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

Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 212 posts

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#181

Post by Volundr »

antisthenes wrote: post #89
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #75

Anecdotally my org is on a hiring tear lately and we're completely remote, and the quality of candidates has steeply risen as of late. I mean really good candidates I'd rarely see before are pouring into my inbox. I've never talked to so many folks currently at Google, Meta, Amazon, but also big banks and other F500s. Many candidates are coy about their reasons for leaving, especially given all the layoffs, but, stil…

> I talked to a director last week who spends 1/3 the year in ski country, 1/3 the year in the Midwest and 1/3 the year on the coast. He's not going back, and practically anyone would be lucky to have him. Does he actually spend any time working?

FWIW we had an engineer who basically did this, and he was definitely a top performer. Depending on where he was and what the activity he was there for he might work nonstandard hours, but he definitely got shit done.

Director level non-standard hours might be a non-starter, but nothing about the lifestyle demanded it, it was really just about maximizing the time spent skiing or whatever. One could always knock of at 5 and get a few hours in.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#182

Post by elvis10ten »

dickersnoodle wrote: post #163
elvis10ten wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would never work somewhere that required me to be in office a few times a month. It’s great that we have that option of companies that are full remote. ——— However, your last paragraph seems to not appreciate the fact that there are folks like myself that prefer going to an office often. My prediction is that we might get rid of the office and replace it with the office in another form — most likely better.

>My prediction is that we might get rid of the office and replace it with the office in another form — most likely better. You'll have to explain what you mean by "most likely better" and then make the case that your "better" is enough to draw workers to an office that a bunch of them don't want to be in for all of the reasons HN has listed.

> You'll have to explain what you mean by "most likely better"

If I knew, I would have started a startup with the idea :).

My high-level point is that there are some pros to periodic physical meetups with colleagues (in an office?). And my prediction is predicated on two things: 1. Those needs still need to be solved 2. There are folks that prefer working from something like an office.

In no way do I want to draw “workers to an office that a bunch of them don't want to be in for all of the reasons HN has listed.”. Tho I think there is some balance for most folks.

I’m pro options. I’m anti black and white. What HN lists on this topic are usually one sided takes.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#183

Post by WaveevaW »

kindatrue wrote: post #31

"Unispace found that nearly half (42%) of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated" No severance payouts. No bumps to your unemployment insurance payments. Everything is working to plan.

[dead]

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#184

Post by bch »

tmaly wrote: post #150
commandlinefan wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> transparently a middle management “I’m still relevant!” Which makes one wonder who the people who kept posting on here how much they missed the office and wished we'd go back to the office during the pandemic actually were.

I have talked with HR and I am told the younger generation entering the workforce wants to be in the office. I guess this might be true, but I do not have any numbers to validate this.

HR works for the corp, strictly in the corporations interests. Even if the narrative you’re describing is true (I don’t know either), it’s only a coincidental[0] point, not The Reason for BtO policies.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#185

Post by dragonwriter »

tmaly wrote: post #150
commandlinefan wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> transparently a middle management “I’m still relevant!” Which makes one wonder who the people who kept posting on here how much they missed the office and wished we'd go back to the office during the pandemic actually were.

I have talked with HR and I am told the younger generation entering the workforce wants to be in the office. I guess this might be true, but I do not have any numbers to validate this.

> I have talked with HR

HR, in general, is not a reliable source on anything other than what the company for whom they work wants you, as a potentially unreliable production input, to believe in order to keep you maximally aligned with the interests of the corporate owners as relayed through management.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#186

Post by Sylamore »

mcronce wrote: post #173
commandlinefan wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> transparently a middle management “I’m still relevant!” Which makes one wonder who the people who kept posting on here how much they missed the office and wished we'd go back to the office during the pandemic actually were.

I will say that, personally, I miss the office sometimes . If I had a 45 minute (per direction) or shorter commute I'd say my perfect world would be getting together in an office with my immediate team 1-2 times a week. It's just so much easier to have thoughtful discussion in person than via teleconferencing; I also, selfishly, enjoy the social aspect. The other side of the coin is that solo work - e.g. slinging cod…

I've worked remote now for 8 years, I do sometimes miss being in the office with the people I'm collaborating with, but it's not something I would want to do 5 days a week. I'd be totally fine with 1-2 days mandated in the office per week if I was within a reasonable commute distance to my team, but my current team is geographically dispersed anyway (think co-workers who've never met face to face in 15 years) so it makes no sense to require any of us into an office. I'll choose WFH every time because I know I'm far more productive that way - if I was forced to go back to commuting work, I would effectively restrict my office time to no more than 8 hours per day and refuse to ever work outside of the office, where as today I'm effectively available to do work about 11 hours per day even though I seldom do.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#187

Post by Kye »

jmopp wrote: post #74
anilakar wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our office building management is giving half a month free for new referrals; meanwhile they are refusing to rent us more floor space.

Why would they do that? Would it not make more sense to focus on existing customers instead of chasing new leads? I mean, sure, don't put all your eggs in one basket. But when an existing customer is asking you to take their money, why turn them down?

Speculating:

One company occupying the extra: company goes bust, you lose their business, probably spend months/years fighting with a bankruptcy holding company to get paid and maybe lose.

Two companies occupying the same space: same risk, but you still get paid for the extra space while dealing with it.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#188

Post by andersa »

marcosdumay wrote: post #132
andersa wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who have investments in commercial real estate want it. All those ginormous office buildings... would be obsolete.

> would be obsolete I doubt this. Would probably be cheaper, but I doubt the rental market is so inelastic that the new price will break anything.

I wonder if they could be turned into apartments or something else useful.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#189

Post by stuckinhell »

pc86 wrote: post #41
stuckinhell wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The younger generations would sabotage us from within if we tried this. We've already had a couple "silent" rebellions from "zoomers" and even "millenials". It's astounding not worth the risk for my firm except for certain teams.

I'm not sure what "'silent' rebellions" you're referring to. The only one I can think of is "silent quitting" which isn't quitting so much as it is not being willingly taken advantage of by working unpaid hours or doing unpaid work.

"Lazy Girl Tiktok", "Quiet Quitting", there seems to be a new variant every week on various social media.

We've even had outright sabotage because one of clients was disliked by an employee.

It's getting ridiculous to keep track off.

Re: Damaging results of mandated return to the office: it’s worse than we thought

#190

Post by kjs3 »

commandlinefan wrote: post #104
wredue wrote: post #50

I reclaim 1.5 hours a day from work from home, so a mandated back to work would actually represent a 6 point pay cut on the day assuming I thought that through properly. I don’t even have an egregious commute compared to others. Never mind that all of a sudden I no longer need before and after daycare. I have a home gym and can acceptably exercise at lunch. I don’t have peer pressures to go out for lunch all the time…

> transparently a middle management “I’m still relevant!” Which makes one wonder who the people who kept posting on here how much they missed the office and wished we'd go back to the office during the pandemic actually were.

That's pretty condescending all around.

Of my current direct reports, I have 2 folks who couldn't wait to get back to the office full time, a number of folks (including me) who go to the office maybe 1-2 days of the week, and the rest never come to an office. My office folks go in because they like a firm separation between work and home and like seeing their friends in person. Same with us casual office types; I go in because there's conversations that move faster to better outcomes when had face to face. Exactly how are we wrong? Why do you care?

And while I know you won't believe this, but the middle managers job hasn't changed: all the bullshit they had to deal with so you don't is still there.

Post reply on HN