Live data from Hacker News

80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

cnbc.com

111–120 of 630 posts

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#111

I understand the merits of WFH and in-person work. One thing that is however funny is the guilt tripping used by employers who have this straw-man version of a lazy WFH employee, and more so, employers who have a delusion that their workplace is important enough that people need to sacrifice a large portion of their lives just for the opportunity to be there in person. 90% of jobs aren't people's "passions" and have…

> 90% of jobs aren't people's "passions" I'd also like to add that even if you are in a field and doing work you are "passionate" about you'll spend between 25-75% of your time doing boring administrative bull hockey that no one is passionate about. Whether it's feeling out a time sheet, or watching HR videos on harassing coworkers.

My passion for my job is limited regardless of salary. I am not going to break my back for someone who makes me jump through arbitrary hoops for everything. Want that promotion? Here's yet another 3 things this review cycle we want to see changed. Just do the work of the title before you're awarded the title! No problem! Take unpaid pagerduty shifts that are forced upon you to resolve problems we wouldn't have if we allowed developers time to do anything!

I work because I have to. There's nothing to be passionate about. Employers are just mad because it takes a little more talent to do as little as possible when remote. If you're smart, optimizing your work to exactly the requisite sprint points (maybe a little more occasionally to show "initiative"), making the appearance of availability, etc will net you the same effect as zoning out at 2pm and staring at your monitor for the next 3 hours when in office. Even better if you learn to exploit PM's miraculous ability to expand into any time available for work. Now you can reduce your sprint obligation commensurate to the amount of time the PM needed you to "plan". Employers never realized often the smartest most talented employees were mentally checking out way before clocking out. The physical appearance of "work" was enough to trick these morons.

I made this realization when I realized how Cxx's, sales, etc view engineers. Just "pie in the sky" dreamers who want "perfect" everything. After making a VP particularly mad at one company (for formally criticizing his dogshit work during an audit as the source of a sev0) I got a reaming that included these exact words. It didn't take long after that to make the connection between engineering and labor, the solid titanium ceiling to progress, and the subsequent solution.

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#112

I understand the merits of WFH and in-person work. One thing that is however funny is the guilt tripping used by employers who have this straw-man version of a lazy WFH employee, and more so, employers who have a delusion that their workplace is important enough that people need to sacrifice a large portion of their lives just for the opportunity to be there in person. 90% of jobs aren't people's "passions" and have…

For me it's not even about the office I quite like there it's quiet compared to home, but the one hour commute back and forth heavily impact my quality of life

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#113
post #68
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My guess is that most employers really have no way to measure if an employee is being productive or not so managers are just reporting what makes them look good...and now we are back to where managers will look better with lots of people running around the office. My guess is that CEOs and VCs have some obscure reason to force people back into the office. Perhaps related to real estate, especially considering how h…

I honestly think it's mostly a huge ego boost to flex with. "Look at how GIANT our new billion dollar HQ is, and look at all of these people working for ME!"

> I honestly think it's mostly a huge ego boost to flex with. "Look at how GIANT our new billion dollar HQ is, and look at all of these people working for ME!"

This may sound like a joke but having gleaming, globally distributed offices is absolutely is a matter of great pride and ego for the C-Suite. They absolutely fantasize about how they are jet setting from one office to another and how all the employees roll a red carpet for them.

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#114
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My guess is that most employers really have no way to measure if an employee is being productive or not so managers are just reporting what makes them look good...and now we are back to where managers will look better with lots of people running around the office. My guess is that CEOs and VCs have some obscure reason to force people back into the office. Perhaps related to real estate, especially considering how h…

Even if your firm isn’t exposed to real estate, its probable that a lot if its shareholders are and are interested in ending the slump in commercial real estate. Plus, while the overall employment situation is strong, the tech downsizing wave may not be over and if you can get people to self-select out, you can maybe avoid having to officially have layoffs.

> Plus, while the overall employment situation is strong, the tech downsizing wave may not be over and if you can get people to self-select out, you can maybe avoid having to officially have layoffs.

Are you sure announcing layoffs hurts share prices? I mean, companies only recently were doing it while still being highly profitable.

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#115

I understand the merits of WFH and in-person work. One thing that is however funny is the guilt tripping used by employers who have this straw-man version of a lazy WFH employee, and more so, employers who have a delusion that their workplace is important enough that people need to sacrifice a large portion of their lives just for the opportunity to be there in person. 90% of jobs aren't people's "passions" and have…

We have a generous hybrid work policy: you can WFH, but you may be required to attend on-site sessions and meetings, for example if we're doing architecture brainstorms or design reviews. We've not found this to work well over zoom. Overall, this works out to a day or two a month, but most people choose to come in at least 1 day a week for various reasons (mostly social). We casually observed there seemed to be a spl…

Start with how you know they're under-performing. What externally visible indications do you have that they're not working?

Eg, if bob was working well at WFH he'd do X, Y, Z, but he only did 0.3 of X. You could even compare that to other employees to show that it's just this one person.

