Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 403 posts

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#281

Post by mandeepj »

huevosabio wrote: post #207
lapcat wrote: post #121

Jassy said the quiet part out loud and admitted what I've always suspected, that most CEOs don't have original thoughts, instead governing by groupthink: > Other company CEOs helped Jassy make up his mind too. Jassy spoke to "60 to 80 CEOs of other companies over the last 18 months," and "virtually all of them" preferred in-office work, he said. I bet that none of those individual CEOs could empirically prove that re…

I think you are spot on. In the last 3 years we had insane hiring sprees, layoffs, full remote proclamations, RTO proclamations, all perfectly synced between companies. This synchronized zigzag makes me think that 1) C-suite pay is indeed too high, and 2) we may have concentrated risk. On the latter, when SVB busted, it was clear that a small cohort of VCs in chat rooms dominated the decisions of tons of startups, th…

> This synchronized zigzag makes me think that

If the waging fixing scandal was not enough of the giveaway about their collusion. Post Covid, they laid-off people purposefully to get back control in their hands https://observer.com/2014/04/wage-fixing-scandal-google-appl...

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#282

Post by nielsbot »

jtode wrote: post #101
nielsbot wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like the first time there would be serious impetus (and a perfect case) for tech workers to form a union.

I am incredibly in favour of unions in all industries, but this one I have serious doubts it will ever happen. I'm gonna be un-PC and reach for a metaphor involving slavery - not because I am comparing tech workers, of which I am one, to slaves, but because I think it's the best real-world example of how oppression is distributed by hubristic figureheads of feudalistic systems. If you ever saw Spike Lee's "Malcolm X"…

To quote a wise man: "¿Por qué no los dos?"

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#283

Post by 6D794163636F756 »

y-c-o-m-b wrote: post #228

PSA: if you have a disability as defined by the ADA (anxiety, depression, and adhd falls under this btw) and have been a remote employee this entire time, they may be legally obligated to provide continued virtual work privileges to accommodate your disability. There seems to have been some recent successful lawsuits surrounding that topic. Take a look here https://www.bfvlaw.com/fielding-remote-work-accommodations-r…

I have a friend who went through that. Amazon's HR likes to take its time to get back to you and in their case the accomodations had an expiration date.

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#284

Post by [deleted] »

RestlessMind wrote: post #256
Nextgrid wrote: post #253

From my experience, these kinds of hybrid policies with mandatory "X days in office" are the worst of both worlds. A mandatory "X days in office" means that during the office days everyone is running and on edge trying to do all their "office" things so you don't get all (or even most?) of the benefits of an entirely on-site company: "Culture" and watercooler chat doesn't really happen if everyone's schedule is packe…

From my personal experience and that of my friends in SV, hybrid with everyone in office for 2-3 same days, is the best experience. I don't have to commute every day. My team can do focused uninterrupted work on their WFH days. We can have team discussions, deep dives or 1:1's on RTO days which are far more conducive for the interpersonal communication.

[deleted]

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#285

Post by bsimpson »

mv4 wrote: post #199
SilverBirch wrote: post #176

To be honest I think 3 days a week in the office is a perfectly reasonable requirement. It gives enough opportunity for people to get face to face time and to build the relationships they need to build whilst still offering flexibility. Should it be combined with some flexibility for edge cases? Sure, managers will always turn a blind eye when it makes sense. And part of that is you can only have flexibility if the b…

One of the reasons I joined Amazon last year was their stance on remote work: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/07/andy-jassy-says-he-wont-forc... For me to go to the nearest office will add 4 hours in commute time daily, and I would still be video conferencing in Chime - as my team is all over the world and nobody is in my office.

That's the stupid part about these RTO-by-fiat decisions.

My team is in a different timezone. There is no interpersonal benefit for me dialing in from a particular office vs from wherever I happen to be.

I should have the flexibility to work from an office when it suits me and remotely when it suits me. That's how it's been my whole career, and it's worked just fine so far.

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#286

Post by manishsharan »

reducesuffering wrote: post #267
manishsharan wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fear of an collapse in commercial real estate is driving these decisions. What 4 hours of your life each day compared to the well being of the real estate moguls ? I am staying at my job (100% wfh )and foregoing other opportunities in the job market as an extra hour of playtime with my kid is worth that much to me. The minute my employer changes their mind, I will be out hunting similar WFH job

That $1T giants care more about a $10b real estate portfolio than 2% productivity of their workforce is the biggest QAnon level conspiracy that HN supports which makes no sense.

Sorry .. I am unable to understand what you meant. Could you elaborate ?

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#287

Post by peteradio »

mjoneill wrote: post #245

If this (or a similar policy) affects you and you suspect that it is an attempt by your employer to get you (and others) to quit in order to avoid having to pay severance, unemployment, etc... Understand what "constructive dismissal" is. It may help if you need to file unemployment claims.

Does constructive dismissal retorts apply at all in the US? I assume the vast majority of those affected are in the US...

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#288

Post by dnissley »

xt00 wrote: post #160

Seems most of these top down driven mandates could be explained by some simple logic—if you don’t like your job very much as CEO, then you are thinking “man I wish I didn’t have to be here”.. and then it starts resentment toward people who also aren’t suffering along with you.. basically these mandates seem likely to be driven by stress at the top of the management, not based upon actual data. If you are asking for d…

Andy Jassy's net worth is hundreds of millions of dollars. There's nothing stopping the guy from stepping down if he really hated his job. This speculation flies in the face of available evidence.

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#289

Post by stilwelldotdev »

freilanzer wrote: post #167
stilwelldotdev wrote: post #127

What about the employees that have a requirement to work remotely due to a disability?

They can find a new job then.

Well yes, that's obviously true. There are a lot of companies out there that don't treat their employees like cattle who are eager to be driven from field to field.

Impressively callous reply, though. Top notch heartlessness.

Re: Amazon CEO reportedly told remote employees: It’s probably not going to work out

#290

Post by benhurmarcel »

Nextgrid wrote: post #253

From my experience, these kinds of hybrid policies with mandatory "X days in office" are the worst of both worlds. A mandatory "X days in office" means that during the office days everyone is running and on edge trying to do all their "office" things so you don't get all (or even most?) of the benefits of an entirely on-site company: "Culture" and watercooler chat doesn't really happen if everyone's schedule is packe…

That’s the point of view of someone that can easily find a fully remote job.

In my industry there are basically none of them. Companies would prefer to have everyone in the office, but now a minimum of 3 days of presence per week in the norm. That’s simply because many people prefer to have that flexibility, including me, so companies provide it to attract employees.

Sure, it would sound great to be fully remote and live wherever I wanted, but I can’t, so hybrid is the next best thing.

Post reply on HN