrid work schedule. If workplaces are hybrid, they are probably doing the “come in 2-3 days a week” type of hybrid and not once every few weeks. I think it’s probably better for you to seek out a fully remote position.

    Reply ↓
    1. Strive to Excel*

      There are some jobs I know of where work is primarily remote and then you fly/travel out to the location once every few weeks, but they seem pretty niche. I’d describe that more as a remote job with a travel component than a hybrid job.

      Reply ↓
      1. Richard Hershberger*

        I got two offers last summer. One of them was nearly entirely remote, driving into the office only occasionally. At least that is how it was pitched to me. I ended up taking the other job, so you never know. But I think it likely was sincere, if only because it also was a pretty narrow set of circumstances.

        Reply ↓
    2. Me, wanting to retire but can't*

      Mine wants people to come in at least two days a week, and you have to come in for four if you want an assigned desk. I despise hotdesking and four days might as well be five. :(

      Reply ↓
      1. Abigail*

        From the perspective of the company, do you think it is reasonable to provide a dedicated desk for people who use it 2 days per week?

        Reply ↓
        1. Seven hobbits are highly effective, people*

          I mean, that would depend on a lot of logistical things about how the company does hybrid. There’s also the middle ground of two specific people who each come in on different days being assigned the same desk rather than everyone getting their own desk or hotdesking, or having bookable workspaces by task so everyone has a prebooked space but a different one on different days depending on what their day’s tasks are, or all kind of other setups that make sense for different kinds of work setups.

          My job is hybrid but has one specific core day a week that everyone is there all day for a combination of meetings and in-person, for want of a better word, “interruptible worktime” where you can quickly find and chat with your co-workers about the things that come up in your own work because they’re all there that particular day and have that shared block of time protected from formal meetings but available for a quick chat. Since we all have to be there and working at the same time, and it’s logistically easier to find people if their desk is in the same spot each time, even the guy who is only on-site at our location one day a week has an assigned desk.

          Reply ↓
          1. Abigail*

            I like the idea of people working alternate days in office so only 2 people are sharing a workspace.

            As a general note, sometimes the tenor of this comment section seems to want a dedicated, silent office when they feel like being at work and a fully accepted remote role when they feel like working from home.

            I think sometimes people here ignore the margins most companies have on operational costs, as if there is an infinite well of money to make everybody happy and people are not using it just cause.

            Reply ↓
            1. PurpleShark*

              “I like the idea of people working alternate days in office so only 2 people are sharing a workspace.”

              Then what is the point of coming into the office if your coworkers you are coming in to work with are consistently not there? To leave sticky notes on a shared desk?

              Reply ↓
              1. Civil Disobedience*

                My company recently downsized our office and did a setup where one department comes in Monday-Tuesday and the other Wednesday-Thursday. There’s not a ton of cross-department work so it works out pretty well, since your in-office days are the same days as the rest of your team. I don’t really mind sharing a desk, but it’s nice to have a specific location so I can keep some snacks, papers, supplies, change of clothes, etc. in one spot.

                There are a few people who come in 4 or 5 days a week out of preference, and they don’t have to share desks with anyone, and we have some spare desks for if you come in on a day that’s not assigned to you and your counterpart is sitting at your desk.

                Reply ↓
              2. RussianInTexas*

                My partner’s company does it. They have two departments working in the same tech center, and his department comes in on Mondays and Wednesday, and the other folk come on Tuesdays and Thursday.
                They need to collaborate within their own group, not with the other group which works on a completely different project. So this “sharing the desk between two people” works just fine.

                Reply ↓
                1. RussianInTexas*

                  They also provide lunches, aka bribing to come (it’s mandatory hybrid, so bribing is a joke).

            2. I Have RBF*

              LOL. The best operational cost margin is fully remote, no office, no desks, no watercooler, etc. If you can eliminate 95% of your real estate related spending, you have a significant competitive advantage over companies that are 100% onsite in a high cost area. Yes, you still need computers, routers, VPN boxen, etc, but not nearly as much as you do if everyone is in the office.

              The only thing you need a hard site presence for is mail, specifically government mail that can’t be sent to a PO Box, and packages. But even packages can go to someone’s house, if need be, to set up computers to re-ship.

              Reply ↓
          2. Another Kristin*

            yeah, “you have to come in two days/week because…reasons”, well you might as well share desks! “You have to come in two days/week for specific, value-added team activities” – you all need workspaces because the entire point is your team working together. Though I suppose if you had multiple *teams* the 2nd model would work with a reduced complement of desks/workstations.

            Anyway, your company’s approach to hybrid work sounds great, Seven Hobbits, but most companies (including my workplace) want you back in the office because upper management wants butts in seats/the government wants workers in office buildings spending money on lunches out and so on. Absolutely zero thought as to what we might do when we get there.

            Reply ↓
            1. I Have RBF*

              And zero care on how much extra it costs the employee to commute and buy lunches out, etc. At this point in my life, if I had to go into an office to “help the local economy”, I would make a point of always bringing my lunch and not spending a dime on those businesses that demand a government commanded subsidy to stay in business.

