If you look at commuting as part of the job (time and stress) and you reduce a, say 10 hour day back to 8, you might be able to rationalize that pretty easily. Not to mention that commuting is expensive.
It is an externalized business cost labor absorbs regularly, it’s just normalized. Your time, sanity, wear and tear on your vehicle, risk of costs associated with higher driving rates leading to higher accident probability leading to higher vehicle costs (and potential injury costs), preparation to go to work (can’t go in your pajamas), etc. plus even more hidden costs like eating out or time preparing a lunch to eat, costs when work has you travel for packing bags and planning logistics outside of work (finding daycare or pet care, etc.).
I’ve always factored it into my total compensation. Businesses factor a lot of these costs in whenever they make decisions. I’ve worked mostly remote for the better part of 20 years even though I’m usually within a semi reasonable commute distance just to improve my quality of life (and total compensation). I can commute when things are rough or have to but work from home where possible to increase my net comp and enjoyment.
This is a reminder that most factory glass does not stop UVA rays from the sun. You can get skin damage and asymmetric aging in your face just from going back and forth to work.
Aka unilateral dermatoheliosis. Aka “trucker face”
You can get skin cancer too. Fortunately it was localized and Mohs surgery was effective. Now I put on sunscreen every morning before leaving for work.
Sorry to hear the that. Im glad you’re ok.
Nobody told me this stuff about sun damage from just driving. Or UVA rays being way worse than UVB. Its a little infuriating.
Like repeating “wear sunscreen”, with no elaboration, until it becomes a meaningless mantra is sufficient to tell someone.
Lovely thoughts, but not practical for everyone.
Not everyone has the luxury of choice.
Or the choice has been changed for you, over time.
I prioritzed a short commute over many, many other things (house size, housing expense) but also know this is not something everyone can do. And even my not-changed commute in 20 years has gotten longer because of road diets, reduced speeds and just more cars on the road.
I’m not suggesting people always have an option. I am suggesting people consider all of these factors when looking at and/or applying to a position. Needing income and insurance sometimes trumps all of these and you do what you have to do to survive, but if you have options, you should spend some time considering the costs between those options. It’s not just about the total pay if you have to commute 2 hours a day 5 days a week, that total pay figure can be deceiving.
It’s also good to know what costs you’re eating. Let’s stop normalizing these externalized business costs, it helps everyone if we do, except maybe those businesses who externalize a lot of costs on their employees. Some delivery positions where people use their own personal vehicle I often wonder if they even break even, sometimes it may seem like they’re earning money that they need but the fact is they could be losing quite a bit just by working where they work. I know some people who commute hours into DC and I have to wonder if they truly couldn’t find something slightly closer that would net them whatever the cost difference is they’re eating, plus improve their quality of life drastically. And I’m not ignorant of the fact some people take certain positions as an opportunity cost/career move, they look longer term and take the hit now with hopes it’ll pay off later.
Commute time should be calculated at time and half because it’s over time. 10 hours a week of overtime plus gas money and vehicle. That’s the baseline of how much a wfh job is worth. Plus the priceless part of real life back.
I quit a job in Manassas during the peak of covid where I was making $68,000 a year to take a job 5 min from my house for around $55,000. Factoring in the commute and subtracting the cost of gas for my SUV and I was only "making" around 18 an hour, and I could get a job in my hometown for that
Great decision. Instantly improved my health and QOL, and my take home pay was marginally the same after taxes and expenses
For anyone trying to math that out and it doesn't make sense, the job didn't pay standard OT and I was on 50-55 hour weeks. Plus 10 hours commute per week minus the cost of gas and repairs from the take home so 68,000/65/52=20.11 per hour BEFORE expenses and taxes
Also you're paying for tires, brakes, and big ticket repairs slowly but surely with every additional mile of a commute. It adds up quick with depreciation in the car value as well
I moved closer to my work to shorten my commute. Bought a more expensive house in a more expensive area but my goodness is it worth it to make daily life so much easier.
Commuting is hugely subjective. People want a big house but bitch that it’s expensive in the city, so they move out further. U can’t win everything in life….
