7 ms·

80 people? It's a voice, but doesn't seem representative of the overall sentiment

by Forge36 5y ago

nvr219 5y ago
I feel like Apple will not have a problem replacing eighty people.
- foobar33333 5y ago
  And those 80 people will not have a problem finding a remote job. Seems like everything will work out in the end. Remote workers will find remote jobs.
  - tolbish 5y ago
    > Seems like everything will work out in the end. Except for those of us who want to work remotely but don't want to be the squeaky wheel.
    - wernercd 5y ago
      If you don't stand up for what you want, why is that anyone's fault but yours? I get not wanting to be the squeaky wheel... but in the end, it's your loss. And you can voice your opinion and work for what you want without being a "sqeaky wheel" - which I take to have a negative connotation as a "complainy pants".
      - tolbish 5y ago
        There are many ways to fight this battle other than writing a letter to Tim Cook.
        wernercd 5y ago
        Absolutely. Sometimes you have to "bring out the big guns" and send a letter to the CEO... sometimes you just have to say "I want to continue to work remotely as has been proven to make me more productive." and be ready to find another job if the company doesn't meet your needs any more. Work is a two way street and Apple employees can probably find work elsewhere easily enough. That's on a personal level though... this happens to be on a "union" level ("employee group"? not sure if that's a union per-se but it's more than just a single person). I think a union (or whatever this is) has the obligation to make these sorts of moves - so there is a difference there. I skimmed the article before and just reread it - 80 people wrote the letter and 2800 joined a slack channel for it - so this does go beyond individuals into a more "our voices will be heard" direction. Still need to stand up to be heard and you can do so without being a squeaky wheel :)
        tolbish 5y ago
        Did I say that making a stand or bringing out the big guns is bad? No. I said that this specific instance (writing a letter to Tim Cook), him saying "No", and remote advocates having to find work elsewhere means that everything does not in fact work out for everyone. Especially for those of us who are not interested in leaving the company.
        wernercd 5y ago
        I didn't say a letter would make everything work out for everyone... I said you have to speak up to have the opportunity - and speaking up can be done without being a "sqeaky wheel" (AKA: complainy pants). Personally, I don't think they'll find a way to make EVERYONE happy. Someone isn't going to get the option they want (100% wfh? work at a remote location because they don't like the main office? etc). There's no way they can. BUT The group speaking up CAN put more pressure to have options that will make more people happy. If hundreds of employees say "Look at the numbers and look at news stories talking about 40%+ of employees willing to leave a job without WFH and etc"... If I say "I'm not open to 100% in the office" and Tim says no? If 80 say it... if 2800 say it... Tim can ignore 1 person. Can he ignore 80? 200? 2000? If you aren't interested in leaving but you want better options then you have two things at odds with each other. You may be interested in staying but if staying means you work in a office you hate or have a commute you hate or whatever... then that's on YOU to decide what's more important - a job at apple or a job with WFH. At the end of the conversation... the letter tells Tim (or whatever CEO gets a similar letter with more than a couple signatures) that he risks losing a sizable number of employees. That letter isn't from one person... it's from a large group of people. It's up to Tim to decide if the risk of losing talent is worth sticking to the currently given options. It's up to you and me if it's worth the lack of option you want to stay at the current job. Like i said... I'd probably look for work if asked to be in the office 5 days a week due to my commute. I don't blame them for asking and given some thought I don't think a letter from a "union" or "employee group" in this circumstance is bad.
        tolbish 5y ago
        We'll have to agree to disagree then. The overall sentiment in big tech is still very much "If you leave your cushy FAAMG job there are hundreds of people eager to replace you, and the employer is well aware of this when announcing returning to work." Although I would love to know if you're also doing work in union/labor organization either at your employer or otherwise.
- eyelidlessness 5y ago
  Seems like replacing (firing) a group of employees for something so arbitrary is maybe not great for morale.
  - jdlshore 5y ago
    The implication is that they’ll quit if they don’t get to work remotely, not that they’ll be fired.
    - eyelidlessness 5y ago
      Right so the implication is that if Apple arbitrarily refuses to continue accommodating them they’re agreeing to terminate employment. This is how most employment disputes of this nature go: - Emplployer: we won’t/will cease to accommodate you in this meaningful way - Employees: we’re not being accommodated and have a reasonable expectation to be; if you don’t meet those expectations we effectively can’t work for you - Employer: bye!
pizzetta 5y ago
How else is the article going to create discord if they can't take a kernel of truth and extrapolate it to make it seem like something bigger?
hourislate 5y ago
Most are probably contractors and H1B's who have the fear of job loss hovering over their heads. Apple is Tim Cooks life and legacy, he has nothing else but that company and like all crazy fucking people in those positions probably believes it should hold the same importance to every last employee. I can understand if your twenty something full of piss and vinegar and think your going to change the world, but you have to be nuts or desperate (H1B's/Contractors excused) to give your life to a job once you have a family.
- jonny_eh 5y ago
  I’m mid-career living in the Bay Area and am eagerly looking forward to returning to the office ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  - peter422 5y ago
    Yes I don’t understand how ‘going into the office’ means ‘giving your life to the company’. Frankly I find it easier to separate work and home when there is an office.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - spacedcowboy 5y ago
    I’m not. I loathe the open office at Apple Park, I dislike the commute, and I have a nice air-conditioned, insulated shed at the bottom of the garden which is great as a home office. There is nothing I need in Apple Park to do my job, and all I get from my director is how pleased he is with how I’m working (“we couldn’t have done this without you”). Tomorrow, what I’ve been working on for the last 6 months or so will be in the keynote, and it’s awesome :) This is the 4th time I’ve had something in the keynote in my career, and this time it’s kind of disappointing (but totally understandable) that I won’t get to stand up with my team and take a “bow”. There’s one more, multi-year project that’s going to blow people away that I wrote the OS for, but that’s not ready yet. I’m not returning to the office in September, I’m going to leave the company instead, after over a decade of service. I suspect I’m the kind of senior engineer employee Apple would prefer to keep, but the thought of not going back to AP is too enticing to pass up.
goalieca 5y ago
If FAANG goes remote, rest assured that many highly capable engineers in cheaper cities like mine are willing to work for them at a discount as we would still come out way ahead compared to local rates.
- taneq 5y ago
  I'd imagine this is a big consideration for a lot of the people advocating a return to the office in those companies. Once fully remote work is an option (or even mostly-remote work, a 3 hour commute might be acceptable once a fortnight and if that's by plane, half the country is within range) they'll be open to far greater competition from equally talented engineers in much more reasonably priced areas.
- px43 5y ago
  That's called being a "scab", and is generally not appreciated.
  - taneq 5y ago
    A "scab" is a worker hired to knowingly break a union strike, so unless there's a well-accepted Apple Software Engineers' Union it's not applicable here. And of course it's not appreciated by the union, since their ability to collectively withhold labour from the company is their only real source of power. The ethics of the situation depend entirely on what's actually going on, though - there are plenty of well justified strikes, but there are also strikes where the union is overstepping its bounds. Union and corporate power remain relatively well balanced or one side gets screwed and ultimately everybody loses.
  - xaduha 5y ago
    I think it's called a job market.

