JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate • Hacker News Board

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#101

Post by intended » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:14 PM UTC

nielsbot wrote: post #62

999900000999 wrote: post #21

I dislike RTO for one simple reason . I'm not at work to make friends, I'm not at work to chit chat. I'm not at work so we can talk about who won the last football game . I go to work in exchange for currency, which is required to acquire goods and services. All this other crap, all these holiday parties, all of this let's dance in diversity videos, no that's not what I'm here for . Most of the time coming to the off…

It pains me to say this, but I find in-person discussions more productive than online ones. It's not just shooting the shit--for me, spontaneous social chats often lead to work-related brainstorming. Being in the office next to co-workers leads to more spontaneous discussions.

Have you ever thought of why? Just ‘magic’, is an open doorway for bias and unreliable memory to enter and influence the conversation.

Is it perhaps that there are specific people, who are doing the ideation, or are particularly good at helping you think? Or is it anyone and everyone? If it’s anyone, then is it a social / biological quirk? Is it something else?

For everyone reading, this is worth reflecting upon, if only to move our regular WFH / RTO discussions on HN forward.

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#102

Post by drjasonharrison » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:14 PM UTC

nielsbot wrote: post #45

switch007 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why do people hate the office they are expected to return to? They hate it because it's designed to be hated. The discomfort is the point. You're meant to know your place and be reminded of it everyday.

I'd argue that's a side effect, not an intent... but you never know.

the intent of creating an office environment that is pleasant to work in is rarely something that employees provide enough input into. I would argue that the side effect of making an office that disrespects some employees perferences is more than a "blind spot", it's a "I don't give a damn"

Examples: - talkative/noisy areas - lighting level - speakerphones/headphones/cellphone conversations - kitchen/ping pong/foosball noises - privacy/divider existence/divider height - personalization - lighting/glare/sunlight/color reproduction - start/stop/break schedule - "cool" versus "comfortable", "public" vs "private" - "corner office" versus "bull pen"

In my new office, I was given the choice to rank my preference from nine desks in a small area (group/team cluster, because "synergy"). I didn't even bother asking if I could sit closer to people I like or identify with (the parents of children at home subgroup).

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#103

Post by riskable » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:16 PM UTC

dowager_dan99 wrote: post #75

bloomingkales wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

American society doesn't want to accept that a lot of our problems happen because the parents aren't home. Michael Moore had an interesting scene in Bowling for Columbine where he showed a 6 year old shooter's mother had to work hours away daily and wasn't home. Mine and most of my friends parents always had to be outside of the house during our formative years. We had very robust economy in the 90s/2000s that pretty…

Wait - how can you say remote is comparable with in-office, then tell me a work from home mother is going to look after her 6-yr-old while doing her job and not split her attention & efforts?

Oh give it up. Very few jobs require 100% attention. At my job I'm on the phone at least half of every day and on 70% of those calls I only need at most 10% of my attention.

The rest of the time I'm going through emails, filling out endless bureaucratic forms/documents, doing mandatory training, and every now and again I get to actually write some code (more likely: reviewing PRs), LOL! My performance reviews are always spectacular and I'm the only one in our (much) larger team that's actually 100% in compliance/up-to-date with everything and completing all my work on time.

The one thing all those tasks have in common? They can wait five minutes while I take care of something and if I'm on the phone I can do something else entirely while I'm listening. Just the other day I did--the horror!--laundry while I was on a call discussing how we should move forward to solve a problem. And I was the one speaking most of the time while I folded my laundry and put it away!

I could easily watch a 6yo and do my job at the same time. Based on how much real "work" comes out of your average corporate office employee I'm certain they could do the same.

Employers should give zero fucks about what their employees are doing while they're at work as long as they get all their work done on time and don't cause the company any problems (and no conflicts of interest). We hire people to get things done not to dress a certain way or keep a chair warm in a very specific place all day!

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#104

Post by parineum » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:16 PM UTC

999900000999 wrote: post #21

I dislike RTO for one simple reason . I'm not at work to make friends, I'm not at work to chit chat. I'm not at work so we can talk about who won the last football game . I go to work in exchange for currency, which is required to acquire goods and services. All this other crap, all these holiday parties, all of this let's dance in diversity videos, no that's not what I'm here for . Most of the time coming to the off…

> We're just talking to each other, shooting the s*, and it was cool to meet some Junior Devs who were just starting their career. But none of that made me a more productive worker.

You're not the only employee of the company. They aren't trying to maximize _your_ output, they're trying to maximize the company's output. You being present for a junior dev to ask quick questions to (the type that don't get asked if they have to message you) will increase their productivity much more than your productivity loss. It isn't all about you.

> If I had to think, I imagine the entire point of RTO mandates is to keep cities sustainable.

