If they're trying to take WFH away from you, get the fuck out. Go somewhere else.

I'd never stay with a company that tries to take WFH away from me at this point. The amount of agency and utility I get from WFH, I'd even take a slight pay cut to keep it.

I get to fuck off to random sunny places while working abroad, you can never do that if you're anchored to a bloody office all the time.

I'd echo all your points above on benefits of WFH, but caution re: this depending on OP's job.

Some jobs - whether you are aware of it or not - may have issue with you working outside of your current country. At a company I was working at in the pandemic, people took off to various places around the world to ride out the pandemic, and it became a relatively big issue for us at some point because some of our government contracts were very strict about geographic location (privacy/security certs yada yada yada).

Oh trust me, I know, we've had the same issue in my company.

This is why you ask for forgiveness, and not permission :)

No one is tracking your VPN status, as long as it's not egregious, my company doesn't care. A few months, or weeks abroad here and there is totally fine.

Moving completely would be a whole different story though, notably for tax purposes.

BRB applying to Telus Health

I am on hybrid now, 2 days a week in office... but even when we were fully work from home, you couldn't leave the country... laptop was property of GoC and security breach to take it anywhere outside of Canada... VPN wouldn't let you log in from outside the country either.

And some countries might not be too happy about you working from there without the right paperwork. All it takes is one grumpy customs official and you're having a bad time.

I’ll likely get this wrong. But it’s actually a big liability for any company. Federally regulated would be different, but provincially the employee isn’t covered outside of Canada. The company is liable (WorksafeBC, eg. WFH injuries from improper desk setup yadda yadda). Whatever that latest bill that was past puts everything on the company.

oof, it's a loaded topic for sure

if you can work from anywhere in the world, does that mean they can hire any other citizen with the lowest pay?

it's a benefit until it isn't

sometimes i feel the current laws almost protect workers too much?

like while I think on average we should aim more to start 3-4 weeks PTO and not take like 5+ years to get there, but not having to give ANY notice before quitting is also unfair

Do they give you notice before they fire you?

Mikey, you don't get 4 weeks (or more) holidays? Bro ... you're sounding a bit entitled.

You usually get way more. Either through yearly check-ins, day to day dealings with your superiors. You can’t get fired for no reason. If it was bad enough to get fired immediately without previous warnings it’s really bad.

If you quit, generally speaking your company knows nothing as you’ve kept it quiet.

It's a dangerous game. If you're going to work from some location where they offer nearly free labour, you better be valuable or that money would be much less spent elsewhere.
What it comes down to though, if you do your job, and do it well, you should be able to do it anywhere that you are able to accomplish it, but the WFH thing clearly doesn't work for everyone. I've seen people accomplish 5 hours worth of work in a 40 hour work week because of it, however, those people might be doing the same in an office.

^i think that’s key.

The time wasted inside/outside of work is likely pretty equal. It’s still a small percentage of the workforce doing a majority of the work. It’s just the shitty workers can really take advantage of it now.

Yeah I don't think WFH makes good workers bad, and I bet many of them it makes them even better, but I'm pretty sure it's easy to quantify it makes bad workers worse. With the job market going the way it is now, there are a lot of people who thought they could coast that are going to be looking for jobs in the near future I'm thinking.

you get severance though

The invoice was made out to the strata, and has been paid by the strata already 6 months ago. 68 likely has a chargeback from the strata asking him to cover for this bill.

https://storeys.com/ryan-beedie-coquitlam-fraser-mills/

I was watching this development and it sold out its first phase. It won Project of the year? Not sure how credible Storey's is, but it's still pretty cool.

This development probably won't start taking form for another 10 years, but I guess it's pretty cool to see. The potential for a waterfront area in coquitlam is nice.

is it a flood plain like RD? right off hwy, noisy?
pretty cool to live next to ikea though

5. Leave me alone :lol

For me the WFH is about flexibility. My GF is starting to do some travel nursing in the states starting in April, so we're heading down to Texas for a bit. This allows her to get paid beaucoup bucks, and we can have a bit of a change of scenery.

