21–30 of 45 posts
Work from office mandates may serve as a proxy for companies on the decline. When things are going well, companies are more willing to take risks that could impact the top line, when things are going wrong it’s all scrutiny and bottom line optimization.
Controversial opinion time: I was chomping at the bit for remote before COVID. Hell, I still chomp at the bit for remote work. It's genuinely better in almost every way for me; I get that people have kids and it gets annoying to work from home for those people or that people want to be social: I am not those people, I am sorry. I have ADHD and I am not able to actually sit and focus in the office, especially these to…
> It's hugely expensive to do this and that money would be better spent on more important things. Unless the company is compensating folks for living closer to offices, they are likely just transferring those costs to the employees’ cost of living when forcing folks to live in higher cost of living areas.
Cost of living has historically been factored when determining salary, right?
I don't live in a high cost of living environment (I live in Malmo, Sweden; pretty cheap by Swedish standards overall) and I won't earn as much here as I would if I was working in Zurich or Stockholm.
What you say here comes across as hugely entitled since presumably you are already paid a really high salary and want to make even more relative to others in your area? By virtue of you being able to work remotely even if it comes at a cost to your productivity?
As a counter: Large companies (such as IBM) typically have their campuses located outside of major metropolitan hubs where office space is cheap: is your predilection, then, that they should pay you now less? If they force a move to a lower cost of living area because they decide that?
You are paid for a job in a place, and getting to that job is part of the salary for that job in some circumstances.
You wouldn't expect Police officer to be paid the same in NYC vs Bryan, Ohio. If that police officer were to move to Bryan from NYC though: their travel costs and cost of living are on them, They would be paid to work in NYC.
Translate: I want layoff but I don’t want to say it.
> All US managers must immediately report to an office or client location at least three days a week “regardless of current work location status,” IBM CEO has also paused hiring for roles that could be replaced with AI
Does IBM have many, or even any roles like this? The only rational assessment of "roles that could be replaced with AI" is first-level customer support, or perhaps translation, both of which I'd expect IBM outsources rather than hires for. Of course the answer is probably that this is based on an irrational assessment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does IBM have many, or even any roles like this? The only rational assessment of "roles that could be replaced with AI" is first-level customer support, or perhaps translation, both of which I'd expect IBM outsources rather than hires for. Of course the answer is probably that this is based on an irrational assessment.
The CEO has already been replaced by an AI.
Controversial opinion time: I was chomping at the bit for remote before COVID. Hell, I still chomp at the bit for remote work. It's genuinely better in almost every way for me; I get that people have kids and it gets annoying to work from home for those people or that people want to be social: I am not those people, I am sorry. I have ADHD and I am not able to actually sit and focus in the office, especially these to…
Does this apply to Red Hat or are they still immune to most of the IBM dysfunction?