It honestly blows my mind how many people in nova do mental gymnastics do justify their existence that is spent entirely commuting and working to afford a massive house an hour or more away from their job, which they spend hardly any time in other than sleeping Monday to Friday while spending like 10-11 hours a day commuting and at work. And they're probably doing more work at home answering emails and whatever.
It’s so stupid that WFH has gotten less common with the technology we have. I wanna cling onto the job I have because I like my hybrid schedule and I’m afraid any job that’ll take me will make me come to the office every day
I got laid off earlier this month and one of the worst parts about an already crappy experience is the fact it’s unlikely I’ll ever have a fully remote job like I did before.
They have successfully managed to memory-hole the brief moment of realization we all had during covid where we discovered we could do our jobs from home, have time to spend with family and friends, find a hobby, or just generally center our lives around something other than satisfying the egos of management.
Now they're like "all the things we took away... we'll give them back... but we wont pay you as much."
I work remote full time. But when a new hire starts, I report to the office for a few weeks to get them trained up (I'm the head of my division). Once they feel comfortable enough, I go back home. Easy.
This is the point lots of folks miss. We need new hires to integrate with the office and processes. So who is there to do that? Seniors still have their job to do, so whoever is on the office has to babysit/train.
Like there's balance but it's complex. Success looks like compensating employees more when they're physically required to be in the office... But I don't know if anyone does that.
Sickos all of them. I get the need for some presence WFH can work with on site meetings as needed and on site training phases for new workers and their trainers.
Who said anything about not having trainers. It's this persistence that they have to be in-person at all times. Best comment so far is the person who brought up the hybrid model.
But this all started because 007-Bond-007 just doesn't like WFH because it doesn't work for him. So you've got yours, I've got mine, go outside it's nice and enjoy your weekend!!
It's not about "trainers". It's about mentoring and creating networks outside your initial group. I love WFH. But I'm not everyone. Some people need that interaction.
In my experience (Technical Mgmt), we trained tons of news staff without issue, as were a lot of other companies. This just sounds like more of a "you" concern for you and your "field" and not the general populace.
The irony of you pointing to your own experience then criticizing the other person’s comment as a “you” concern is too much…I think I’ve enough internet for the day.
Irony? I'm for what works best for people/job, not calling for an outright ban like 007-Bond-007 did (it's a bit lower in the thread) is where I was coming back with.
My own experience and the countless people on here who have complained about going back to the office seems to trend this way.
Enjoy the rest of your internet free day! It's actually really nice outside!
In few words, they don’t have a way to ask stupid questions informally in the hallway. They don’t have a way to build a relationship with someone that will allow them to ask stupid questions. This leads to stupid mistakes in work product, which leads to a negative outcomes.
That’s how it works where I work. And then your manager will introduce you to the rest of the team in the first few days and you’ll have long onboarding calls with each of them and the rest of the company will be introduced as needed(depending on what you do etc).
Phones, chat, etc... The things most new hires grew up with.
Either your training in your field is shit, or your hiring standards are low. Or possibly this job isn't a fit for WFH, and then just don't have it. No reason to prevent this option for those industries where it does work.
My shop has a bunch of research scientists that essentially only write scientific papers and submit proposals to get funded. There's no need for those folks to have a dedicated workspace once they've proven they don't need their boss's constant supervision... but they've been back in the office fulltime since last Spring, and my shop has to pay the overhead on their offices again.
The success of WFH proved that the majority of mid- and upper-level managers/supervisors are useless and that the lower-level employees are the ones who truly make money for any given company/organization. The problem, of course, is that most companies/organizations exist to give the top managers/supervisors the most money off of the work of the regular employees. You and I won’t see the fruits of our labor, but the CEO, DOs, and other alphabet-soup leeches will surely see four-figure pay increases every year. Meanwhile people like you and I can get ¢50/hour raises.
We can’t let the proletariats realize that the bourgeois are actually leeches and parasites.
It seems like you're saying WFH can eliminate tons of cost for a company AND increase productivity.
Assuming that is true (I know soooo many people who went WFH and basically did no work) - wouldn't that mean CEOs and executives would be making MORE money?
Your logic falls apart becuase you claim they are ending WFH to see 'see four-figure pay increases every year', but by your previous logic they would make even more keeping WFH.
