751–760 of 913 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing wrong with wanting to work in an office. The issue is trying to force everyone to work in an office.
The whole point of wanting to work in an office is being surrounded by colleagues. That means everyone on the team needs to be in the office on the same days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unask this question. Every industry, every company, every team, and every project is different. What works in some places and times doesn't work in others. You have to decide for yourself and your team/company if RTO is what is best, and don't take other's lived experience as your own.
> Unask this question. I don't understand this response and it come off as incredibly rude. What I'm asking is whether it ever makes sense for a firm to do something against the preferences of employees if it demonstrably increases productivity. > You have to decide for yourself and your team/company if RTO is what is best, and don't take other's lived experience as your own. I genuinely think you might be responding…
For the record, you're talking to different people. You asked the question to me, and I responded. guhidalg is a different person in the conversation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Prior to COVID, everyone understood that remote work was supported by some companies and not others. It was also a type of work that was preferred by some employees and not others. As a result, everyone peacefully self-selected into their preferred employment relationships. Companies got the type of workforce they wanted and workers chose the type of environment they wanted. It was great. Today, as some companies are…
Before COVID there were a ton of people who wanted to work remotely but couldn't because remote jobs were few and far between. COVID finally gave them what they always wanted, but now it's being taken away, and remote jobs are getting harder to find again. That's why there is resentment. There was resentment before too, but it was more below the radar because it was always shot down with "we work better in person" an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You give them entirely too much credit. They were told by others (primarily Wall Street) that they are to do this. It provides them with three things: 1. Real estate holding investment increases. 2. Control. 3. Silent layoffs. There's no reason for RTO. None. They're doing it to save money and regain control of their workforce.
(1) is a dumb conspiracy theory, the tech companies that pay rents care about their own profits, not the profits of their REIT counterparties. The idea that evil capitalists sacrifice their own profits in order to boost other companies’ profits in the name of class solidarity is one of the sillier things people on the left believe. According to your theory of how capitalism works companies work Amazon and Walmart sho…
This is one aspect of the RTO discussion that's sometimes missed: there are plenty of people in the tech sphere (myself included) who've been comfortably remote for much longer than those who were pushed into remote work by lockdowns and pandemic response. We're not about to give up a whole lifestyle we've built over (in some cases) decades, on the whim of whichever executive we happen to be serving under at the pres…
This is not only about before pandemic remote workers. Once people enjoyed the flexibility they aren't going back.
I mean this is true in the scenario where demand for their skills outstrips the supply of available workers with said skills.
In a different scenario, where tech jobs are being reduced across the board (due to return to normal interest rates and VC funding slowing down), such an "aren't going back" ultimatum isn't necessarily going to be compatible with "I need a job."
And of course, if you believe Microsoft, ChatGPT is going to start eating tech jobs left and right any day now.
The economy runs in boom and bust cycles, and the winds are shifting. The tech environment from 2020-2022 was extremely weird, and the balance of power now is shifting back to management. Management knows that (at least some) workers highly value remote work, and they're not going to hand that out for free.
The only certainty here is change, and as tech workers lose leverage, "remote work" moves from a default assumption to an item that must be negotiated for (perhaps in exchange for some total compensation) - if it's available at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before COVID there were a ton of people who wanted to work remotely but couldn't because remote jobs were few and far between. COVID finally gave them what they always wanted, but now it's being taken away, and remote jobs are getting harder to find again. That's why there is resentment. There was resentment before too, but it was more below the radar because it was always shot down with "we work better in person" an…
I'm ready to believe that remote work can be more productive overall, and definitely more cost effective, but I always have a really hard time with the "I'm just as productive, if not more productive remotely" data and argument. It's really easy to believe that folks with an existing network of colleagues and relationship, as well as a decent amount of company of industry know how can be more productive remotely. Few…
Humans are great at adapting to their surroundings. Mentoring/growing juniors will continue but in a different way that works better for modern work arrangements.
Spare me. If someone is willing to pay someone $500k per year as I’m sure someone like the author is able to get, if the CEO wants them in the office three days a week, so be it. It’s stupid, everyone knows it’s stupid, I agree with the author on that, but tech workers sound _incredibly_ entitled when they write pieces like this. There are people making 1/5th what the author is making and somehow surviving in VHCOL a…
Historically, violent conflicts notwithstanding, only people in already relatively comfortable positions are able to improve conditions for themselves and others, such as normalizing WFH, since the people stuck with 4hr commutes that can only pray that they can afford a full tank of gas that day won't have the time or energy to do so.
The author explicitly says they're not going to uproot their life to move to some expensive city, which presumably is much more than a cost of living argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole point of wanting to work in an office is being surrounded by colleagues. That means everyone on the team needs to be in the office on the same days.
I don't see why someone's desire to be surrounded by colleagues should trump someone else's desire to not be surrounded by colleagues and just work in peace.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never said that employees shouldn’t have preferences (I explicitly stated otherwise in another comment) and shouldn’t have a say in the matter. I was just saying that ultimately the CEO makes the call on RTO (at least that’s what it seems to be at megacorps), whether it’s the right or wrong one isn’t my call.
> I was just saying that ultimately the CEO makes the call on RTO (at least that’s what it seems to be at megacorps), whether it’s the right or wrong one isn’t my call. This is the part I was disagreeing with. The CEO does not make that call. The CEO and labor negotiation over that call. If you view it as just the CEO's decision, you've ceded a tremendous amount of power. But, actually, it's a shared decision between…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people who claim to like an office specifically like other people being at an office
Most people who claim to like work-from-home specifically rely on other people showing up at their workplaces -- restaurants, delivery drivers, grocery workers, cleaners, healthcare, dog walkers, etc.