Live data from Hacker News

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

theverge.com

311–320 of 403 posts

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

#311
post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You aren't that far off. Much of what is in the realm of "management theory" is rehashed from the heady days of slavery if you trace it's inspiration back far enough, at least in the United States. Basically, if you aren't an independent trades/craftsperson, you're being handled by the same corpus of institutional knowledge that kept ye olde plantation running smoothly. Less outright violence. Still there though.

Modern management science pulls heavily from WW2 organizational tactics in western militaries when conscription was common and the idea of conscientious objection was not well received.

Give

https://www.amazon.com/Going-Postal-Rebellion-Workplaces-Col...

a good read through. Many, many facets of labor relations didn't change one iota from far before WWII. There's an elitism inherent in American culture that is just a right pain in the arse to shake off.

Take Ames dumping on Reagan with a grain of salt, but he does a fantastic job of extending the line of labor relations culture quite a ways back beyond merely WWII. Though I won't argue that things got very turbid around that time specifically because of the perceived existential threat the War created.

I still maintain, however, that no matter how unpopular labor movements were at the time, that they dug in was still an invaluable act of civic courage. It is at such times that resistance is most important, as the majority is all too eager to turn a blind eye to the suffering they have wrought.

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

#312
post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We'd still have people dying from keyboard accidents in mine tunnels too.

This is funny on two levels. On it's face, it's absurd and clever. It's also funny because when you or someone you know falls ill or is injured and is unable to work you'll realize that all the boot licking you did when you were able bodied means precisely nothing without worker protections. This comment will be in your history and maybe you'll even remember writing it. There will be no safety net for you - private o…

I know where you are coming from. I migrated from a European country with a very robust public safety net (14 months parental leave, long term disability, etc) to the US where similar protections largely don't exist. I don't think unions have played any role in the difference.

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

#313
post #40

I don't know the origins of the "disagree and commit" philosophy, but Jassy's use seems like a self-serving perversion of what is an attempt at dealing with decision deadlock. ... that is, disagree-and-commit transactionally seems like it ought to be between peers. Disagree-and-commit when applied between superiors and reports could be rewritten as just "shut up and follow orders."

I was just disagreeing and committing is the new “just following orders”

"just following orders" implies doing something inherently immoral, but refusing to take responsibility and laying it on higher authority. Nothing like that is happening here. RTO is not inherently immoral - while I prefer remote work, it's a valid choice for management to have different preference for their teams. The team members can either agree with that or move to another team or employment - neither choice is morally wrong in any way. I personally think handling it this way would be detrimental for Amazon, but I am not their manager and they are, so it's their authority. There's no need to put it like there's only one obviously moral way to handle it and the other way is morally flawed.

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

#314

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.

As a remote worker, given the choice I'd probably choose to go to the office 1-2 days a week and work remotely for the rest (I worked like that before and it was fine). Occasionally, being in the same room is very helpful. It's not worth firing someone who is physically so remote they can't go to the office, but with all possibilities open, my experience shows the hybrid model is the most efficient overall. In reality, the possibilities are not always open, so one has to find the model that works best for the particular team.

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

#315

Read: Amazon CEO lays off its remote staff without severance

It is sort of the opposite. The people with remote contracts aren't affected by this. It is the people who have contracts that list a work location but who have been working remotely anyway because of workplace flexibility who are affected. Yes, it is a crappy situation and workplace flexibility should be way way way more common but it isn't laying off remote staff.

> The people with remote contracts aren't affected by this.

False. I currently work at Amazon and was hired remotely, as per my employment contract, and I've been forced to relocate or resign.

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

#316

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…

Mandatory attendance with hot-desking is complete BS (even if the hot-desking is just theoretical - like one friend who's workplace has them essentially have the same desks daily but name plates are verboten - wtf?)

If the company demands you to show up more than 50%, and doesn't give you a permanent desk that's a huge middle finger IMHO.

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

#317
post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Considering that a nobody like myself has "real estate" in his portfolio, I have no doubt that people at Jassy's level have stakes in all kinds of businesses that will benefit from RTO. Commercial RE is just one of them. They could have Airbnb/rental properties, restaurants, franchise fast food, private car services.

Jassy has ~$100 million / year compensation for doing his job. He is outvoted by >99% of the companies shareholders. Jassy doing anything not in the best interest of shareholders will get him fired. He does not care about random properties that are peanuts compared to his compensation and status as CEO of Amazon.

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

#318
post #101
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"…

I think a lot of this hinges on tech workers thinking they're not "the proles" while management sure as hell thinks they are (or should be, or "will be soon") and makes moves in that direction.

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

#319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ?

Many people on HN claim that big co's like Amazon, Apple, and Google only want RTO (return to office) because they stand to lose so much money in real estate. However, these are companies worth >$1,000 billion. When you dig into the value of their corporate real estate holdings, it's almost always only $5-20 billion, a paltry percentage of their overall worth. Their financial incentives mean they do not care about losing even 50% of a $5-$20B real estate portfolio, if it in anyway impacts the ability of their workforce to be productive in making the $50 billion/year profits required to maintain >$1,000 billion equity value. Losing 50% on $10B real estate means a 0.5% loss. Losing just 1% productivity on your workforce is a 1% loss, double.

These companies care about their software productivity and profits, period. That's what drives their decisions. Their worth isn't comprised of real estate.

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

#320

Hilarious to me Oracle has no issue with remote work while Apple, Amazon, Google, all flip out Deals they cut, whether it’s leases or tax breaks, are not my responsibility. Aside from Apple, the only thing the anti-remote places have is brand recognition. The knowledge they possess is worker knowledge. They’re having a hard time justifying valuations since their real social value is corralling workers who are then to…

Next headline: Apple, Google, Amazon collude on revoking remote work options.

It's not like they haven't done this before (but for salaries) [1] - they got off with a minuscule fine ($415M - better than the cost of doing business as usual) why wouldn't they do this again?

[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2015/01/16/37...

Post reply on HN