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

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

#201

Post by sam0x17 » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 11:43 PM UTC

giraffe_lady wrote: post #87

sam0x17 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A lot of their job is "intangible" I think for many executives it's so "intangible" as to be worthless bordering on detrimental ;)

I agree but that's a stronger claim that's more difficult to defend. In terms of "why are they pushing return to office" it's not that relevant. Assuming they are doing anything by doing this , they need to be in person to do it. I'm with you though I don't think very much of value is taking place up there.

Well the fact that they do nothing becomes a lot more obvious when they aren't breathing down people's necks in the office.

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

#202

Post by ryandrake » Wed, Aug 02, 2023, 12:43 AM UTC

antonjs wrote: post #193

McDyver wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does he actually spend any time working? This seems the exact thought process of management wanting people to RTO. They forget there's time, and life, after working hours. And the less you need to commute, the more free time you have to actually live and enjoy life.

I grew up in a mountain town, and the mountain started doing 8 am openings for season pass holders. Some colleagues and I would hit the slopes, ski for an hour, and be in the office at 930. My actual productivity after that kind of fresh air and exercise every morning was much higher. We also had an employee with a 'powder clause' in her contract. Any day with over a certain amount of snowfall meant a day off.

> We also had an employee with a 'powder clause' in her contract. Any day with over a certain amount of snowfall meant a day off.

This person is my new hero.

I wonder how common this is, though. I mean, I've mostly worked for medium-to-huge sized companies, and as WorkerBee number 56612, I have zero ability to get anything non-standard or cute into my actual employment contract. I get the same standard boilerplate as all 50K other WorkerBees, and if I don't like it, I can go pound pavement.

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

#203

Post by ryandrake » Wed, Aug 02, 2023, 12:50 AM UTC

spacemadness wrote: post #120

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.

Yes, it seems weird so many HN folks seemed to pine for the office when the statistics show a different picture.

It's so weird. I don't know anyone in real life who pines for the office.

When I meet someone new around my neighborhood, I usually don't offer information about my employment, but if they ask, I tell them I work in computers from home. 100% of the responses I get are approximately "Wow, that's amazing," "you are so blessed/lucky," "our boss dragged us all back in," and "are you guys hiring?" and exactly 0% say "Aww, sorry to hear that... you must really miss the office/your commute."

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

#204

Post by xyzzy_plugh » Wed, Aug 02, 2023, 12:55 AM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #202

antonjs wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a mountain town, and the mountain started doing 8 am openings for season pass holders. Some colleagues and I would hit the slopes, ski for an hour, and be in the office at 930. My actual productivity after that kind of fresh air and exercise every morning was much higher. We also had an employee with a 'powder clause' in her contract. Any day with over a certain amount of snowfall meant a day off.

> We also had an employee with a 'powder clause' in her contract. Any day with over a certain amount of snowfall meant a day off. This person is my new hero. I wonder how common this is, though. I mean, I've mostly worked for medium-to-huge sized companies, and as WorkerBee number 56612, I have zero ability to get anything non-standard or cute into my actual employment contract. I get the same standard boilerplate as…

This is a lie they tell you. In reality there is no "standard employment contract." It's a living document. There's a non-zero chance that every colleague you work with has a slightly different contract than yours.

The world is messy and The System is designed to accommodate the mess. In my experience, you get maybe one or two free negotiation points to spend without any consequences. Worst case, they say no. You can't typically change everything, but getting more salary or time off or flexible hours or signing bonus or a powder clause are not crazy in the grand scheme of things.

Once you sign, though, the game is over. Unless you're a keystone it's unlikely you'll be able to renegotiate.

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

#205

Post by kcplate » Wed, Aug 02, 2023, 2:55 AM UTC

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…

I say this on here every time this topic comes up and get downvoted to hell because no one likes to hear it, but I don’t care because people need to hear it and I m gonna preach it. Everyone who complains about RTO always focuses on how it affects them. If you want to argue from a position of strength with your company on why WFH is better, stop focusing on it’s benefits to you and more on its benefits to your company.

Your arguments about “me” will always fall on deaf ears at your company. They don’t care about “me”, they care about “us”.

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

#206

Post by 1letterunixname » Wed, Aug 02, 2023, 9:18 AM UTC

I will not relocate and I will not commute to some subpar, noisy office where no one around is on my team.

If everything can't be done remotely, then there's a collaborative tech problem.

The other insanity is shared desks. Why even bother having an office if you're going to take away things from your employees? It and pointless penny pinch sends the message that you're no longer a cool place to work and nudging people to quit by stacking up the misery factor as high as possible to alleviate your guilt of doing more layoffs to keep profits high and salaries low.

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

#207

Post by gotorazor » Wed, Aug 02, 2023, 1:08 PM UTC

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 heard the same. I also asked someone who is in management. They said that they were getting a lot of feedback from exit interviews from employees with > one year of tenure who left. Many complain of feeling disconnected from their team or not know what to do.

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

#208

Post by gotorazor » Wed, Aug 02, 2023, 1:12 PM UTC

kcplate wrote: post #205

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…

I say this on here every time this topic comes up and get downvoted to hell because no one likes to hear it, but I don’t care because people need to hear it and I m gonna preach it. Everyone who complains about RTO always focuses on how it affects them . If you want to argue from a position of strength with your company on why WFH is better, stop focusing on it’s benefits to you and more on its benefits to your compa…

Mostly because it is a thing that affects them (the employees). The only problems a company faces from RTO is employee dissatisfaction.

Same as saying that you need to argue why a pay raise is good for your company. I mean, it mostly doesn't. All it does is that it makes the employees happier.

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

#209

Post by thanatropism » Wed, Aug 02, 2023, 1:56 PM UTC

bluefirebrand wrote: post #169

thanatropism wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I empathized a little with my manager during the pandemic. My job got somewhat easier, his got much, much harder. I guess managers took a little longer to be whacked by the wrecking ball of technology.

I don't think managing got that much harder unless you're managing by gut feel where butts in seats factors in a lot.

My manager called me for short chats on world events (semi-relevant to our larger work, not for current-assignment). Now I realize that was 20% to get my take on whatever (say, 2008 auto companies bailout) and 80% just to look me in the eyes and hear me talk and feel that I'm really here and committed and not silent quitting.

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

#210

Post by kcplate » Wed, Aug 02, 2023, 6:49 PM UTC

gotorazor wrote: post #208

kcplate wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this on here every time this topic comes up and get downvoted to hell because no one likes to hear it, but I don’t care because people need to hear it and I m gonna preach it. Everyone who complains about RTO always focuses on how it affects them . If you want to argue from a position of strength with your company on why WFH is better, stop focusing on it’s benefits to you and more on its benefits to your compa…

Mostly because it is a thing that affects them (the employees). The only problems a company faces from RTO is employee dissatisfaction. Same as saying that you need to argue why a pay raise is good for your company. I mean, it mostly doesn't. All it does is that it makes the employees happier.

Sure, but unlike a requested comp change which is understood to be a employer/employee individual negotiation, RTO tends to be decided on an employer/employees basis. The company doesn’t view it on an individual employee level so individual employee arguments are the wrong approach when selling WFH over a RTO directive.