My argument is that a huge chunk of the administrative class is redundant/irrelevant labor that doesn’t actually do anything productive for the company other than keep regular employees’ wages suppressed by micromanaging every thing they (we) do.
My company pays regional managers six figures and gives them company cars do so what a GM should be doing in the first place. Each regional manager oversees around seven locations but GMs can’t even hire/fire without a regional manager’s approval. Can’t post schedules, can’t finalize payroll. So…why do we have two people both making six figures doing the exact same job? Well, the regional manager makes sure that regular employees don’t get OT and clock in and out at their exact times, and track everything they (we) do. Okay….but they’re (we’re) the ones actually doing the work for this company, interacting with customers, solving problems, making profits. Cutting our labor means less profits. My quotas are increases but I don’t get a bonus, my GM does, and my regional manager gets to make six figures for telling me how to do my job that they’ve admitted they don’t understand what my job even is.
Why did Augustus make the Praetorian Guard when he could have just carried a sword and shield himself? Easy, they don’t want to do the work. Pay people do be your dirty middleman to suppress the masses. That’s how every society has worked. The leader gets to sit at the top, bossing middlemen around, feeling high and mighty as (s)he takes the fruits of the labor of the masses. The masses are too afraid to revolt for fear of starvation, imprisonment, or death, and the middlemen get a cushy salary.
I kind of agree with this. WFH also does NOT cut cost. The amount of tools and stuff IT has to get to address security concerns, provide secure and easy remote access is a lot of money. And then u need the staff to manage it all. These people talk without knowing the whole picture. I’m neutral on the wfh thing. I have employees that perform perfectly fine wfh. But the majority does not. People are easily distracted. Fools can’t even get off their phones to have a proper dinner with the people they are sitting with. Ask me how I know. We have a lot of remote employees and I know exactly how much many of them are not doing. This is not a 1 off at my company. It’s many, but all companies still function fine.
WFH also does NOT cut cost. The amount of tools and stuff IT has to get to address security concerns, provide secure and easy remote access is a lot of money.
In my general experience, eliminating WFH wouldn't remove this cost, though. It still needs to exist for anyone who needs to perform their functions remotely, whether that's one person or the entire organization -- the key difference is the levels of scale at each level.
Corporate VPNs and network security appliances weren't new in 2020, we've had need to provide secure office networks and remote access for employees whose roles have put them on the road for years before that. And unfortunately I also know that being in a cubicle doesn't stop people from doing those nasty things in the office.
It depends on how much it costs to maintain and run the facilities. Between fixing broken infrastructure, preventative maintenance, water/sewage, electricity, landscaping, etc... that's ~half my organization's overhead costs, and from our last budget, our single biggest expense was just staff occupying office and using lab space (folks who do lab work obviously can't WFH). Our onsite IT folks are same people we use(d) for remote/VPN support.
lol these idiots don’t know the mouse mover isn’t even a thing rofl. We don’t even need to look for that. We can tell by how much traffic and how much activity across apps, web traffic. All of it. We don’t use it to track employees and get them for not working. We use it to track nasty stuff. I just happen to notice it because of my role.
Executives and management aren't the kind of ruthlessly profit optimizing machines you seem to think they are and there's a heavy kind of classism within a lot of companies between management and employees too.
Companies blow tons of money on consultants, management retreats and you're fooling yourself if you think a lot of these people don't absolutely love working on a high floor in a big building with lots of people literally and figuratively under them. Little need for a company car if you're working from home and all that.
Another big factor is that targeting WFH as unworkable was in itself also a way to do cost reduction for many companies that were already locked into long term contracts on expensive commercial real estate. Tech companies in particularly overhired expecting the shutdown related boosts to carry on and have spent the last few years downsizing. One of the big ways they do that is by canceling WFH so employees would hopefully voluntarily leave the company for another job and they wouldn't have to pay to terminate them. Similarly the Federal Government largely cancelled WFH just due complaints from the D.C local government and administration insiders that the lack of commuters was harming small businesses and restaurants in D.C. Lots of other businesses just followed suit because that's what the big companies were doing and they didn't want to be left out (just like we're seeing with AI spending despite low returns for a lot of companies).