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#116
post #64

I understand the merits of WFH and in-person work. One thing that is however funny is the guilt tripping used by employers who have this straw-man version of a lazy WFH employee, and more so, employers who have a delusion that their workplace is important enough that people need to sacrifice a large portion of their lives just for the opportunity to be there in person. 90% of jobs aren't people's "passions" and have…

Acting like all humans will work equally as hard when they are supervised vs unsupervised is completely naïve

[dead]

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#117
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These very same employers will never take a pay cut for said “passion” that they have for their product (which they probably don’t even use much either). They want to only pay others per keyboard keystroke but can’t accept that often the most efficient/productive workers don’t need to be busy. They spend a lot of their time thinking so that they can generate more impact with fewer keystrokes. Treat people like adults…

There are two issues in the psychology of employers that keep them from doing this. 1. They care more about control than doing the right thing. 2. They don't get satisfaction from improvements that don't come directly from their doing Very stringent quotas, asinine team building activities, and of course, mandatory in-office policies construct a narrative for the company that no good thing that happens is from anywhe…

Astute observations. +1

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#118

I understand the merits of WFH and in-person work. One thing that is however funny is the guilt tripping used by employers who have this straw-man version of a lazy WFH employee, and more so, employers who have a delusion that their workplace is important enough that people need to sacrifice a large portion of their lives just for the opportunity to be there in person. 90% of jobs aren't people's "passions" and have…

It's a small point, but we bounce ideas around just fine on my fully remote workplace.

[deleted]

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#119

I had lunch, not too long ago, with a senior executive of a silicon valley tech company that was moaning about how much of a pain it was to get people to come into the office and how it felt like things would never return to the way they were. And I told them I actually knew of a way to get 100% of their employees to return to the office happily. When they asked what this magic bullet was I said, "Go back to offices,…

So, you found simple solution for very complicated dynamic and you actually believe you solved this problem? I don't care about offices with doors. Sure, they're better, but still it doesn't solve my issues - I care about commute - time and money, especially time. I've been commuting like 3h / day before WFH and I don't want to go back unless you pay me at least 2.5x

I think this is a great comment.

> I care about commute - time and money, especially time.

I'm assuming you have done the whole draw a circle around where you live that represents your maximum willingness to commute and then apply for jobs in that circle thing? It was very popular in silicon valley during the dot com boom. When the commute circle comes up empty though, what do you do?

Not snark, 100% serious. Hired a consultant who was fairly specialized and she spent 6 months working for me and at the end quit but offered to come back in 6 months. Her solution was she would live in the Bay area for 6 months, renting an apartment, save her money and then fly back to Hawaii and live there for 6 months on the money she had saved. She had worked out what was, to me, an ingenious solution to the conundrum that there isn't anywhere near where you want to live that you would like to work.

There are a lot of reasons why people won't work in the office, and I get it, working from home is way better for the employee. One of the more interesting things COVID did was switch the "balance of power" from employers back to employees and so far it has been pretty awesome. In my lunch discussion my message was more "You are gonna have to make people be willing to work in your office if you want to compete for the best ones." The unemployment rate is low, but employees are a population, not a single type, their effectiveness falls along a standard distribution like most things. To compete for the talent you want is making management "cave" to things like offices. It has been relatively minor so far, but as work actions go the whole "I don't wanna go back" movement has certainly been felt in the Bay Area.

Organizational dynamics is a really well studied topic and co-located organizations are able to respond faster, and more effectively, to changing conditions. Consider firefighters who used to respond to a call from home, get to the station, and then head out. Versus ones that are living in the station and can start out immediately. It is a dramatic illustration of the principle but one worth considering if you are managing a large organization.

Reading the comments (which are great btw!) I have observed that a number of people haven't contextualized work yet. Specifically, an employer is an enterprise that employs people to achieve its goals. The employer has factors they can change and factors they cannot when creating an attractive place to work for people who can (in theory) choose to work anywhere. Some of those employers will say "work at the office or quit, your choice." with the expectation that some will quit but presumably most will stay (change is really hard after all and it's scary to jump into the abyss). They want you to stay of course, it is better for them, and this is a rare opportunity to suggest/demand they revert some of the things that made working in the office so awful. Yes, making such demands forces them to decide, and their decision might be one you don't like, but if you are true to your goals and needs you will be happier with either decision. It is just harder to recognize that future happiness in the moment when you're crushed by them saying, "Okay then, we will call Friday your last day then."

Re: 80% of bosses say they regret earlier return-to-office plans

#120

I understand the merits of WFH and in-person work. One thing that is however funny is the guilt tripping used by employers who have this straw-man version of a lazy WFH employee, and more so, employers who have a delusion that their workplace is important enough that people need to sacrifice a large portion of their lives just for the opportunity to be there in person. 90% of jobs aren't people's "passions" and have…

We have a generous hybrid work policy: you can WFH, but you may be required to attend on-site sessions and meetings, for example if we're doing architecture brainstorms or design reviews. We've not found this to work well over zoom. Overall, this works out to a day or two a month, but most people choose to come in at least 1 day a week for various reasons (mostly social). We casually observed there seemed to be a spl…

See if embracing async work does it for those individuals, with some pressure on the deliverables but instead of end-of-day of that day, you let them deliver the next morning prior to chatting. Basically the same pace, but you shift on them the accountability of meeting the deadline for whatever widget you need, so if they didn't do anything that day, the expectation would be that they log in sometime during the night or very early in the morning to do it in one shot, because of the pressure being used as a motivator. If you identify that pattern, you have a procrastinator with potentially an attention/motivation disorder.

With a little of handholding and outcome motivation management, you should be able to hack into their dopamine cycle, keep their interest and those deliverables coming.

Post reply on HN