This is, essentially, a conspiracy theory. RTO is happening because management thinks it will increase productivity. Right or wrong, it's crazy to assume the are all working together to keep cities alive.

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#105

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:17 PM UTC

999900000999 wrote: post #21

I dislike RTO for one simple reason . I'm not at work to make friends, I'm not at work to chit chat. I'm not at work so we can talk about who won the last football game . I go to work in exchange for currency, which is required to acquire goods and services. All this other crap, all these holiday parties, all of this let's dance in diversity videos, no that's not what I'm here for . Most of the time coming to the off…

There is no universal answer to RTO vs WFH.

What is abhorrent is employers changing these terms as if they're trivial. We probably need legal protections treating swapping workplace requirements as requiring someone to relocate or accept lower pay.

> If every single office job went remote, what's the point of a city like New York

You really don't see the value of New York beyond its office buildings?

> it's a big club and you ain't in it. The powers that be one as many people in office chairs as possible, so they're real estate holdings appreciate in value

This is a Bay Area conspiracy theory that doesn't make a lot of sense, particularly when the cost and need for layoffs explains the effect more parsimoniously.

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#106

Post by jltsiren » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:18 PM UTC

999900000999 wrote: post #21

I dislike RTO for one simple reason . I'm not at work to make friends, I'm not at work to chit chat. I'm not at work so we can talk about who won the last football game . I go to work in exchange for currency, which is required to acquire goods and services. All this other crap, all these holiday parties, all of this let's dance in diversity videos, no that's not what I'm here for . Most of the time coming to the off…

> If I had to think, I imagine the entire point of RTO mandates is to keep cities sustainable.

More like to keep cities unsustainable. If a few major real estate companies went bankrupt, forcing the rest to lower the rents, a lot of wealth would be destroyed. At the same time, cities like New York would become even more desirable due to being more affordable.

NYC is still the #1 city in the world. There are plenty of things you can't find anywhere else. Cities like that – cities that offer something unique – would benefit from being more affordable. Mid-tier cities that exist primarily for economic reasons would probably suffer from a real estate crash.

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#107

Post by intended » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:18 PM UTC

dowager_dan99 wrote: post #64

nickff wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe JPMorgan doesn't want employees like you; maybe they want employees who chit-chat, and become attached to their company, for various (non-kLoC) reasons. Not every workplace is for everyone.

Have you noticed that those who come out hardest against RTO - or any change/revision that doesn't fit their desires - use the same, unbending absolute arguments they claim to be fighting? Like anyone who (gasp!) might want to work in the office is a slacker, there to shoot the shit and at the whim of useless managers and executives who just count asses in seats?

If you select the people who come out hardest against RTO, as opposed to the median, or mean, then … you would expect this behavior, no?

You sure you picked the right example category to service your point?

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#108

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:19 PM UTC

hn72774 wrote: post #63

lenerdenator wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I had to think, I imagine the entire point of RTO mandates is to keep cities sustainable. In a few cases (certainly not all), it's to keep the c-suite's reputation sustainable. If you're a CEO that signed a lease or construction contract on any piece of property since, idk, 2015, you have, in some way, burned a lot of money on a piece of ground that could have, in many cases, been replaced with a far cheaper int…

I'd love to see data on RTO mandates vs real estate lease/own status. For companies that own, Low occupancy = asset write downs = higher cost of capital.

Control for overhiring during the pandemic. Almost every RTO whiplash I've seen is a shadow restructuring.

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#109

Post by linotype » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:19 PM UTC

999900000999 wrote: post #21

I dislike RTO for one simple reason . I'm not at work to make friends, I'm not at work to chit chat. I'm not at work so we can talk about who won the last football game . I go to work in exchange for currency, which is required to acquire goods and services. All this other crap, all these holiday parties, all of this let's dance in diversity videos, no that's not what I'm here for . Most of the time coming to the off…

> If every single office job went remote, what's the point of a city like New York

Yikes, if the only reason you’re in NYC is a job and you don’t go out I highly recommend you find a new job/city.

Re: JPMorgan Workers Ponder Union in Wake of Return-to-Office Mandate

#110

Post by mocha_nate » Mon, Jan 13, 2025, 9:19 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #59

HamsterDan wrote: post #25

Workers need to tread carefully here. If you there's no need to be in the office, what's to stop corporate from replacing you with an Indian that costs 1/3rd as much? Push back too hard on RTO and you may not have a job at all in five years.

What stopped them from doing exactly this 20 years ago? Turns out the differentiating factor isn't salary but talent. They pay you $$$$ because they can't find equivalent talent in India. And the talent that does exist in India isn't going to work for peanuts.

The talent abroad is also moving here for higher quality of life.