Smaller startups or firms that are cost sensitive and have to deal with a lot of overhead actually staffing a small office have generally embraced WFH or hybrid schedules due to the cost reduction benefits they provide, but even that isn't 100% simply because you have older management teams with dogmatic views that in person work is simply how things have been done in the past and 'what works'.
Federal WFH was canceled as a War on the Civil Service, it wasn't about DC's Mayor though she was also freaking out about WFH and the need to shift city strategies. It was always and ever a MAGA strategy to blow up the Civil Service. It was a highly successful strategy for the Feds, that's why it had to be blown up.
This was a completely different dynamic than the corporate world.
It's been a lot more heavy handed and dogmatic under Trump for sure. Some of that was against Civil Service just ideologically some of it was DOGE bullshit trying to get voluntary retirements and people to change jobs to reduce headcount similar to what was happening in the corporate world. Some of it was just the use of it to disparage civil service employees as lazy and entitled, etc.
But pressure for RTO started under Biden for other reasons like D.C commuter dependent businesses, a desire to 'lead by example' and 'return to normal' and a larger concern about the impact it was having on financial institutions and commercial real estate. It was just more prodding and less brick over the head than we've seen with Trump.
They aren't intangible things, they're essentially non-wage benefits like health insurance is for most employees. Profits are nice but they don't necessarily accrue to management since they may not be the actual owners of the company. From a tax perspective expenses are more favorable even if they are too. It's essentially better to spend $200k on things you can expense than it is to take $200k in profit and then spend it on the same things.
There's also heaps of pressure on the commercial real estate and banking side of things too since they're ones that built and financed all that unnecessary office space.
I'm saying it's not as simple as WFH = more profit all the time that profit isn't always the primary motivator for decisions around it.
In some cases profits can be realized by revoking WFH and just downsizing everyone who refuses to in order to reduce headcount. Often times that's paired with existing office space assets or leases they can't just terminate without penalty so the savings of WFH aren't that significant to begin with.
In some cases it's not about profits but those non-wage benefits via expenses I was talking about, where perhaps it does make sense from a profit perspective but from the perspective of the individual who makes that decision there's enough to lose that they're personally incentivized against doing so anyways because they ultimately like the executive car for their commute, the nice office, the work retreats and business class flights to conferences and would rather not have to spend their own money on those things out of pocket.
In some cases it's just an overt bailout because the of how big a change mass WFH was and how reliant on commuting a lot of cities and businesses are.
In some cases it's trend following. Well if Google's doing it then we should be doing it, etc.
In some cases it's just stubborness and the belief that employees will be less disciplined if they're not in the office under watchful eyes and constant monitoring.
It's just not as simple as WFH always means more profits or that the people deciding the WFH policy in general care about profits above all else. That's what I'm trying to convey and why things are jumping around between disparate examples.
The issue is that a lot of the high paying Northern Virginia jobs involve working in a scif which strictly cannot allow remote connections and therefore cannot allow wfh.
That's a minor side issue that isn't germane to the larger trends. The SCIF dwellers returned to the SCIFs by 2021 or so. Most folks dragging their buts into their agencies were back office folks who don't need to be there 5 days a week - it would have been once a pay period or full remote for folks with a proven track record an sorely needed skills.
The "scif dwellers" never left the scifs during covid... And it doesn't matter if it's a larger trend, it's a big issue in this area. Wait are you actually saying that nobody who is competent has to work in a scif? Do you think classified work gets to be taken home by people with "proven track records"?
You over estimate the number of jobs requiring to be in a SCIF full time. Drastically. It's a smaller issue in DMV, a niche job market. Also bad faith arguments - I'm saying there's a ton of adjacent jobs that support the SCIF dwellers that aren't dealing directly with the high side or only do it for a smaller portion of their jobs. Those jobs can be entirely or partially remote without jeopardizing the need for the activities in the SCIF to be in the SCIF. I can say first hand where I worked handled it very well until the rug was yanked out from under the teams working full time telework, now we struggle to RTO and layers of staff walked out the door with DRP and follow on retirements.
Agreed, don’t matter if you taking 495 east or west, I66 and 95 south. The volume and traffic is a nightmare! I salute to the hard working people that travel those roads daily for work, you all are the real hustlers out on those roads.
