3 ms·
I’m very surprised that the remote-first companies aren’t being more assertive with employee theft from Apple. There are top employees that have children or ot
by jimbob45 4y ago
I’m very surprised that the remote-first companies aren’t being more assertive with employee theft from Apple.
There are top employees that have children or otherwise can’t afford not to be remote. I’d be WW2-style dropping leaflets over Apple HQ and purchasing billboards to poach them. When else in history will remote-firsts have such an utter and glaring advantage over Apple again?
- dmitrygr 4y agoOh they are! Every time apple leadership sends out another one of these ahem... notices, recruiters perk up and start flooding email and LinkedIn inboxes. they highlight things like "[REMOTE]" and "[WFH FRIENDLY]" heavily
- eapple983 4y agoThe top employees that aren't moving back have already left or been granted remote as "key talent" through a politically charged process that requires a director going to bat for you in front of a VP. Apple has made it abundantly clear to everyone seeking it that you will not be allowed to go remote, you will not be allowed to work at another office, you will not be granted any sort of flexibility unless legally required. My team seemed to force out a lot of expensive senior talent to easily replace them with new college hires, so, you know, quite convenient for the company. At this point if you are still at Apple hoping for full remote and haven't been granted it, well, good luck.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y agoIn a sense, they do not even have to know. Ratio of applicants to postings for remote vs non-remote positions is very noticeable. Those companies already have their pick. In my social circle, people who could jump, already have. The companies that are rigid now have either people, who could not for whatever reason move or truly did not want to.