641–650 of 969 posts
Top employees, ones that can easily get jobs elsewhere, are just going to leave and find ones without RTO. Employees that don't feel confident in their abilities to perform in the job market are going to show up in the office to keep their job.
/unpopular opinion
Threads like these are always one sided with people against RTO. What I would really like to see is arguments from the other side. Can someone steelman RTO. Preferably with evidence, anecdotal or otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For highly-specialized engineers and researchers, there’s often only a tiny handful of companies they could work for that offer jobs in their specialties. For example, if you’re a compilers expert, there are only so many companies that hire compiler developers, whether it’s working on a commercial compiler like Microsoft Visual Studio or contributing to an open-source project such as LLVM (Apple is a major contributo…
But only a small percent of people work in those highly specialized jobs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is always an answer to unionizing and other demands: hiring freeze plus offshoring overseas. Eventually even unionized people will be replaced with offshore buddies.
Offshoring always ends in disaster, companies have tried this time and time again but the end result is an awful product that requires more money to fix than they needed to make it in the first place. And that also doesn't solve the problem of dealing with institutional knowledge loss if you decide to aggressively cull employees trying to unionize. In either scenario the solution is for union workers to become even m…
Is it? If it is a disaster , why there are millions of IT folks employed in offshoring locations?
Only the cheapest offshoring ends in disaster. Cheap contractors from TCS will fail you. Open your own dev center, hire few thousands engineer there - a road to success. And yes, no one will actively complain about RTO policies there.
Threads like these are always one sided with people against RTO. What I would really like to see is arguments from the other side. Can someone steelman RTO. Preferably with evidence, anecdotal or otherwise.
I work a 2 in 3 out style schedule. During the 3 days I wfh, I get the most work done. I can focus and organize my day around executing a plan. During the 2 days I'm in the office, I can get answers from people much quicker. Some people (new hires in particular) don't know how to describe their problem, or they're just really bad at it. My solution to endless teams convos is to just say "I'll head over to your desk"…
I know someone is going to chime in a claim those conversations break flow. That might be true for some particular deep problems but I’ve never seen it affect any team I’ve been on and I have 40 years of work experience. Not saying my experience fits everyone else but I’ve seen no real evidence of it being an actual problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm glad I live in the midwest. Every story I hear about working in the bay area makes me wonder why anyone would.
For highly-specialized engineers and researchers, there’s often only a tiny handful of companies they could work for that offer jobs in their specialties. For example, if you’re a compilers expert, there are only so many companies that hire compiler developers, whether it’s working on a commercial compiler like Microsoft Visual Studio or contributing to an open-source project such as LLVM (Apple is a major contributo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
3 is real, this is what was behind Amazon’s RTO mandates. Its designed to ensure that people decide to quit.
From a source closely involved with this- Amazon tracks many productivity metrics of employees and was seeing very significant differences between in-person and remote people, which drove the decision. Source left since so I don’t know how much productivity has improved. Advice to new grads: get into the office 5 days a week for at least a few years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a wonder that people still work for a living when all you have to do is buy a share of SPY, suddenly elevating you to same level as your boss.
Well, how else are you going to buy the share? (I don't think further engaging on this would be meaningful, as the reactions are all coming from a place of prejudice to state of the world.)
Threads like these are always one sided with people against RTO. What I would really like to see is arguments from the other side. Can someone steelman RTO. Preferably with evidence, anecdotal or otherwise.
1. Onboarding and growing junior employees.
2. Managing/coordinating people
3. Doing/coming up with something innovative
4. Making sure an employee is not working another job in parallel
With RTO, companies try go get back the ability to do these things, at the expense of employees’ commute time
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> where it comes from It's a power play. To show regular folks their place. Big corpo is a modern feodal state, where CEO is an emperor, c-suites are kings, managers are barons, IC are peasants and external contractors are slaves(but leased from other owner). It's not only RTO, it's also about timetable and dress code. Yes, I had a beef with IT manager about dress code in the development office of a bank. Just becau…
> Big corpo is a modern feodal state, where CEO is an emperor, c-suites are kings, managers are barons Why do people forget about board members and shareholders? There's a lot of overlap among the rich. I doubt Satya "wants" to RTO. I would suspect board members / shareholders with real estate interests are forcing the policy. (eg Vanguard holds 10%, with Blackrock close behind). Big corpo is a feudal state, in the s…
Board members do not have powers over daily business of the company.
I would add the board to the feodal model as a Church. The head of the board is the Pope.