80 people? It's a voice, but doesn't seem representative of the overall sentiment

nvr219 5y ago

I feel like Apple will not have a problem replacing eighty people.

foobar33333 5y ago
And those 80 people will not have a problem finding a remote job. Seems like everything will work out in the end. Remote workers will find remote jobs.
- tolbish 5y ago
  > Seems like everything will work out in the end. Except for those of us who want to work remotely but don't want to be the squeaky wheel.
  - wernercd 5y ago
    If you don't stand up for what you want, why is that anyone's fault but yours? I get not wanting to be the squeaky wheel... but in the end, it's your loss. And you can voice your opinion and work for what you want without being a "sqeaky wheel" - which I take to have a negative connotation as a "complainy pants".
    - tolbish 5y ago
      There are many ways to fight this battle other than writing a letter to Tim Cook.
      - wernercd 5y ago
        Absolutely. Sometimes you have to "bring out the big guns" and send a letter to the CEO... sometimes you just have to say "I want to continue to work remotely as has been proven to make me more productive." and be ready to find another job if the company doesn't meet your needs any more. Work is a two way street and Apple employees can probably find work elsewhere easily enough. That's on a personal level though... this happens to be on a "union" level ("employee group"? not sure if that's a union per-se but it's more than just a single person). I think a union (or whatever this is) has the obligation to make these sorts of moves - so there is a difference there. I skimmed the article before and just reread it - 80 people wrote the letter and 2800 joined a slack channel for it - so this does go beyond individuals into a more "our voices will be heard" direction. Still need to stand up to be heard and you can do so without being a squeaky wheel :)
        tolbish 5y ago
        Did I say that making a stand or bringing out the big guns is bad? No. I said that this specific instance (writing a letter to Tim Cook), him saying "No", and remote advocates having to find work elsewhere means that everything does not in fact work out for everyone. Especially for those of us who are not interested in leaving the company.
        wernercd 5y ago
        I didn't say a letter would make everything work out for everyone... I said you have to speak up to have the opportunity - and speaking up can be done without being a "sqeaky wheel" (AKA: complainy pants). Personally, I don't think they'll find a way to make EVERYONE happy. Someone isn't going to get the option they want (100% wfh? work at a remote location because they don't like the main office? etc). There's no way they can. BUT The group speaking up CAN put more pressure to have options that will make more people happy. If hundreds of employees say "Look at the numbers and look at news stories talking about 40%+ of employees willing to leave a job without WFH and etc"... If I say "I'm not open to 100% in the office" and Tim says no? If 80 say it... if 2800 say it... Tim can ignore 1 person. Can he ignore 80? 200? 2000? If you aren't interested in leaving but you want better options then you have two things at odds with each other. You may be interested in staying but if staying means you work in a office you hate or have a commute you hate or whatever... then that's on YOU to decide what's more important - a job at apple or a job with WFH. At the end of the conversation... the letter tells Tim (or whatever CEO gets a similar letter with more than a couple signatures) that he risks losing a sizable number of employees. That letter isn't from one person... it's from a large group of people. It's up to Tim to decide if the risk of losing talent is worth sticking to the currently given options. It's up to you and me if it's worth the lack of option you want to stay at the current job. Like i said... I'd probably look for work if asked to be in the office 5 days a week due to my commute. I don't blame them for asking and given some thought I don't think a letter from a "union" or "employee group" in this circumstance is bad.
        tolbish 5y ago
        We'll have to agree to disagree then. The overall sentiment in big tech is still very much "If you leave your cushy FAAMG job there are hundreds of people eager to replace you, and the employer is well aware of this when announcing returning to work." Although I would love to know if you're also doing work in union/labor organization either at your employer or otherwise.
eyelidlessness 5y ago
Seems like replacing (firing) a group of employees for something so arbitrary is maybe not great for morale.
- jdlshore 5y ago
  The implication is that they’ll quit if they don’t get to work remotely, not that they’ll be fired.
  - eyelidlessness 5y ago
    Right so the implication is that if Apple arbitrarily refuses to continue accommodating them they’re agreeing to terminate employment. This is how most employment disputes of this nature go: - Emplployer: we won’t/will cease to accommodate you in this meaningful way - Employees: we’re not being accommodated and have a reasonable expectation to be; if you don’t meet those expectations we effectively can’t work for you - Employer: bye!