              Reply ↓
              1. Tradd*

                I really don’t get the current mindset demanding the employer needs to pick up an employee’s commuting cost. If you live urban and don’t have a car, you’d likely have some sort of a transit pass anyway. If you had a car and commuted suburb to suburb, would you expect the employer to pay you mileage from your home to the office?

                Reply ↓
                1. smirkette*

                  Because in many cities/metro areas—especially the largest—if you’re not making over six figures, you’re going to have to sink at least 10 hrs into a commute each week due to housing costs. 10 hrs of work-determined but uncompensated time PLUS the costs of commuting should be compensated. Rural commuting can also be very time intensive and surprisingly expensive. It’s not just cities: it’s available affordable housing.

                  Commute times and costs have been inching up for decades, and what with declining real wages and the cost of living rising without any sign of slowing, workloads increasing, workers are finally getting fed up.

              2. Richard Hershberger*

                Tough luck. I brown bag it. I get the appeal, but not the economics of buying lunch. I do this maybe once a month. But in the meantime the local economy will just have to make do without my contribution.

                Reply ↓
              3. Uranus Wars*

                I don’t think I understand what you are saying…if you went into the office and it helps the local economy when you to buy lunch, at, say the pizza place down the street that is on the verge of closing due to less traffic in town after the pandemic, you wouldn’t support that local business to punish your employer? Genuinely not following the thought process here.

                And not sure why commuting costs, etc. should fall to the employer. I mean, I love that I save when I work from home – but I also don’t expect my employer to subsidize my commute on the days I go in now anymore than I did pre-pandemic.

                Reply ↓
    3. Garrett*

      We have a one-day a week at home option. There is rumbling that they are going to get rid of it entirely next year. This is an issue for me and I know others, as we were hired with the expectation of this “perk”. We have lost people because of the inflexibility with that. I need the option to work from home to meet an electrician or if I’m feeling a little icky and don’t want to expose others. I hope they don’t follow through.

      Reply ↓
      1. FunkyMunky*

        which is so strange because before the pandemic people easily worked at least 1 day a week at home, why are places going beyond backwards

        Reply ↓
        1. I Have RBF*

          Yeah, my pre-pandemic job we got one day WFH and they were looking to expand it to two, for environmental reasons – nothing says “green” like eliminating commute miles.

          Reply ↓
    4. Anax*

      The big exception might be union workplaces – my partner is union, and only comes in once per quarter. The union saw how much people valued WFH, and they’ve pushed hard for it. So that might be one to keep an eye out for.

      Reply ↓
    5. amoeba*

      I feel like those would probably just be posted as remote, anyway? Like, I guess people who actually want a hybrid position are probably not searching for something that’s 95+% WFH. If I only travel to the office once a quarter, that would be more like any kind of business trip for me, not like “hybrid work”.

      Reply ↓
  2. Tradd*

    Please ask at the beginning of the process. My company is in office only (privately owned, small company). We attempted to find a third person for my department earlier this year. We ended up not filing the position as the workload decreased enough to not need a third person. The online posting said “in office only/remote not possible” at the top. The recruiter also told this to everyone she talked to and reminded them multiple times it was in-office only. Every person we interviewed in person, after a phone screen where in-office only was mentioned multiple times, came to the in-person interview thinking they could just turn the position into remote by asking. It was very frustrating at the time as we made a big effort to make sure candidates were aware remote was NOT a possibility, but they just either ignored it or thought it would change.

    I talked about it here in the Friday open threads at the time as well as with people I know who are hiring managers. I was told by the people I know in real life that we should make the position remote to get candidates. Owners don’t want to change the requirement. If 10+ year seniority employees are not allowed to regularly work remote, then a new employee will not be allowed to. Unfortunately, some companies are in office only and they won’t easily change.

    Reply ↓
      1. Tradd*

        That aspect of the situation is not for debate now. My reason for posting was to tell the letter writer that if they’re expecting a fully remote position, they need to ask from the very beginning, so no one’s time is wasted.

        Reply ↓
      2. lost academic*

        This. I remember that lengthy thread. It was a very “ESA” vibe. Big difference after all in “this particular work can’t physically be done off site” and “the owners REFUSE to change this requirement”. The market is not the employer’s friend in this case.

        Reply ↓
        1. Tradd*

          Just because someone wants a fully remote job, it doesn’t mean they’re going to find one. I know a couple of people who after months of searching (while they were out of work due to reorgs) just accepted in office positions because the fully remote jobs they wanted didn’t exist.

          Reply ↓
      3. M2*

        This is not true. I work at a well known organization that is hybrid 3-4 days in office depending on department but the policy is 4 days and we attract great candidates and many people want to work here. More and more companies are RTO and with the new administration I think the fed will also be RTO.

        I give flexibility to my team but they have all been there awhile (longest 15+ years shortest is 1.5 years) and even with flexibility I would expect them to be in office 4 days a week first 3 months and probably minimum 3 days a week 3 months after that to see how they WFH but first 6 months mostly in the office. It’s also about time of year. There’s a period where if people get their work done they can come in 2-3 days a week but it’s only because the team is doing great and everyone is high in performance reviews.

