Remote Work and Shifting the Costs

Back in 2001 I started working for Sun Microsystems, and worked for them several years in professional services and later as a software engineer. During my time there I traveled nearly every week and often found myself dropping in on various campuses for a day of work. Whether it was Santa Clara, Calif., Broomfield, Colo., or  Burlington, Mass., I could drop in and pick a desk for the day. Sun provided “hot desking” or “hoteling” capabilities which simply meant they had a bank of workspaces that were not assigned to a specific person, but were available on-demand as needed with a first-come first-serve model. They determined they could save substantially on real estate and corresponding overhead costs by keeping large swaths of the campus flexible. Reportedly, a typical employer can save between $10,0001 and $11,0002 per year for every person who works remotely half of the time. Sun Microsystems saved $68 Million per year on real estate costs1 with this model.  

As an employee, I loved the convenience. The culture encouraged working from home when it made sense and that benefit was enough for employees to get on board. Employees were going to save the time and gas money on the commute, wake up later, reduce child care costs by being closer for the after-school pickup … the benefits go on and on.

However, the expenses the employer saved didn’t disappear. The cost was shifted to the employee. Most employees were so happy to change up the work schedule and location, they simply assumed the trade off was worth it. Granted, we were well paid and could afford to make a bedroom into an office. The next time we looked for a home, we took the requirement of a home office into account. However this year, 2020, the acceleration to remote working has highlighted disparity; the privileged worker able to easily work from home compared to those that don’t have the space, services, or home life that afford the flexibility. Let’s consider the hard costs first.