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

The return-to-the-office trend backfires

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 151 posts

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#101

Post by 000ooo000 »

matchbok3 wrote: post #35
imcrs wrote: post #13

RTO is about controlling labor, nothing else. Everything else is a smoke screen. Ask yourself the following questions and you'll understand what happened: - why did RTO happen seemingly right after salaries jumped and labor became scarce? - why did RTO happen virtually in lockstep across all of white collar employment? - why did RTO happen despite no evidence that productivity had anything to do with it? (and in fact…

I think these conspiracy theories about RTO are really unhelpful and actually harmful to the viability of hybrid work arrangements. Please work in a day as a oil rig technician or a nurse. "I should be able to work anywhere and my employer must accommodate me" is an extremely privileged and elitist view of thinking. A few of your notes are actually just wrong as well. Salaries jumped during covid due to over-hiring a…

>Please work in a day as a oil rig technician or a nurse. "I should be able to work anywhere and my employer must accommodate me" is an extremely privileged and elitist view of thinking.

To highlight just how stupid this is, here it is from another angle:

"I have to work on site so everyone else must work on site"

What is the logical conclusion here? That the workforce should be equal in every sense? Come on

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#102

Post by pdabbadabba »

DIVx0 wrote: post #84
pdabbadabba wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we're not here to please you or make your job easier I don't mean to be a jerk but ... if you are one of the people I manage, you literally are employed (at least in part) to make my job easier. That's not the only thing that matters -- which is why we (like many employers) do still allow some remote work. But making management more difficult is absolutely an impact that a rational workplace would take into account…

Your employees are there to make your life easier? As their manager? Do you demand they make you coffee? Rub your feet? I've been doing this for decades, and I've never seen that attitude work with any 'leader.' I'd hate to work for you. Ever hear of servant leadership? Or hear the line "My job is to clear the runway for you" Managers are cost centers, 'your' employees are what keep you employed, give them the respec…

That's not at all what I mean. What I mean is that I am responsible for the output of my team. If someone I am supervising does a bad job, is hard to communicate with, etc. it means that one way or another I have to do more work, which reduces the total output of my team. It can also lead to inferior service, angry clients, adverse outcomes, etc.

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#103

Post by pdabbadabba »

NeutralCrane wrote: post #87
pdabbadabba wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we're not here to please you or make your job easier I don't mean to be a jerk but ... if you are one of the people I manage, you literally are employed (at least in part) to make my job easier. That's not the only thing that matters -- which is why we (like many employers) do still allow some remote work. But making management more difficult is absolutely an impact that a rational workplace would take into account…

It’s the exact opposite, managers are employed to make employees job easier. Employees get the jobs done, managers are there to coordinate that work, remove blockers, and enable workers.

The relationship is reciprocal. I lay the tracks so my supervisees can do their job (and, indeed, have a job to do!). They help me produce far more work for clients than I ever could myself.

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#104

Post by pdabbadabba »

000ooo000 wrote: post #100
pdabbadabba wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we're not here to please you or make your job easier I don't mean to be a jerk but ... if you are one of the people I manage, you literally are employed (at least in part) to make my job easier. That's not the only thing that matters -- which is why we (like many employers) do still allow some remote work. But making management more difficult is absolutely an impact that a rational workplace would take into account…

Congratulations. You have outed yourself as the archetypal manager that every WFH/RTO thread ever complains about.

And you as someone I would never hire!

Though the truth is probably just that we're not seeing eye-to-eye because we're communicating through an imperfect medium that doesn't encourage a nuanced discussion.

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#105

Post by pdabbadabba »

asdff wrote: post #66
pdabbadabba wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not persuaded that's the only thing going on here, but I'm sure that is part of it. Nonetheless, I think this is why many employers pushed for RTO.

I think RTO/WFH also kind of hits on a fundamental cultural divide that is beginning to emerge in our society. There is idea of who are we working for that I think people are starting to reckon with: in support of ourselves or in support of someone else, maybe even to the point of detriment to ourselves. The arguments for and against fall along these lines. For RTO: in favor of the company over the self. It is more "…

I think this is right. Of course, the trade-off has always been there for all to see between "work" and "life," but greater ability to WFH has rightly cause people to reassess the sacrifices they are willing to make for their careers. I hope I've been clear that, while I think there are real reasons RTO is valuable, they are not necessarily decisive at every margin.