        My organization does this too and we are upfront if anyone did this at the final stage we would say no and they would probably be listed at least for a few years (and yes there’s a list
        HR keeps of people to not phone screen again). Wastes everyone’s time. Only apply for remote only if you only want remote so many companies say it in the job and if they don’t ask at the phone screen.

        We also had someone on a different team who agreed to the in office requirements and when they started WFH all the time and then tried getting accommodations for WFH all the time. HR did their thing and it was a hassle but they were let go and now probationary periods are 6 months not the normal 3 because if this issue if people trying to WFH. Don’t try and game or go around the system. There are remote jobs although many are harder to get because everyone wants remote but if roles say they are in office or hybrid on them they are telling you upfront so if it’s a deal breaker just don’t appply honestly. I would be really annoyed to go to in person interview round and have someone think they were so awesome to be the only fully remote employee (and a new employee at that).

        Also, check in an interview if the role will stay remote. I have friends at Amazon and Google who were remote pre COVID and now are in office 5 days a week for Amazon and I think google its 3/4. So ask that question as well!

        Reply ↓
        1. Fatigued_Geologist*

          This isn’t always available and in many fields, mine included, employers just straight up lie. You accept the position and are blindsided 2mo in. I accepted a remote role with in person site work — note at no point was office work required (offices on site were fieldwork, and office work was to be done at home, and this is A Thing in my field, and that’s not in an enclosed space). I was hired with very specific expectations. I was then told by HR those never existed and I was crazy. I was also told I was crazy for assuming the ADA applied to my position (it did).

          A lot of businesses do not tell you the truth when you ask. No job requirement in a non-union job is safe, IME.

          Reply ↓
    2. Antilles*

      The problem is that there’s plenty of places which officially say “in office only” but actually would show a bit of flexibility if asked or as part of negotiations. So from the candidate’s side, it makes sense to at least roll the dice and see if maybe there’s more flexibility than implied. Especially if your “remote not possible” doesn’t have a firm business requirement (e.g., regulatory requirements or core component of the job) and the candidate knows the industry well enough to know that, it’s perfectly understandable why they’d believe there’d theoretically be room for at least a compromise of a couple days WFH or something.
      I would also note that your owner’s stance of “if 10+ year seniority employees can’t, nobody can” seems rather short-sighted. As soon as those 10+ year seniority employees decide to leave (possibly to a competitor who offers more flexibility) and you need a new Senior VP of Sales? The candidates for that are surely going to be asking about (and expecting) WFH capabilities themselves.

      Reply ↓
      1. Tradd*

        You also have to consider the industry. The only people I know who regularly WFH are higher level employees (manager at least) who have negotiated it. The entry writer level position we were hiring for? Those are in the office. There are other comments further down in this thread where fully remote doesn’t exist. The competition here isn’t hiring for remote or even hybrid.

        Reply ↓
      2. Antilles*

        But for the LW themselves, I would certainly agree that you need to ask upfront and figure out where they stand. Especially if LW’s goal is something very close to the current status of only coming in when required, once every couple weeks.
        Negotiating a company down from 5 days per week in person down to 4 days per week is often very possible even if the ad says otherwise (again, exempting actual business needs for it). Negotiating them all the way down from 5 days a week to 0-1 is probably a stretch.

        Reply ↓
      3. Strive to Excel*

        There are, but if WFH was one of my dealbreakers I wouldn’t count on it. You want to align your dealbreakers in the first phone screen. Same with any other dealbreaker.

        Reply ↓
      4. hello*

        Love how this reply implies that Tradd and their place of work don’t understand industry norms? If they’re only hiring in person, I’m sure they know if they’re competitors are allowing flexibility or not.

        Reply ↓
        1. Rory*

          I mean aren’t they themselves saying that EVERY single candidate they interviewed expected the job to have at least some level of remote time and that in the end they never even hired anyone? If every single candidate thought this was a possibility than maybe it truly is the company that has expectations that don’t line up with reality.

          Reply ↓
    3. basically functional*

      Yes, and I would go further and say don’t bother applying for a role that is advertised as in office if you are only willing to accept remote work. It’s a waste of everyone’s time. I just don’t understand the mindset of someone who applies to a job with conditions they won’t accept, expecting that the company will completely change the nature of the role (making an in person role remote, making a full-time role part-time, significantly raising the budgeted salary range, etc.). It seems so arrogant and entitled – not only do you think you’re so special and awesome that the company will happily change the role to suit you, but you also think you know better than the company what they actually need for the role.

      I work at a state university and we can’t be fully remote because of our horrible governor. That’s just not something we can offer a candidate, ever. It’s so frustrating being on hiring committees for jobs that are specifically advertised as hybrid (in office 3 days/week) and having all the applicants try to negotiate for fully remote work, especially after wasting our time (and theirs!) going through interviews.

      Reply ↓
    4. Acronyms Are Life (AAL)*

      I see this as applying to a role that says the published pay scale is between 40-60k and interviewing and then at the end saying that you want 100k. Maybe the job market is such that 100k is normal for the role, but you knew up front that they were not going to give 100k, so why apply and waste your time trying to convince them that they should pay you 100k?

      I don’t get why people look at the descriptions and think that the company is going to change just for them, and not for any of their other employees.