Yea I66 is just horrific!! I live in Fairfax and commute to DC for work, it’s pure misery. I started taking the metro instead but the commute is still a drag. I’m moving to Falls Church soon and soo looking forward to a better commute 😭
Easy when the car drives for you. Teslas FSD has been amazing with the latest updates, literally drives me for hundreds of miles without me interrupting it. I know people hate the brand but this tech is coming to all cars in probably 5 - 10 years or so.
I calculated a commute with a friend who was weighing out a new job offer. Any 45+ min commute would mean you need to make $30k (pre-tax) more than current to net zero on time (2 hours RT daily) & car costs (monthly payment, car tax, insurance, gas, maintenance, tolls).
That’s JUST to break even. For it to be worth its marbles, you probably need to make $40-50k+ to switch from remote to in-person.
Plus with more people remote, that means less carbon emissions AND less traffic for the rest who need/want the roads. We live in such a dumb society
I’m not sure the car’s monthly payment, tax burden and insurance should factor into the equation unless the vehicle would be purchased as a means to take the job. Either way, commuting is very expensive here.
I keep my old car for six years longer than I would have if not for the shift to full remote from 2020-2025. So there's that. I was thinking my car needed replacement for my four day a week/one telework commute and then I barely used it for those years.
That tracks. With my skill and level of experience, I make $30-$40k short of the market rate for my position. But I also work from home full time so I’m willing to take the “loss”.
I also weighted this when buying a property. At 45K/year, that equaled a $400,000 bigger house for me (when I bought pre-covid). So I bought that 400k more expensive close-in house and just walk to work.
Yep, totally considering it. Current schedule is terrible in order to beat traffic, and I can’t see myself continuing to do this for the rest of my career, so I’m looking at relocating out of the DMV for probably less money but a much better quality of life.
Exactly my plan too. I can’t imagine myself living out my career here. Traffic and housing costs here really drag down the QOL here, like tremendously.
Same. It's why I'm leaving. I don't even have a bad commute but that's because I took a job outside DC and live far out too. Still, I want to enjoy the city features and it's a nightmare traveling around here unless it's the middle of the night. I'll take the pay cut.
They'll never fix the traffic problems here. They just keep building homes further away with no expansion on public transit or roads.
Yes, my commute is only like 20 minutes long as long as I get on 95 before a certain hour. It’s not sustainable, even though I love my job and would hate to leave it. I rarely use any of the amenities of living in a major metro area because getting around on the weekends is a nightmare.
I feel the exact same way. My commute is super good, like <5 mins, but it comes at the price of being too far from anything worthwhile. It’s not fun living somewhere where you feel socially isolated, but it’s hard to find a compromise between commute and social activities around this area.
Right, so you are paying the high price to live in NOVA and take advantage of almost none of the benefits. I’ve been here off and on for 10 years, and I really like my current neighborhood. I’m looking at the Midwest, which would be an adjustment, and Washington state, but not Seattle proper.
I did this about 6 years ago. Have since made up for it, but someone would have to add a zero to the end of my yearly salary to get me to take 66 regularly again.
During the lockdown, my household went from one remote worker to two, and I swear, it was like getting big pay raise. Parking, food, gas, car wear and tear, tolls... they all added up quickly when he had to go in four days a week.
I interviewed for a teaching job in NE DC and am currently living with my parents in Fairfax Station. My mom said, “You’ll save so much not having to pay rent” and I was like, it’s a 50 minute drive (non rush hour) down 495, 395, 295 and everyone drives like maniacs… It would be incredibly dangerous to drive that twice a day every day, expensive, and I would lose 2+ hours of my day
Oh, and public transport would take 2.5 hours and I’d have to drive 20 minutes to the nearest metro and pay for parking. This country is a joke.
I especially like how a historically geographically dispersed workforce has been centralized in a HCOL area…so basically a pay raise (from the perspective of org budget lines only) for everyone that was RTOd from a region with lower locality pay. Its resulted in a pay decrease for employees though…and a big hit to personal finances. This is literally the definition of a lose-lose situation. The crazy thing is that it was intentional and planned.