pizzetta 5y ago

How else is the article going to create discord if they can't take a kernel of truth and extrapolate it to make it seem like something bigger?

hourislate 5y ago

Most are probably contractors and H1B's who have the fear of job loss hovering over their heads. Apple is Tim Cooks life and legacy, he has nothing else but that company and like all crazy fucking people in those positions probably believes it should hold the same importance to every last employee. I can understand if your twenty something full of piss and vinegar and think your going to change the world, but you have to be nuts or desperate (H1B's/Contractors excused) to give your life to a job once you have a family.

jonny_eh 5y ago
I’m mid-career living in the Bay Area and am eagerly looking forward to returning to the office ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- peter422 5y ago
  Yes I don’t understand how ‘going into the office’ means ‘giving your life to the company’. Frankly I find it easier to separate work and home when there is an office.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- spacedcowboy 5y ago
  I’m not. I loathe the open office at Apple Park, I dislike the commute, and I have a nice air-conditioned, insulated shed at the bottom of the garden which is great as a home office. There is nothing I need in Apple Park to do my job, and all I get from my director is how pleased he is with how I’m working (“we couldn’t have done this without you”). Tomorrow, what I’ve been working on for the last 6 months or so will be in the keynote, and it’s awesome :) This is the 4th time I’ve had something in the keynote in my career, and this time it’s kind of disappointing (but totally understandable) that I won’t get to stand up with my team and take a “bow”. There’s one more, multi-year project that’s going to blow people away that I wrote the OS for, but that’s not ready yet. I’m not returning to the office in September, I’m going to leave the company instead, after over a decade of service. I suspect I’m the kind of senior engineer employee Apple would prefer to keep, but the thought of not going back to AP is too enticing to pass up.

goalieca 5y ago

If FAANG goes remote, rest assured that many highly capable engineers in cheaper cities like mine are willing to work for them at a discount as we would still come out way ahead compared to local rates.

taneq 5y ago
I'd imagine this is a big consideration for a lot of the people advocating a return to the office in those companies. Once fully remote work is an option (or even mostly-remote work, a 3 hour commute might be acceptable once a fortnight and if that's by plane, half the country is within range) they'll be open to far greater competition from equally talented engineers in much more reasonably priced areas.
px43 5y ago
That's called being a "scab", and is generally not appreciated.
- taneq 5y ago
  A "scab" is a worker hired to knowingly break a union strike, so unless there's a well-accepted Apple Software Engineers' Union it's not applicable here. And of course it's not appreciated by the union, since their ability to collectively withhold labour from the company is their only real source of power. The ethics of the situation depend entirely on what's actually going on, though - there are plenty of well justified strikes, but there are also strikes where the union is overstepping its bounds. Union and corporate power remain relatively well balanced or one side gets screwed and ultimately everybody loses.
- xaduha 5y ago
  I think it's called a job market.