      Reply ↓
    5. Joielle*

      At my last job we went through this same thing when hiring someone to staff the front desk. The nature of the company was that we would get a few random/unscheduled walk-ins a day and needed someone to be there in person to greet them and direct them to the right department. It literally cannot be done remotely. But people would come to the interview asking about remote work anyways. They ended up hiring someone who seemed to understand and be happy with 5 days a week in person work, and then after a few months she was mad that she couldn’t work from home. At a certain point I don’t know how to avoid it, but I definitely commiserate!

      Reply ↓
    6. EngineeringFun*

      I interviewed for a job that was specific to my dissertation work that was an hour away. The recruiter told me it was hybrid even though the posting said it was in person only. I was not driving through Boston traffic 2 hours everyday. The recruiter thought they would bend when they saw my resume. Company said the offices are “so nice” I would even want to come in on the weekend. Nope nope. I shut that down real quick.

      Reply ↓
  3. Medium Sized Manager*

    The 2nd point is so important: I thought I hated remote work because it was annoying to call into meetings on a WFH day (all of the supervisors rotated to have 1 WFH day a week even pre-Covid). It turns out that it’s more about the structure and culture being supportive of it.

    Reply ↓
    1. A Simple Narwhal*

      Yes 100%! Pre-covid, my office allowed for only the occasional remote day. The infrastructure made it hard to do anything more than that – only certain people had rights to create a dial-in meeting, the meeting creator always had to be on the call (so if they were out or running late there was no way to start the meeting), only certain people were allowed to share their screen, ad-hoc meetings were essentially impossible, our internal IM system didn’t really work and required you to manually add a person and then be approved before you could actually message them, I could go on and on. Essentially the only way to get a hold of someone not face to face was to email them or hunt down their landline number, it was not great.

      And then covid happened and all of a sudden everyone was remote, so the company bought and implemented Teams (shockingly quickly, in hindsight), and remote communication became infinitely easier. Now we can seamlessly work with people in any location, which previously was not really possible.

      Without a good setup (that people actively use) you’re just not going to be successful/it’s going to be a lot harder to be successful.

      Reply ↓
      1. Yadah*

        “Without a good setup (that people actively use) you’re just not going to be successful”

        I just want to emphasize the “that people actively use” part of it!
        Because you can have all the tools in the world at your fingertips but if people don’t use it, are bad at checking it, are not tech savvy enough to use it, etc. then it just doesn’t work.

        I worked at a company pre-covid that was kind of a “work where you want” vibe but didn’t really have any office space to support me being in person so I was effectively a remote worker whether I wanted it or not – but they didn’t have a shared folder system, they didn’t use any sort of IM and I couldn’t convince them of the value of it, and there was just no sort of “central” place that the company existed in any way. It was just a mountain of mass e-mails and varying group texts.
        I hated it.

        Reply ↓
    2. Blue Horizon*

      Yes, very much so. Whether the primary work mode is remote or in person is very much an all of company decision.

      In my experience it’s often quite binary – companies with an online-first culture will often use that flexibility to hire from further afield and pick up a great remote candidate over the best available local one. Over time that leads to geographically distributed teams, so the online culture becomes a necessity. All meetings are online by default and collaboration tools spring up to replace things like whiteboard brainstorming. In-person events need to be planned in advance and involve a lot of travel.

      I work for one of these now and it’s a completely different philosophy from WFH at a mostly in-person company. I used to stay home on days when I needed focus time and come in for meetings. Now it tends to be the reverse – I go into the office to connect with colleagues, reinforce my relationships, socialize, and have impromptu conversations. If I have a day full of meetings then I’ll be dialing in from my desk all day, and I might as well do that from home.

      Reply ↓
  4. Purlewe*

    my job started me at 2xs a week and once I got myself fully trained I am now 2xs a month. I was expecting 1x a week but the boss said my work showed that I could handle the 1xs a month. I did put in at least 6 months of 2xs a week until trained tho.

    Reply ↓
  5. OrdinaryJoe*

    Seconding the … don’t be the only one who is WFH! I’m one of two WFH’ers (since 2017) and it was tough the first few years. It’s hard to build relationships, it’s hard to ‘break into’ teams, it’s hard to learn company culture, whatnot. It’s great now but it took much longer.

    Reply ↓
  6. GoodNPlenty*

    Just a word about deal breakers; be very clear in your own head about how much flexibility you have. Decide whether it’s a “never” event to be in the office or an occasional one. I interviewed a person for a job years ago and although the job was not one in which routine travel was required, there was an obligation to be at our home office (45 minutes away) maybe 2-3 times a year. The candidate got very panicky and said “no travel, that’s a deal breaker!” and left. Turns out she lived near the office, envisioned walking to work and wanted a guarantee of no driving, ever. She kept applying and wanted us to drop the home office requirement. We even offered to ride share with her but it wasn’t a guarantee we could make.

    Reply ↓
    1. Jessica Ganschen*

      I can totally sympathize with not being willing or able to drive, but if I wanted the job that badly and it was only three times a year, I’d just make sure I had the money set aside for cab rides or something.

