81–90 of 185 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because developers in those regions can tolerate less salary due to their lower expenses, as a competitive advantage.
What if the dev in Boise and the dev in Seattle and the dev in Butte got together and agreed none of them would work for less than a certain salary?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What else is there to takeaway? They knew they weren’t working for a remote-first company. They knew what their contract said. They played a dangerous game and now they’re finally burned. You cannot collect an Amazon salary living out in Idaho or Nebraska.
Why not?
It is for a three-day return-to-office, not full time. Given the state of the economy, I'd be worried about just quitting. It seems during the pandemic tech workers went for broke and took car leases and moved away banking on being able to WFH for a long period of time. I wonder if Amazon made it clear WFH would not be permanent or an option. There are plenty of tech workers who would like to work at Amazon if a bunc…
Last week I had to deliver an onsite at a company who insisted on doing at their location. You see the thing is...I have been curing a strong feverish cold, but was good enough to go. We were all 15 on a tiny cozy meeting room for 3 days. I am fairly certain half of this team will cook my virus and will feel miserable and might stay in bed next week...Am I guilty ?? ;-)
> "Staffers who posted in the Slack channel said they were caught off guard by the announcement. Many expressed frustration that they’d have to find arrangements for child care, caregivers for aging parents, or potentially move in order to be within commuting distance of the office. One worker said they’d recently leased a car with an annual limit of 16,000 miles assuming remote work was still an option; if they’re r…
Yes, they should have expected shitty behavior from Bezos and Co. My take is that this is a cover mass layoff. Amazon is enforcing this now in the hopes that people like these folks resign voluntarily. Another mass layoff would make their share price drop again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course you are guilty of putting others at risk of catching your virus, and you seem perfectly aware. Did you tell them that you were possibly infectious? If this is some kind of joke I don't understand it.
Now you are on to something. Is company management guilty when forces the employees onsite, knowing many could be infectious but not know about it yet?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because developers in those regions can tolerate less salary due to their lower expenses, as a competitive advantage.
What if the dev in Boise and the dev in Seattle and the dev in Butte got together and agreed none of them would work for less than a certain salary?
Studies have found that employees thrive when they spend 23-40% of their time in the office.[1] This also is a very personal thing dependong on living conditions (also on personality type like introvert/extrovert, ADHD etc.). People with kids, small homes etc. will probably enjoy returning to the office. I valued my office workplace very much as long as we lived in a single-bedroom apartment but started hating going…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because salary is not determined by how much profit you make but by the demand of your labour in the market.
Newsflash-- the "market" is becoming less constrained by geography.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because developers in those regions can tolerate less salary due to their lower expenses, as a competitive advantage.
What if the dev in Boise and the dev in Seattle and the dev in Butte got together and agreed none of them would work for less than a certain salary?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because developers in those regions can tolerate less salary due to their lower expenses, as a competitive advantage.
What if the dev in Boise and the dev in Seattle and the dev in Butte got together and agreed none of them would work for less than a certain salary?