4 ms·

Looks like they're already going to war over WFH; all the business press are on it anyway. I mean the culprit must be WFH, right? Not supply chain disruptions,

Looks like they're already going to war over WFH; all the business press are on it anyway. I mean the culprit must be WFH, right? Not supply chain disruptions, closures, restrictions, actual sicknesses and bereavements, cost increases and accelerated inequality due to financial turbulence/bailouts, etc, etc. If you ask me, tech, at least, is more productive without constant office-space type interruptions and harassment etc.

AtlasBarfed 4y ago
Or MASSIVE numbers of people that simply aren't working and are reconfiguring their lives to require a lot less money? The constant downpressure on paying labor is now at the "quiet revolt" level. The good news: if companies hate WFH, then why would they like outsourcing? It's basically the same problem, except with 3000 miles and 12 hour timeshifts and a language barrier.
- deepsun 4y ago
  > why would they like outsourcing? ... 3-5x less expensive.
  - carlmr 4y ago
    Oh it was very expensive in the last job I worked. You needed to redo everything we got back from the cheap labor there. I automated most jobs that I was told to send there. Since due to the quality issues only the busy jobs were sent there that are faster to automate and higher quality, too. After a few months my boss came to me and told me I need to use the outsourced staff more, since they have nothing to do.
    - deepsun 4y ago
      Outsourcing != bad hire. Sounds like you just did bad hires, whether that's outsourced or not is diagonal. I'm a business owner, and we do extensive outsourcing, with a very good outcome. The trick? We outsource from our home region (where I emigrated from), so we know the market better and how to hire well.
- 000ooo000 4y ago
  >if companies hate WFH, then why would they like outsourcing? It's basically the same problem, except with 3000 miles and 12 hour timeshifts and a language barrier. Haha - I can't believe I've not seen this mentioned anywhere before. This is hilarious.
- daveKoala 4y ago
  This I agree on. I'd also add based on my experience, consultancies add to the issue. After 20+ years of meddling and pushing the latest idea we are still not productive
- AHOHA 4y ago
  >The good news: if companies hate WFH, then why would they like outsourcing? It's basically the same problem, except with 3000 miles and 12 hour timeshifts and a language barrier. I had similar argument with my previous employer, it was simply about “culture” and “team work dynamics” and other BS, ironically, when most of management team was allowed wfh but denied for software/engineering team
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
ryandrake 4y ago
I’ve never seen corporate America aligned so strongly against something as they are aligned against WFH. It’s like every CEO went to the same seminar where they were told that WFH is going to rob their treasury and shoot their dog. The only other things they are as universally against are unions, which is telling.
- Haga 4y ago
  [dead]
- hn_version_0023 4y ago
  The thing they are against is workers having power. Nothing else.
  - jacknews 4y ago
    It's much harder to subtly intimidate workers (or is it 'charismatize' them?) over zoom. Maybe this is what they mean by 'limitations of technology'.
- late2part 4y ago
  Yes, syllogisms are effective at debate, as is water skiing,
dehrmann 4y ago
> Not supply chain disruptions, closures, restrictions, actual sicknesses and bereavements, cost increases and accelerated inequality due to financial turbulence/bailouts, etc, etc. The article said this: > U.S. productivity plunged 2.7% in the first quarter of this year compared to last year, EY found. Most of that doesn't really apply in 2023Q1. Even SVB hit late in Q1. You could argue that the stability in Q1 should have improved productivity.
- helij 4y ago
  Would be funny if productivity 'plunged' due to return to office.

AtlasBarfed 4y ago

Or MASSIVE numbers of people that simply aren't working and are reconfiguring their lives to require a lot less money? The constant downpressure on paying labor is now at the "quiet revolt" level. The good news: if companies hate WFH, then why would they like outsourcing? It's basically the same problem, except with 3000 miles and 12 hour timeshifts and a language barrier.

deepsun 4y ago
> why would they like outsourcing? ... 3-5x less expensive.
- carlmr 4y ago
  Oh it was very expensive in the last job I worked. You needed to redo everything we got back from the cheap labor there. I automated most jobs that I was told to send there. Since due to the quality issues only the busy jobs were sent there that are faster to automate and higher quality, too. After a few months my boss came to me and told me I need to use the outsourced staff more, since they have nothing to do.
  - deepsun 4y ago
    Outsourcing != bad hire. Sounds like you just did bad hires, whether that's outsourced or not is diagonal. I'm a business owner, and we do extensive outsourcing, with a very good outcome. The trick? We outsource from our home region (where I emigrated from), so we know the market better and how to hire well.
000ooo000 4y ago
>if companies hate WFH, then why would they like outsourcing? It's basically the same problem, except with 3000 miles and 12 hour timeshifts and a language barrier. Haha - I can't believe I've not seen this mentioned anywhere before. This is hilarious.
daveKoala 4y ago
This I agree on. I'd also add based on my experience, consultancies add to the issue. After 20+ years of meddling and pushing the latest idea we are still not productive
AHOHA 4y ago
>The good news: if companies hate WFH, then why would they like outsourcing? It's basically the same problem, except with 3000 miles and 12 hour timeshifts and a language barrier. I had similar argument with my previous employer, it was simply about “culture” and “team work dynamics” and other BS, ironically, when most of management team was allowed wfh but denied for software/engineering team
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

ryandrake 4y ago

I’ve never seen corporate America aligned so strongly against something as they are aligned against WFH. It’s like every CEO went to the same seminar where they were told that WFH is going to rob their treasury and shoot their dog. The only other things they are as universally against are unions, which is telling.

Haga 4y ago
[dead]
hn_version_0023 4y ago
The thing they are against is workers having power. Nothing else.
- jacknews 4y ago
  It's much harder to subtly intimidate workers (or is it 'charismatize' them?) over zoom. Maybe this is what they mean by 'limitations of technology'.
late2part 4y ago
Yes, syllogisms are effective at debate, as is water skiing,

dehrmann 4y ago

> Not supply chain disruptions, closures, restrictions, actual sicknesses and bereavements, cost increases and accelerated inequality due to financial turbulence/bailouts, etc, etc. The article said this: > U.S. productivity plunged 2.7% in the first quarter of this year compared to last year, EY found. Most of that doesn't really apply in 2023Q1. Even SVB hit late in Q1. You could argue that the stability in Q1 should have improved productivity.

helij 4y ago
Would be funny if productivity 'plunged' due to return to office.