      Reply ↓
      1. GoodNPlenty*

        It wasn’t able….it was a willingness issue. Not a medical issue. And we offered to pick her up. It just didn’t fit into her perfect job dream that wasn’t flexible enough to adjust to real life needs.

        Reply ↓
  7. Spicy Tuna*

    I get why people like remote work, and I think going into an office is really not necessary for many jobs. That said, I wouldn’t want to start a new job remotely. I think it can be hard to get acclimated to your co-workers’ various work and communication styles and the company’s norms if you are not there in person.

    Reply ↓
    1. Lab Rabbit*

      Eh, I have excellent working relationships with people I’ve never met in real life. I don’t even know what they look like because we are very much a cameras-off culture.

      As a result, I am much more productive because there is much less time around the water cooler. I have a job that requires extended periods of thought, and not being interrupted by all the things I used to get interrupted by when I was working in an office means I have a higher level of productivity and accuracy than I ever have.

      Reply ↓
      1. Nightengale*

        yeah I think it really depends

        I work with children with disabilities. I converted to all telehealth early in the pandemic and now do a mix of office and remote. Telehealth has a lot of good things but I know I would loose something if I never saw my patients in person, especially new patients.

        On the other hand probably my closest professional relationship at work is with one of our occupational therapists. She works at another site. I have met her briefly in person twice and we’ve had a couple of video meetings but mostly we text chat through our EHR. We share patients, resources, ideas. At my actual site is our office manager and nursing staff and I have a good relationship with them but they aren’t professional colleagues in the same way.

        Reply ↓
    2. StartingRemote*

      I’ve worked quite a few jobs fully remote. In one case I was the only employee in the entire Northeast. It’s really not hard as long as people aren’t actively obstructionist.

      Reply ↓
    3. Elle*

      It was really hard to onboard when we first started hiring fully remote positions. We’ve gotten better at it, but I would be very nervous to onboard remotely.

      Reply ↓
      1. Richard Hershberger*

        My current job had essentially zero onboarding. I have ample experience to know what needs to get done, but had to learn the system for getting it done. The learning process was entirely going and talking to people, spread over multiple departments. This would have been vastly harder to do remotely. Not impossible, but much difficult. On the other hand, some actual onboarding would have gone a long ways, too.

        Reply ↓
    4. I Have RBF*

      I’ve done it for my last two jobs, and it’s fine.

      In both cases, the entire team was remote, and all of the onboarding was handled remotely. In both cases, there was no local office for me to go and get indoctrinated in, and they didn’t feel the need for travel to a mostly empty office for onboarding.

      A remote first department or company just has to work out team integration and onboarding. It’s not hard, it’s just different.

      Reply ↓
    5. SayHey*

      Meh. My last 2 jobs (incl this one) are 100% remote. No issues at all. It may ultimately depend on the what you do… In fact, I have spent more time doing nothing in my career while working on site waiting for someone/thing etc. than being remote/home. That part, I can’t yet explain…

      Reply ↓
      1. Claire*

        It’s because the first-person statement was followed by a general statement of the difficulties “if you are not there in person.”

        Reply ↓
  8. LK*

    I agree, don’t be the only remote person. I’ve had one team member in this situation pre-covid, and one person in this situation now, with everyone else hybrid. We are well set up for remote work now, but the fully remote person is less integrated into the group.

    Definitely worth asking what hybrid looks like at an organization. My employer is officially in the office 3 days a week. But in my large department, there are groups where everyone is there 3 days a week, 1 day a week, or quarterly, but it’s group dependent.

    Reply ↓
    1. ItDepends*

      This can be fine unless the office is awful, but most places I’ve worked have some experience with having multiple offices if not hybrid or remote employees so they’re at least used to not being co-located. In fact, back in the day I’d sometimes go into the office to spend the day talking/messaging with folks in other offices. Super silly.

      Reply ↓
    2. allathian*

      I’m curious, what do you mean by “less integrated into the group?”

      Does this employee get their work done on time and up to standard? Has the employee received opportunities to do interesting work or are they forgotten because they don’t come to the office?

      I suspect that most (NT) people would find it isolating not to be included in social chitchat, but others prefer it that way and I suspect the AAM commentariat skews heavily in the less social direction. As much as I enjoy remote work, I also enjoy talking to people, which is why I wouldn’t be happy in a fully remote environment even if I appreciate the flexibility I do have.

      Before I got this job, I worked for 4 years as a freelancer. Then my main client decided they no longer needed my services and I got this job thanks to the experience I got as a freelancer. My biggest client gave me an excellent reference, essentially saying that they’d hire me right now if they had the budget and enough work for me to work FT. The thing I really appreciated about working for an organization was the work community.

      When I was hired, there were no options for remote work. We all got laptops in 2014 and after that you could work remotely occasionally. I used that benefit maybe once or twice a month at most. I wouldn’t want to return to the office full time anymore, though.

      My office’s officially asking people to go to the office 4 days a month, or about once a week. But at least so far, nobody seems to be keeping track, at least not in my department. Some departments have instituted official in-office days when everyone’s supposed to be at the office unless they’re on vacation or sick leave.