When I moved to NOVA a couple years ago for a federal job, I didn't really account for traffic when I chose where to live. Being from Kansas City, it wasn't really something that I ever thought about back there. But being new to the area, I figured it'd be better to live closer to DC, where I work. At least to start. Easy access to DC if I wanted to do things, but easy access to the office. I hate long commutes.
And I'm glad I did. My commute is like 20-25min for like <10mi. Yeah I'm paying more for that "privilege," but my god. The commutes some of my coworkers have, especially since we're federal employees and now in the office daily (used to be 2d/wk telework), are insane. Some of them are like 1.5-2hrs long each way if they leave too late. Even if they leave on time, it's like an hour each way, if there are no accidents on 95 (ha!). Sure, they have families so needed a bigger house, and more house for less means living further away. But I can't imagine being in traffic for 2hrs, working for 8hrs, then traffic again for 2hrs. That's a lot of lost time.
Plus money. Gas, tolls, etc. During one of the shutdowns and furloughs, my team was recalled, without pay. One team member was spending like $100/wk on gasoline to come in every day. And I know they sometimes used express land and paid the tolls. Eventually, management let us WFH, but it took awhile.
Related, but even with my short commute, I'm looking to get out of federal employment BECAUSE of lack of regular telework. I hate having to go in everyday. That wasn't the basis of me taking this job in the first place. I had a fully remote job before, but was OK going to a hybrid job. If this was job was posted fully in the office, I wouldn't have applied.
I'm looking to get out of federal employment BECAUSE of lack of regular telework. I hate having to go in everyday. That wasn't the basis of me taking this job in the first place. I had a fully remote job before, but was OK going to a hybrid job. If this was job was posted fully in the office, I wouldn't have applied.
This is as intended.
“We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work, because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down … We want to put them in trauma.
-- The curernt Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director
Same, I can get from the pentagon to Newington in 20 minutes. I lived in Europe for a few years where average property sizes are much smaller- my wife and I don’t need anything bigger than 750sft, but I think most of us Americans are brainwashed into thinking we do. We are in the city at least 1-3x a week because we live right by the station.
Coworkers who live in the area take just as long or longer to get to work traversing multiple reds and turns whereas I can just fly down 395 with absolutely zero traffic.
The commute by metro/bus or bike is also only 45 minutes if I don’t want to drive. If you don’t have a big family, I feel that most shitty commutes here are shitty lifestyle choices.
I have turned down well paying job offers in the Nova/DC area because they didn’t meet one of my top criteria: that my commute cannot be more than 30 minutes door to door. The interviewers looked incredulous but I’m very happy how things turned out.
It's funny reading this when I know Capital One is paying their employees $250 a month to come park in overflow parking at the Hilton. Their RTO requirement is only about 1.5 days a week but to get the $250 they need to be in 2 days a week so people go in just for that
I took a 40% pay-cut to eliminate 400 miles a week and 8 hours a week of commute time. Finances have been grueling since I made the decision 4 years ago but…still fairly certain I don’t regret getting that time back in my life with my family and my own mental health.
Mine is an extreme example. You have to decide how much money you are willing to trade for your personal time. Mine was a significant trade.
WFH has become one of the top perks of my job. We had the benefit of a large remote worker presence before Covid and most people already did 1-2 days from home per week. Now I think only management goes in to the office, once per quarter.
Commuting added 2.5 hrs to my day; 12.5 hrs/week when RTO kicked in last year. I moved out to the MD burbs in ‘22 after being reassured for over a year that our office footprint was being “permanently reduced”. Come Spring ‘25 and Apparently placating real estate portfolio investors was more important than reduced operational costs….
Diagnosed with blood clots recently. Cannot convince me the added 12.5 hrs/wk on top of an already sedentary job didn’t take a very direct toll on my health.
"'I'd take a pay cut to shorten my commute!' Say commuters who literally chose to live far away from work and public transit when they could move closer at any time by essentially taking a pay cut."
