5 ms·
Before I even read this thread it was pretty obvious this meant they never planned on offering WFH forever. If they wanted some on site employees to handle the
by NotAnOtter 5y ago
Before I even read this thread it was pretty obvious this meant they never planned on offering WFH forever.
If they wanted some on site employees to handle these kind of outages, they could just pay their top 1% to come to office or move within 15 minutes of the office or something.
- tombert 5y agoThat's my thought as well. These corporations get a ton of free publicity for being "the cool companies that are going to make remote permanent." Then all they have to do to more or less save face is wait for something bad to happen, show some vague graphs about how this could have been prevented if we weren't remote, and that they are forced to implement a RTO order.