      My manager works at a different office from me and my close coworker, and we’re a distributed team with people in 3 different offices. For my department as a whole, that number increases to 7. I see no benefit in going to the office to sit in Teams meetings all day. I do enjoy the in-person development days/offsites we have twice a year.

      Last week I went to the office mainly because my employer had won a prestigious industry award and they provided coffee and cake. Even with the free snack, only about a third of the people at the office showed up. (Just as well, we’ve downsized and there’s only room for about 50 percent of us at the same time.)

      Reply ↓
  9. CzechMate*

    “On the other hand, maybe they would consider it for a candidate they really want and I won’t be that candidate unless I get to the end.”

    It could just be the industry/industries that I have access to, but I don’t think this is very common. The ones that I and my family members/good friends are in (education, higher ed, tech, finance) are pretty set in whether they are remote or in-person. In my own line of work (higher ed) remote work is basically a no-go. One person in my office was hired thinking “Surely there will be exceptions where I can work from home SOMETIMES” but there really aren’t, and I can tell he’s frustrated and probably job searching.

    I would raise it early. If it’s something the company can be flexible on, they shouldn’t have any problem telling you that at an early stage. I definitely wouldn’t waste time interviewing hoping that you can negotiate work from home later, because based on what I’ve seen, that just may be non-negotiable.

    Reply ↓
    1. michelephx*

      It is like this in my industry (fashion/apparel). Very few companies allow strictly WFH for most positions. There are a few that workable but there are quite a few that will just not work from home. I have been interviewing the last few months and the first question out of every recruiters mouth is if I am willing to be in office. I prefer being in office. It is just easier for what I do. It’s hard to have fit sessions, approve lab dips, and review any protos from home. I would literally have to pack up a light box and bring who knows how many samples home to do my job.

      Reply ↓
    2. lost academic*

      Well, yes and no. Once a hiring manager/group has decided to make an offer they also feel invested and truthfully they are, they’ve spent a ton of time and money getting to that point, even though it’s a sunk cost, and letting the candidate go without making some potential concessions can often mean truly starting over. It’s easier for them at times to get concessions from their chain of command once they’re talking about a specific person they want to bring on rather than a theoretical hire. It creates a focal point and it makes it very real – that now there’s something for them to lose.

      It’s easy to say “raise it early if it’s a dealbreaker” but there’s a difference between “I won’t accept an offer for THIS job without X” (which can be to some extent a negotiating position) and “I absolutely need A job and it has to have X or I simply can’t do it”. I wouldn’t take something with a dealbreaker unless I had to and expect it to change, but I’d keep negotiating if they’d do the same until someone walked away from the table.

      Reply ↓
      1. Helewise*

        This is where I think there’s a difference between negotiating down from five to four in-office days versus five to 0-1 in-office days. The former may not be preferable but could be workable; the second feels like a bait-and-switch.

        Reply ↓
      3. Kitten*

        We just hired someone who used to have 1 WFH day a week at a competitor. We do not have that option and the positions core work cannot be done remotely. It is a client facing role.
        The new hire immediately started advocating a WFH day. I find this really irritating. This individual is sloe in their training for the role and then complaining about in person everyday is making me question if they are a fit.

        Reply ↓
  10. RemoteWorkAccommodation*

    I have been working hybrid since the 90s and mostly fully remote since the mid10s, with some fully or mostly remote positions starting around 2010.

    It was rarely an issue pre-pandemic, but I also need it for medical reasons at this point (and at my jobs since 2018 or so companies have been paying for an Uber on the rare instances when I have to go in).

    I didn’t disclose until pretty late in the process and this has never been an issue (sometimes I didn’t have to disclose at all, just say I prefer to be remote), but my last job search was pre-pandemic and it seems like this is likely to be yet another thing the pandemic ruined.

    I don’t want to disclose medical/disability before I have an offer, but it seems likely to be unavoidable as work at home has become a political issue.

    I am dreading having to navigate this in the future (maybe I’ll get lucky and just stay at my current job until I eventually retire, but I’ve already worked here for almost 5 years which is 2+ years longer than my previous longest job).

    Hiring managers out there, when would you want to know about remote work if remote work is a reasonable accommodation under ADA (and likely the only workable accommodation even if you pay for transportation – which aside from not being physically feasible for me on more than an occasional basis would likely be prohibitively expensive if done frequently) if it’s not otherwise just granted.

    Reply ↓
    1. Blue Skidoo*

      In a similar situation – within the last year and under threat of “get accommodations or come in 3x/week (or be fired),” I’ve transitioned to be probably 90% remote as a medical accommodation. I also may be job searching come Q1. The thought of navigating the need for remote work is daunting. The accommodations process was hell with my current employer, and I at least had supportive management to help me through it.

      I feel like my best bet is to only apply for roles which state they’re fully remote, but my niche role makes that incredibly difficult to come by at the outset. Ugh.

      Reply ↓
    2. Anax*

      Totally feeling it. I’m also in the remote-due-to-disability camp, and was mostly remote before covid.

      I typically disclose early because honestly, it’s really hard to force an unwilling company to accommodate remote work. At least in my area, companies believe they can claim in-office work as an essential function with even the thinnest and vaguest of justifications, even if you lawyer up and throw legal precedent at them.