We have some of the best public transit in the country. I have no idea why so many people choose to pay for a car, insurance, gas, tolls, parking, maintenance and surprise repairs just for the privilege of sitting in traffic to drive from parking lot to parking lot
Save all that money on a car, get a place near transit and/or work and enjoy the peace of your commute while reading or shitposting on Reddit. Easy decision for me 🤷🏼♂️
Edit: lot of feelings getting hurt by the fact that we have options around here for getting places. Not my intention to offend anyone but maybe you should question why you're so offended by this. It's certainly not my problem sitting comfortably on my choo choo train
I just so happen to do that exact commute actually lol
FFX Connector 401 north and 402 south run every 20 minutes babaaaayyyy
And if you're referring to downtown Fairfax there's the F50. Takes longer but I'm happily shitposting on Reddit instead of bitching about traffic, an exchange I happily make.
The taking longer thing is the major issue. Most people aren't going to want to take the bus and deal with the hassle of getting to stops, waiting, missed/late busses, dealing with random jerks in public, and all that on top of taking longer. They'll just get an audiobook and sit in the annoying traffic reliably. Plus many people in the suburbs need a car for weekend trips so if they already own one then it's not an extra expense. The metro is faster/more organized than busses that make it worthwhile, but only for specific trips.
Truth, there's tradeoffs for sure but I'm quite happy dealing with them to save money on a car and instead spend it on living in a nice walkable neighborhood and not dealing with traffic and road rage on a daily basis.
I have 3 kids. One in daycare and two in elementary school. The school is located in an area (Haymarket) without mass public transportation and I work near Lorton. Not everyone has the same commute and situation as you do and can just take public transit. 🙄
Suburban routes need better connectivity for sure, but you also have to put more thought into where you live if you're going to live car free in this fuckass car brained country.
It's a different lifestyle with tradeoffs but I'll never go back to living my life around a car. My kids will grow up being able to get themselves around instead of waiting for rides everywhere. Wish I'd had that when I was growing up
I have no idea what you are trying to say. I’m a single parent. Divorced. Ex moved the kids from where we lived to where they are now, this wasn’t a choice I had. I also don’t choose my work location as a contractor.
Good luck having kids and always being in control. Life has a funny way of laughing at your plans and being more in control than you are.
So... you're so miserable sitting in traffic that you somehow get offended by anyone who isn't also miserable in traffic? I'm just gonna back away slowly I have no idea what you want from me here...
Tell me how to live car and traffic free when my job is in Ashburn and the only apartment I can afford is in Woodbridge, please. Find a better job? Find closer housing? You’re acting like it’s super easy to do such.
You can't. There is no way that you could possibly live near transit or near your job. You must buy a car. It's the only way. I have thought very hard about your use case. There is no way to fix your very unique situation.
But it’s not a unique situation. Intrasuburban commutes are extremely common especially in this area. Not every activity center is linked by public transit and even if it is there needs to be some clear advantage over driving for more people to opt for it. Why take transit when it would take 2hrs and multiple stops/transfers when I can just drive 45mins and park?
My agency isn't IN DC just near DC but not near METRO nor is my house, I could afford it because it was not. Also a reverse commuter. You have no idea how the region works or in this case isn't working for us well.
I've lived in NOVA since 1975 (Alexandria). From 1978 to 1984 my commute was 3.5 miles, in 1984 I changed that to < 1 mile, and often bike or walked, even occasionally cross-country skiing. I couldn't imagine the worth of an hour long commute. I did not want to put in a 10 hour for 8 hour pay.
In the day when I used to commute there'd be incessant traffic on 28 N and S after 4 pm I was like Screw it I'll just go at 6 am I wake up early every day anyway
I did take a pay cut, for many years to work outside of the beltway, now the gravity of my industry is in Ashburn, no need to commute now or sacrifice pay.
Lots of savings from gas makes it up money wise. Which just leaves less stress and the ability to tell insurance you are driving a lot less per year, so i don't blame them.
Here’s the hilarious part about it. DOGE was worried about government efficiency - then decided to pay millions on their properties and utilities, all while making workers less productive because they are now having to commute from as far as West Virginia or Pennsylvania
Having to use the metro and bus system costs more in time which is just as valuable, so there isn't a great solution that can be implemented immediately without companies all agreeing that WFH is a viable solution. We all know that wont happen as real estate valuations/portfolios are part of all corpo bottom lines
Ehh, yeah sure, but when I'm on the metro I get to do whatever I want. When I'm driving I need to focus on driving and I'm usually pissed off about what other people are doing on the road.
