171–180 of 301 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe most people can get all their work done in 4 hours so sitting in an office for 8 is pointless
Maybe, maybe not. However, management bought 8 hours of your time and not 4 when they hired you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe most people can get all their work done in 4 hours so sitting in an office for 8 is pointless
Maybe, maybe not. However, management bought 8 hours of your time and not 4 when they hired you.
So the times you’re off on the weekends doing no work is valuable to the company because you’re recharging your mind and possibly also thinking about problems subconsciously.
I went to check my job offer, and it doesn’t mention anything about 40 hour weeks or 8 hour days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no conspiracy theory here. Most people will work 4 hour work days when working remotely. (And if they're working an 8 hour work day it's because they're working two remote jobs at the same time.) "No loss of productivity" is a flat out lie.
How much of your 8 hours at the office is productive work? In my experience, half the day is spent on coffee breaks and lunch anyway.
The idea that there's a global cabal of ultra-wealthy real-estate owners who have globally conspired to control people to go back to the office holds about as much weight in my mind as the idea that there's a global cabal of ultra-wealthy who have globally conspired to create a virus to control the population. Covid was an outlier event, and the outcomes that occurred as a result of it will revert to the mean over ti…
Is that what we are calling business now? As if industry players don't buy media outlets precisely to push their narratives (look at tech outlets, crypto outlets, pharma etc). How is this a "cabal"? It's cheaper to just talk to your friend who owns business insider and also invests in the same RE funds to ask "journalists" to research on the topic.
Also, plenty midmanagement in many industries love RTO: it's harder to justify their roles (and what they got promoted for) unless they have bags of flesh to oversee. It's not a cabal of midmanagement. It's just midmanagement slow pushing for RTO internally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My theory, which is kind of informed by what I saw it play out in my company: The reason is a psychological one. Most leaders derive their power from in-person interactions. Remote and video calls severely impact that. Those leaders also love having an audience that needs to listen to them whenever they are in the room and the lack of that kind of feedback and adulation shellshocked a lot of them.
It feels a lot worse to deliver a lame joke at the start of an all hands meeting to a bunch of muted zoom windows with their cameras off. How much of the return to office is leaders wanting that polite chuckle from that captured audience back? I'm barely being facetious. "That polite chuckle" is really a stand in for all the soft power they wield in person that evaporates with WFH. They have lost a degree of control…
So if a leader wants, requires, needs, is addicted to that feeling that people are submitting to them, then things will eventually go downhill as in the end the only people who will work for them will be "yes men".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Calling stuff a "conspiracy theory" is just a thought-terminating cliché, and measuring the ability of humans to conspire [0] by equating that ability with stuff like Elvis still being alive isn't the attempt of an argument, it's just a slogan. [0] for which there is no communication between them required, or even conscious desire to "conspire" of single one of them. Consider how mobbing can go. People don't go "so,…
What is "cliché" is to offer up "McKinsey is this shady organization we all hate!" as some sort of evidence that they could conspire to organize this sort of thing. Getting back to the original thesis of the article, the author is stating that people making the decision on RTO (the "elites", another nebulous scary term...) are doing so because commercial real estate is so critical to their decision making process. If…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My theory, which is kind of informed by what I saw it play out in my company: The reason is a psychological one. Most leaders derive their power from in-person interactions. Remote and video calls severely impact that. Those leaders also love having an audience that needs to listen to them whenever they are in the room and the lack of that kind of feedback and adulation shellshocked a lot of them.
And that goes up to every levels of the hierarchy. It's definitely about power and control. I'd add that it is also a question of geography. The work place is the place where power exists. And so having you inside the company's walls means you are under control.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? A workplace with no proper desk, chair, lighting, multi screen setup, isolation from domestic distractions, crappy phone lines due to bad internet, the hurdle of contacting someone who used to sit next to you, and the impossibility of scribbling something on a whiteboard etc? Sure, remote work can be productive for certain work, and for certain people. But people underestimate the value of an office. Working…
I doubt there are many people in tech with bad Internet. Worst case, there's Starlink. All other issues are easily solvable too, either with the right tools, or the right processes. (nb. I also think working at a coffee shop isn't for most people)
By coming back to the office?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don’t think the world is so coordinated. The "think tanks" that are pre staffed and fully capable of churning out and placing 3x major long form articles per week that are pro or con {Subject X} (and an additional few that fence sit and are "just asking questions") already exist and have been about since at least Nine out of Ten Doctors Recommend Smoking . You know, 5+ decades ago. The "elites" that are losing mo…
Can you link some think tank pieces arguing against remote work? I tried looking but couldn't find any. I found a few things but clearly none of these are part of an anti remote work effort: an AEI interview https://www.aei.org/workforce-development/the-future-of-remo... which seems pretty balanced overall (and doesn't take a prescriptive position) an AEI piece https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/the-trade-o…
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/from-digital-nomad-to-...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/julianhayesii/2024/09/22/is-ama...
https://bmmagazine.co.uk/in-business/rachel-reeves-urges-end...
https://www.finews.com/news/english-news/64448-zurueck-ins-b...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/09/deloitte-mon...
https://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/news/2024/09/18/amaz...
https://www.newsday.com/news/region-state/new-york-state-pop...
https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/survey-reveals-us-remote-workers-s...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/are-remote-workers-real...
https://www.onrec.com/news/news-archive/is-remote-work-losin...
I've been a remote worker for many years prior to covid and it's been interesting to watch. There's a constant drip of negative articles about remote work which increases to a flood around headlines like the Amazon one.