30 ms·
It seems like every day there is a new article on Business Insider or Forbes or Fortune about how remote workers are the scourge of all things workplace related
by vogt 4y ago
It seems like every day there is a new article on Business Insider or Forbes or Fortune about how remote workers are the scourge of all things workplace related. Almost feels like a semi coordinated push from executives (especially those with commercial real estate interests in one form or another) to pay to have stories in these outlets to shift the hive mind in a direction that favors them.
- chucksta 4y agoAs a millennial I appreciate the "cause of doom" distraction some
- gamechangr 4y agoI agree...I've wondered who is sponsoring all these articles?
- jfghi 4y agoI wonder. It seems as though historically commercial real estate is a gigantic industry with strong relationships to other industries. Anecdotally it seems as though companies that lease their real estate have been much more inclined towards wfh.
- vkou 4y agoNobody is sponsoring those articles, they are simply writing what their readers want to hear, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Much like when the papers write so much nationalistic tripe that the people reading them actually start both believing it, and expecting it.
- adhesive_wombat 4y ago> writing what their readers want to hear No, they're writing what gets clicks or shifts papers. Saying WFH is bad pleases a (large) subset of managers and enrages a lot of the rank and file, but they all click. So that's what they write.
- esel2k 4y agoNot only pleasing managers. I feel as well a certain envy from people who can’t work remotely, that find pleasure in seeing such articles. And I say that as someone working in tech missing the office.
- a_techwriter_00 4y agoMarketwatch is a subsidiary of Dow Jones which is a subsidiary of News Corp, which also owns Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, and Investor's Business Daily, among others.
- mandelbrotwurst 4y agoYeah, maybe also those folks are the target audience and enjoy reading content that reinforces their way of thinking?
- chadlavi 4y agoNot so sure about "semi"
- francisofascii 4y agoIt is not just commercial real estate. If you think about it, there are several market segments that benefit from people commuting. Transportation infrastructure companies, car manufactures, office supplies, oil companies, etc.
- VoodooJuJu 4y agoI have a conspiracy theory that collusion is exactly what's going on here, and not just with the "back to the office" push, but also with how kafkaesque the hiring process has gotten. With remote work, an employee can work multiple jobs simultaneously, and they're unbeholden to any one employer, what with how easy it is to apply and switch to a new one. So how do companies combat this? They introduce friction at the very start of the pipeline - hiring. Multiple rounds of oral exams, take-home exams, leetcode questions that can only be answered with weeks or months of deliberate studying (something an already-employed person has little time for) - flaming hoops galore. They'll still compete with one another, sure, but they've found it's in their best interests if they all agree to hire in this kind of fraudulent manner.
- BlargMcLarg 4y agoIt is plausible, but at least the medium and small fish in the pond seem to be doing it out of typical human stupidity rather than a conscious effort. Or worse, they try to imitate the big fish.
- eastbound 4y agoI’m all for hiring employees without interviews. Most of them will quit their job, work for me one day, then stress out because they didn’t match. So, out of respect, I do perform tests. But some employees who seem perfectly good during tests come into the company with plenty of grammar mistakes, then I notice that they only master the surface of everything and they get fired. I should charge employees for passing my exams, since it lowers the risk of misadventures. I’m so tired of this “Employers are evil” trope often suffixed with “because going to a coding interview is like working for free.” I should do lengthy tests just to filter out stingy employees. (and I talk as someone who gave a 78% raise to one employee who’s been here 10 months, and 30% to the other).
- skyyler 4y agoDoing deliberately lengthy tests doesn't filter out stingy employees, it filters out employees with self-respect.
- the_watcher 4y agoIt's pretty obvious when you look at who is quoted in these articles that someone is paying for at least one PR push related to this. PG wrote about how this works in one of his older essays, in fact: http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
- vogt 4y agoThis is so insightful, thank you so much for posting it as I have never seen the article yet it clarifies so much I have always hypothesized. I’m curious if there is any level of transparency (anywhere, not simply the US) as to what PR firms work with specific groups of publishers. Of course I highly doubt this, but I’d love to trace the origins of a lot of these coordinated narratives.
- squintychino 4y agoAbsolutely agree. They are doing it to change the narrative and make people think that being back in the office is what the majority want. These executives are the ones that have access to mainstream media to get their propaganda out there. The average person does not.