Of course, another side of this is that some people like their workplaces and like to social aspect of going into the office. Not everyone has to, of course, but it also takes a certain critical mass of people in the office in order for anyone to get those benefits. So, on a certain level, this is also just about competing preferences.

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#106

Post by defrost »

matchbok3 wrote: post #57
asdff wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you understand how rig work or nursing is? These are very flexible jobs. There is demand for nursing everywhere. You can be a travel nurse and go find work in HI or CA or Las Vegas right now if you want. Temp agencies that place you so you don't even need to really hunt either. Rig work it is weeks on weeks off sort of deal where you then get off that rig back to, quite literally, anywhere in the world where you l…

I'm not sure I understand the point. The vast, vast majority of jobs simply cannot be done remotely. So I have little patience for the entitlement of people thinking they "deserve" it or yell about conspiracy theories about why it is going away. There is a reason YC is in person. There is a reason why the top companies are in person.

To expand upon a particular point; near as I understand WFH, or rather more broadly _not_ "RTO" (ie. endure office bound work) has a strong backbone of people wanting to maximise home/work life balance.

The point about rig work, FIFO mine work, nursing (again, FIFO) et al is these are jobs that are a priority choiice for many that are living that somewhat off-grid lives with a big home-life component dream .. and have been doing that for many decades now.

I'm over 60, have worked in a majority of countries across the globe (geophysical exploration field work), and have avoided offices like a plague for the entirity of my career - I enjoy 24/7 field work with weeks off at home to work projects there or to code / build for various projects from home.

We've even built up resource and energy intelligence services and sold them on to FinTech companies that way.

And met and talked to many people that way.

So, from some PoV's you chose the worst possible examples of jobs that supposedly tie people to an office grind.

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#107

Post by chrismcb »

imcrs wrote: post #13

RTO is about controlling labor, nothing else. Everything else is a smoke screen. Ask yourself the following questions and you'll understand what happened: - why did RTO happen seemingly right after salaries jumped and labor became scarce? - why did RTO happen virtually in lockstep across all of white collar employment? - why did RTO happen despite no evidence that productivity had anything to do with it? (and in fact…

Lockstep? Once the major company did it, it was easy for others to follow. No conspiracy here. You are right, it is about controlling labor, watching the workforce, justifying the office expense. But I think a lot of your questions are just coincidental. As much as I enjoy working from home (been doing it for most of the last two decades) there are some advantageous to new hires working in the office.

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#108

Post by bestouff »

GuB-42 wrote: post #67

Two possibilities: - There are some statistical biases in the article, correlation != causation, Simpsons paradox, etc... things like that - Company will return-to-the-office mandates will soon disappear or adapt as they will lose their competitive advantage, x1.7 is too big of an effect to ignore What is possible is that work from home benefit companies in the growth phase while office work is more appropriate for c…

> Company will return-to-the-office mandates will soon disappear or adapt as they will lose their competitive advantage, x1.7 is too big of an effect to ignore

Lol the market magic hand. At that point it's more of a religious belief than a scientific fact.

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#109

Post by benterix »

heraldgeezer wrote: post #53

What if I actually like the office? I have a 40min walk to it or 10min bus ride, so no American commute, lol. (Your society is done) I like my colleagues. Sometimes you want to meet and solve problems face to face, and not have it be planned. I have a shift schedule, sometimes I am the only one in the office, that is bliss :) But my work is 100% in office.

> What if I actually like the office?

We had this discussion like, forever?

If you like the office, that's great - go to the office! Most people want the freedom of choice, RTO is exactly about taking away that freedom.

Re: The return-to-the-office trend backfires

#110

Post by benterix »

imcrs wrote: post #13

RTO is about controlling labor, nothing else. Everything else is a smoke screen. Ask yourself the following questions and you'll understand what happened: - why did RTO happen seemingly right after salaries jumped and labor became scarce? - why did RTO happen virtually in lockstep across all of white collar employment? - why did RTO happen despite no evidence that productivity had anything to do with it? (and in fact…

But this is blatantly obvious to everyone, I'm not sure this aspect is a taboo in official conversation. People wanted WFH long before the pandemic, but it was a privilege of a few high bosses, the rest had to be packed in cubicles or open-plan offices (not sure which is worse). Then the pandemic came and it turned out most people can work remotely without abusing it. But the management never wanted to give the employees that freedom, it was just a question of time.
Post reply on HN