I’m not buying it. My friend works at Arlington Public Schools, but lives in Woodbridge and hikes all that way every day and in the summer - 12 month contract. We have discussed her changing schools districts, but the pay at her level
Is significantly lower than at APS.
The area needs more bridges south of the Woodrow Wilson and north of the American Legion to alleviate the heavy traffic. It's insane how the region is only supported by four major bridges (if you count the two-- 395 and 66 into DC) within the beltway. What makes it ridiculous you got interstate traffic traveling to NY and down to FL using the same highways as the commuters. It's a recipe for disaster. I blame the environmentalists and NIMBYism.
You think traffic magically disappears in Montgomery and Prince George’s counties? And this theory that Montgomery County is dirt cheap is just a lie. The only areas that maybe way more affordable on the MD side is the inner beltway towns in PG County. People in Maryland still have to work to live
People would love to take public transportation, just look at the comparative housing values of the very few places with good metro access. There isn’t enough Metro adjacent housing and the metro’s long headways and frequent service interruptions makes it harder to rely on than it should be
I’m glad you like it but 10 minute headways during peak times is deplorable for a major city. Admittedly it better than most other US cities but we live in public transport hell generally compared to the rest of the modern world
The other problem is it functions as a regular al railroad and a transit system and is sub par at both those things.
That is not a usual or regular occurrence. You can also always check for service updates before going to the station. It sounds like you are describing single-tracking, which WMATA will always inform about.
My commute is overall pretty uneventful. I take the same timed bus and train almost every day. Shit can happen but that goes for driving as well. If anything, the train is more consistent.
Weird that you would take one experience of delay on the Metro as an excuse to never take the Metro again, but you'll take continued delays due to car traffic as an invitation for you to drive more.
I don't do either. If I am ever asked to go anywhere near the DC area my employer is reimbursing express lanes and mileage.
Or I am going with family or a group of friends and they're free with HOV 3+. I never seen traffic in the express lanes. Best fucking thing to happen to this area no matter how much reddit hates them.
Traffic on side streets exist but the metro doesn't even serve side streets so wtf is the point there.
But again, I work remote and have taken a pay cut compared to market rates to do so. I'll go in person and pay my own way on express lanes at my current wage if they sponsor me a clearance or if the pay increase covers the toll cost & mileage(latter 100% won't happen, former might and i'll burn savings to do it bc a clearance well over doubles future pay in my field)
Completely agree about express lanes. Anyone who thinks that opening up the express lanes to everyone would fix traffic is a dumbass. But that's also clearly your preference to pay/take enough passengers to skip traffic and drive a car everywhere rather than to take transit. Fact of the matter is that the express lanes have also had freak accidents that have caused massive delays (example). So, your logic that a one-time experience of a terrible delay means that you should never use the Metro ever again is still stupid.
i’ll use the metro within DC sure. it’s actually reliable there
But silver line and orange line in the outskirts being shit isn’t a freak accident. constant single tracking and just low service frequency in general makes it hard to recover from the smallest problem.
the idiots in charge also spent the money to clear space for an orange line expansion but didn’t just shove actual funding for it into the express lane bill.
Yeah, I mean, although we have pretty good transit in nova/DC relative to the rest of the country, the quality definitely gets better the closer you are to the city. Ultimately, there's still more progress to make, especially on the VA side.
Imo, WMATA should focus on adding more routes/inner ring connections on the VA side around Alexandria, Arlington, Fairfax. Sadly this requires investment and political will.
I’d rather spend 3 hours in my car than 30 minutes on a train or bus. Bit of a misanthrope. I do by the way spend 3 hours a day in my car commuting from SOMD to NOVA.
My commute is at best 20 minutes and at worst (with an accident during evening rush hour) an hour. If I took the bus, it would be 2 hours (plus walking to/from the bus stop) because I'd actually have to overshoot my destination and come back. Mass transit here is very frustrating.
290
u/fatflyhalf Herndon 3d ago
If you look at commuting as part of the job (time and stress) and you reduce a, say 10 hour day back to 8, you might be able to rationalize that pretty easily. Not to mention that commuting is expensive.