3 ms·

Probably because everybody else is. If they've over-hired, they can fix matters a bit or if they're very good/careful with HR they can prune some deadwood. Or

Probably because everybody else is. If they've over-hired, they can fix matters a bit or if they're very good/careful with HR they can prune some deadwood. Or, it's just part of the plan to break the back of the WFH movement, thus removing worker agency.

ClumsyPilot 4y ago
> Or, it's just part of the plan to break the back of the WFH movement, thus removing worker agency. Put the peasants in their place - business justification is just rationalisation
- musicale 4y ago
  This is an interesting take. Basically an authoritarian crackdown to shut down a nascent worker rebellion before it really takes off.
  - cronin101 4y ago
    As someone working at Microsoft I can actually say that they have continued supporting WFH and if anything are actually leaning even heavier into WFH-facilitation (at least in my division) lately. It’s been a big success for enabling cross-office cooperation and is seen as a pretty valuable differentiator vs SV-corps. I believe for the longest time, even when the stock and comp wasn’t so hot, Microsoft had a reputation for “the place with with work-life balance”.
    - jleyank 4y ago
      I hope this is true. I also hope that any company bringing jobs that could be WFH into commuter-land again would STFU about climate actions. Unless their staff is walking to work, they're wasting time and stressing the environment so people can be seen rather than be effective.
    - musicale 4y ago
      That sounds great actually - I hope it continues.