I’ve been looking for a new job as a software developer. The huge majority of job listings I see in my area are hybrid or remote. I just had an introductory phone call with Vizio (which didn’t specify the location type in the job listing). The recruiter told me that the job was fully on-site, which I told her was a deal breaker for me.
It makes me wonder how many other people back out after hearing that the job is on-site. And it makes me wonder why this wasn’t specified in the job description. I assume most people only want hybrid or remote jobs these days, right?
Anyways I was just wondering how many of you guys apply for on-site IT jobs? Hybrid is so much better, I don’t know why people would apply for on-site jobs unless they have no other options.
It’s entirely possible that people can work remote but still relocate to an area where the company has a presence. For example, they may not be set up to pay taxes in a certain jurisdiction. For example, my company could not hire Canadian residents until we had a legal entity in Canada. Thankfully we bought a cabadieb firm.
Why would a company decide to grant you a working visa when you will primarily be remote? Furthermore, why would the government grant you a visa when you could, in theory, work from your own country?
As I said, they may not have support to pay or provide benefits in the area where they live. So perhaps you need to move to a different state or country but can still work remote. E.g. Maybe I take a remote job with a company in the UK but I decide to live in Glasgow instead of London.