If I had to be in an office, I couldn't leverage that. My productivity doesn't change, and if anything it's probably for the better as I'll be working in a time zone closer to these American companies I'm working with already.

Yes it's flood plain area.

I think it's separated enough from Highway 1 that it's not an issue (United Blvd and a bunch of big-box stores in between, T&T, McD's, IKEA, etc.)... however...

I wonder what the plan for traffic is because at that density, without major changes it's going to be a clusterf*ck. The only routes out of that area are King Ed overpass north to Lougheed, United Boulevard east to Mary Hill/Lougheed, and Braid west to Brunette (with that tiny Bailey Bridge in between). Those are already pinch points and will only get worse with this development.

hope they keep that wooden bridge in brunette!
neat little historic memento

The area is surrounded by industrial units, doesn't look appealing to me.

There's also a waste transfer station up the road and freight trains go full steam on the railway. But it hasnt stopped people living in new west.

Story Time - My wife and I (girlfriend at the time) started looking for our first place to but together back in 2015. In November we walked into the sales center for Murrayville house in Murrayville (condo building right beside Langley Hospital). The building was framed up and we actually walked through unit and picked the one we wanted, no drywall or anything literally just framing but still could see the view etc. Put a deposit down that day and signed all the paperwork. 2 bed 2 bath condo on second floor, $279,000 taxes in.

Months go by and we are getting updates saying it's going well, place is slowly (very slowly) getting built. Soon we are told it's being delayed from our original move in date of July 2016, to November 2016. Annoying but these things can happen so make due. October comes and get another notice "delayed until April 2017", now we are definitely annoyed and luckily the place we are renting lets us go month to month. A few of the other people we know through a FB group that purchased in the building as well aren't so fortunate, senior couples who are downsizing and have sold their SF homes (this was prior to the huge housing increase) and having to store all their possessions plus find somewhere to rent.

Finally in the summer of 2017, nearly 2 years after putting our deposit down we are told the building is going into receivership and a new company will be taking over to handle the $62 million that was owed to creditors. At this point, we lawyer up with about 38 other people who are going to fight to get our deposits back, and have the ability to purchase the unit we rightfully purchased.

Quickly we found out there were 149 contracts written for the 92 units (our specific unit was sold twice, with one unit being sold 4 times). We were now fighting for the right to buy our unit at market value. $10k in lawyer fees later we made it all the way to the supreme court of Canada and the judge sided with the creditors and our contracts were torn up, stating that we would be given first right of refusal for our unit.....at market value....which now after the housing boom was $449,000 plus tax, $200,000 more than what was on our original contract.

Unfortunately we had to walk away as we could no longer afford that price considering we had spent the rest of our savings on lawyers plus we were still fighting for our original deposits back. Luckily they would agree to send those back to us, after about a year of waiting.

As shitty as our situation was, I really felt for the seniors who not only lost the money on the purchase of the condo, but also lost the insane increase on the SF homes they sold to move into the condo. One couple sold their SF home in Walnut Grove for $440,000 to buy a similar unit to ours, and ended up having to buy a condo for the same 3.5 years later. Paying a higher mortgage after all the fees and taxes, forced into a condo for same price, and losing money on lawyer fees. Their old SF home sold 2 months after they moved into a condo for $875,000.

The issue now with this (and one of the reasons it made it to the supreme court at the time) is that it set a precedent for all presale contracts in BC. The receiver at any point has the right to cancel the original purchase contract if it means the creditors will get repaid in full. Unfortunate situation for anyone ever falling into something similar, which is what this new development is looking to be leaning towards.

Murrayville House - Court rules in favour of creditors

Murrayville House Receivership

HOLY crap....
1) this is why you need to always get it from big developers
2) also proves lawyering up doesn't mean nothing. Rights and protection are never on your / buyer's side.
3) it's a risk "we" take. Yes if you successfully get in at 257k and now at 440k... no one complains... but when it's flips the other way around... people go ape shit... (which is fair), it's risk / price to pay.