      EEOC enforcement is so slow that in my experience, it won’t save your job even if you win. I’ve been waiting almost a year on my complaint – eight months and counting since I lost my last job.

      Sorry. Depressing, I know.

      Copy/pasting my comment from below on legal precedent –

      For whatever it’s worth, for the disabled folks here – there’s some legal precedent protecting WFH as a reasonable accommodation, including need to WFH because you can’t drive or commute. Especially if you live in the Ninth Circuit, where I live.

      The legal side is still broadly on the employer’s side, EEOC complaints are very slow to work through, but this might help if anyone does get the WFH rug pulled out from under them.

      This one was hunted down by our union attorney –
      Ravel v. Hewlett-Packard Enter (2017 E.D. CA) 228 F. Supp. 3d 1086. On pages 1093-1094, this case discusses the law on commuting limitations and states:

      Defendant argues that the ADA does not require employers to accommodate employees’ commutes because commutes are not considered part of their job duties. (See Def.’s Mot. at 10-11.) The Ninth Circuit has held, however, that an employer has an obligation “to accommodate an employee’s [*1094] limitations in getting to and from work” under the ADA.2 Livingston v. Fred Meyer Stores, Inc., 388 F. App’x 738, 740 (9th Cir. 2010);       see also Humphrey, 239 F.3d at 1135 (holding that employer had obligation to accommodate employee’s inability to get to work on time or at all due to obsessive compulsive [**11] disorder). In light of this holding and in light of plaintiff’s alleged inability to commute to the Roseville office, defendant’s offer to have plaintiff continue working at the Roseville office does not constitute a reasonable accommodation. See Humphrey, 239 F.3d at 1137.

      (The referenced cases are Livingston v. Fred Meyer Stores, and Humphrey v. Memorial Hospitals Ass’n – the latter of which ruled WFH was a reasonable accommodation in the mid-90s!)

      Reply ↓
      1. Anax*

        (Honestly, this is one reason the election has me vibrating with anxiety. If I lose this wonderful job because of federal budget cuts, and have to try to find a fully-remote gig again in a hostile job market… I’m going to cry, ffs.)

        Reply ↓
  11. The Wizard Rincewind*

    I’m searching for a remote job and even if the job description says it’s fully remote, I always ask “is this job remote and projected to stay that way?” during the phone screen. I know they can’t promise anything, but it’s reassuring to hear “oh, yes, our team is currently comprised of people spread all over the US!” and…less reassuring to hear “well,,,,we do encourage a hybrid approach.”

    Reply ↓
  12. Chairman of the Bored*

    Pre-Covid I applied to a place that has a very strong “everbody must be in the office” culture and got them to create a remote position just for me. It can be done.

    My approach was to apply to places that were hundreds of miles from my home, and then very early in the process phrase things in terms of “Well I’m obviously not going to move across the country for this job but I am interested in remote options”.

    This removes even the possibility of me being on-site or “hybrid” and makes it a digital choice for the employer where they only get my skills/labor if they’re up for me working from home. Helps to clarify things for everybody.

    Reply ↓
    1. Strive to Excel*

      This works well if you have particularly in-demand niche skills or have the freedom to wait until you find your perfect job, which doesn’t apply to many people job hunting right now. You also run the risk of looking like a very out-of-touch job seeker.

      Reply ↓
  13. restingbutchface*

    I will work in my pjs until I die and I bring it up as early as possible. Saves time for everyone and if the answer is no, next. Also, I tell headhunters I’m only considering remote roles, even if the office environment is super fun and has a football table in the break room.

    Reply ↓
    1. Unkempt Flatware*

      Good for you. I must be still dealing with imposter syndrome because I feel like I look like a slacker when I consider saying this as well but this is how I feel too. I want to work remotely forever.

      Reply ↓
      2. restingbutchface*

        I feel you. I don’t know when I stopped caring about looking like a slacker but poof, it just happened. Possibly when I realised that I could work 20 hours a day and make the business a million dollars a month and they would still replace me in a heartbeat if they felt like it.

        I think there’s also something about having loud and obvious confidence about whatever your boundary is. Only someone who was really exceptional could be so confident about saying they will only consider X work, right? Perhaps this only makes sense in my head :)

        Reply ↓
        1. Rory*

          There are SO many worse things in life to be than a slacker (especially when most companies definition of a slacker seems to just be someone who does what’s required of them and no more)

          Reply ↓
  14. I Have RBF*

    I only apply for remote jobs. I can’t deal with open plan bullshit any more, and I have several immune compromised people in my house, including a spouse with cancer.

    The last time I was looking, a couple years ago, I phone screened with one company for a remote job, then came the “Oh, but you’re local! Local people have to come into the office twice a week.” I removed myself from consideration, because that was a deal breaker for me.

    Quite frankly, foosball, pool, free snacks, etc are not worth having to sit in an open plan even twice a week. I like being able to hear myself think. I work in a concentration heavy field, and I can get stuck in for hours, and need to. This is not compatible with open plan noise pits for me.

    I am willing to go for a quarterly meetup for a week, if needed, if they pay my travel. But I’ll be wearing a mask, because my spouse and roomies deserve to be protected.

    YMMV, of course.

    Reply ↓
    1. Aunttora*

      But but but COLLABORATION!!

      As an old person, it has become almost impossible to pretend to believe any Corporate Speak anymore.

      Reply ↓
    2. Anax*

      Same here; I only apply for remote positions, or raise the need for remote work VERY early if it’s “you have to come in if business needs require it”. Like, in the cover letter.

      I have a physical disability which makes commuting or working outside my home nearly impossible (and fairly dangerous), and the push for RTO has been incredibly stressful and depressing.

      I lost my job this spring because of a rigid RTO policy that was instituted after I was hired, it was… a whole thing. EEOC complaint still under investigation.

      For whatever it’s worth, for the disabled folks here – there’s some legal precedent protecting WFH as a reasonable accommodation, including need to WFH because you can’t drive or commute. Especially if you live in the Ninth Circuit, where I live.

      The legal side is still broadly on the employer’s side, EEOC complaints are very slow to work through, but this might help if anyone does get the WFH rug pulled out from under them.

      This one was hunted down by our union attorney –
      Ravel v. Hewlett-Packard Enter (2017 E.D. CA) 228 F. Supp. 3d 1086. On pages 1093-1094, this case discusses the law on commuting limitations and states:

      Defendant argues that the ADA does not require employers to accommodate employees’ commutes because commutes are not considered part of their job duties. (See Def.’s Mot. at 10-11.) The Ninth Circuit has held, however, that an employer has an obligation “to accommodate an employee’s [*1094] limitations in getting to and from work” under the ADA.2 Livingston v. Fred Meyer Stores, Inc., 388 F. App’x 738, 740 (9th Cir. 2010);       see also Humphrey, 239 F.3d at 1135 (holding that employer had obligation to accommodate employee’s inability to get to work on time or at all due to obsessive compulsive [**11] disorder). In light of this holding and in light of plaintiff’s alleged inability to commute to the Roseville office, defendant’s offer to have plaintiff continue working at the Roseville office does not constitute a reasonable accommodation. See Humphrey, 239 F.3d at 1137.

      (The referenced cases are Livingston v. Fred Meyer Stores, and Humphrey v. Memorial Hospitals Ass’n – the latter of which ruled WFH was a reasonable accommodation in the mid-90s!)

      Reply ↓
  16. Ganymede II*

    A personal anecdote: one person was hired at fairly high level in my previous job, and got an exception made for remote work because the hiring manager thought they were too good to pass on. They got laid off 6 months later when new leadership didn’t think they were all that good. Don’t let one person’s view of your exceptionality be the only thread tying you to a job, it can too easily be cut.

    Reply ↓
  17. Angel S.*

    l like the idea of coming in at different times. If that’s possible, of course. I remember sharing an office! It was an office with five desks! I secretly coordinated with one particular coworker. If she came in a little late, I’d take an early lunch, but usually I waited until she came back from lunch to take my lunch. That gave me a whole hour of peace!
    Then, sometimes she would eat at her desk! And cuss. Loudly.

    Reply ↓
  18. Serin Mcdaniel*

    Anecdotally I see a lot of stories about companies offering “remote” jobs when they have no intention of allowing remote work on a regular basis.

    If I were interviewing for a position, I’d want to get it out there ASAP that I would only accept full-time remote to stave off a situation where they reluctantly offer me an exception when they make the offer and then it turns out that in practice somehow this can never really happen.

    Reply ↓
  19. Winning Hybrid*

    I was in a fully remote role that required on-site out of state visits for ~3 nights/2 days per month and recently switched roles for one that advertised hybrid but when you talked to leadership, they said they wanted someone 4 days/week in office. I was VERY upfront from the beginning that I was willing to start at 3 days/week for the first month, 2 days/week for the second month, and then re-evaluate. By the 3rd month, I’m down to ~3 days/month (so a little less than once per week).

    I’m the only person who’s really even hybrid at this location and it hasn’t really been an issue. I’m sure it annoys some people but frankly, it was necessary for me. It helps that I’m the head of my department and all of the bosses of the people at my level are offsite or peers at other locations so people are on Teams calls a lot anyways.

    I would say definitely mention it early because it’s a dealbreaker for you and be clear about what you are/are not willing to do upfront. Also, it’s going to depend on the company (do they have calls virtually already?) and how valuable and rare your skillset is.

    Reply ↓
  20. Daisy-dog*

    I interviewed with 2 companies that were hybrid. One was 3 days/week (Tues-Thurs) and the other was 4 days/week (Thurs was WFH). In both, I asked about flexibility and core hours. It sounds like they do allow for flexibility of arrival/departure times, but still expect you to be there 7-8 hours most days. Arriving late or extra early can help with rush hour traffic, so that is a benefit at least. The WFH days were very strictly set in place, so it’s not likely that they’d let someone work more days at home without some type of exception/accommodation.

    Reply ↓

Leave a Comment

Before you comment: Please be kind, stay on-topic, and follow the site's commenting rules.
You can report an ad, tech, or typo issue here.

Subscribe to all comments on this post by RSS