5 ms·

> If some employer is paying on-site workers 20% more than the exact same work for the same company remotely, then I'll believe that they truly want people to b

> If some employer is paying on-site workers 20% more than the exact same work for the same company remotely, then I'll believe that they truly want people to be on-site That would effectively mean increasing salary of the current employees that choose to go to the office by 20%. Alternatively, that'd mean reducing salary of current employees that choose not to. Either way, that seems like a horribly inefficient way to deal with the problem. Most companies choose much more subtle approaches, such as: 0) Stop hiring remote -> build a new workforce that does not expect remote conditions 1) Mandate RTO (just like Meta, Amazon, Google, Apple, and others did) 2) Start putting people who do not respect RTO on PIP, or on some other bullshit process that'll threaten to fire those that do not conform while giving you, the company, enough time to replace them with new hires. 3) Slowly and silently follow through 2) until remote is a thing for <10-15% of the workforce. This gives the company a number of advantages, such as: 1) Not appearing evil 2) Not dealing with disruptions caused by mass employee exit Companies that really want RTO don't have to do it in a "big bang" way. Such companies would rather do it silently while telling you how they value your opinions on what the future workplace policy should be. They'll get away with it IIF point 0 is possible. I hope it is not, but who knows.

zer8k 3y ago
My company had a mandatory come-to-office for every but people who are truly remote. For the truly remote (e.g. me) they cut all fringe benefits. They also have gone out of their way to find subtle ways to rub it in our face: expensive lunches and dinners for people who come in, all "fun events" happen locally and to attend you have to pay your own way, etc. So remote workers like me are second-class citizens. I've even heard "remote work will hurt your ability to advance in the company". They'll never stop hiring remote. Remote workers will simply become second class citizens at a company with fewer benefits for the same work. Most people, including myself, will happily sacrifice beer coolers and ping pong for the privilege of never having to deal with an office again. I do feel bad for people who are coming into the office. I hope those fun events and food are worth the gas money, increased risk, and reduced health going into the office entails.
- spankalee 3y ago
  increased risk, and reduced health?
  - zer8k 3y ago
    Simply getting in your car and driving to work increases your all-cause mortality significantly. I'd wager more people die in car accidents on their way to work than DUIs. Anecdotally I've been nearly killed several times because someone was late for work and ran a red light, cut me off, etc. Road rage incidents increase because you have to be in the office by X hour. Reduced health, of course, because of driving. You can also consider most employers aren't going to stock a full kitchen so you're probably eating more fast food and garbage snacks. You're more sedentary because you typically can't walk out of the office for a quick trip to the gym, etc. Oh, also, your sleep is probably worse because you have to be up 2 hours early to get ready for work and drive.
    - genocidicbunny 3y ago
      Even if you're not driving to get to work, simply going outside and taking any form of transport (even walking) increases your risk. And for most people, if you can reasonably walk to work, you're probably going to be exposed to all sorts of particulates from the roadway you're likely walking along. Exhaust fumes, rubber particulates..etc, none are exactly health-boosters.
    - kaylynb 3y ago
      Most people don't realize how dangerous automobiles really are. Accidents are one of the leading causes of death in the US until people get to be 45+ and cancer starts overtaking it. Even in 2020-2021 CDC data that probably has less people driving than usual: https://wisqars.cdc.gov/data/lcd/home https://wisqars.cdc.gov/data/lcd/home. One thing I liked about living in a city was being able to walk to work. I'm reluctant to work anywhere I have to commute because the last few years have likely significantly reduced my chance of accidental death purely due to remote work. In some ranges it's the leading cause, although overdose deaths sometimes win out. It's kind of absurd that this isn't brought up in articles about remote work. Newspapers run articles about gun violence every day despite it being wwaaaayyyy less likely than dying in an automobile accident, but the far greater danger of commuting is almost never discussed.
startupsfail 3y ago
The reality is, video conferencing gives you almost all of the benefits of being in office and of face to face communications. While efficiency of using meeting recordings and not being stuck wasting time at the meetings stays. You can cut away useless air travel, hotels costs, remove rush time traffic. And give employees more flexibility. Source global workforce efficiently. Or you can try copying Google and Apple. Without having a $1B half-empty campus that is currently pretty pleasant to work at, because it is not crowded. The results will be very predictable.
read-burn-999 3y ago
Wish Grindr's relatively new CEO was reading your comment. The company was remote-first/friendly since day 1 years ago, and along comes this guy, and gives a RTO ultimatum to all employees. That was couple of weeks ago. 3/4 (no joke) of engineering dept took severance. Other departments lost more than a half too. The company lost more than 60% of employees in 2 weeks. There are lawsuits now because 2 weeks before RTO ultimatum, a employee union was formed so a lot of people think that RTO ultimatum was a Unfair Labour Practice or a union busting move. The move was so boneheaded and uncomprehensible that a lot of people suspect that the CEO simply wanted to destroy the union even if that takes sinks the company.

zer8k 3y ago

My company had a mandatory come-to-office for every but people who are truly remote. For the truly remote (e.g. me) they cut all fringe benefits. They also have gone out of their way to find subtle ways to rub it in our face: expensive lunches and dinners for people who come in, all "fun events" happen locally and to attend you have to pay your own way, etc. So remote workers like me are second-class citizens. I've even heard "remote work will hurt your ability to advance in the company". They'll never stop hiring remote. Remote workers will simply become second class citizens at a company with fewer benefits for the same work. Most people, including myself, will happily sacrifice beer coolers and ping pong for the privilege of never having to deal with an office again. I do feel bad for people who are coming into the office. I hope those fun events and food are worth the gas money, increased risk, and reduced health going into the office entails.

spankalee 3y ago
increased risk, and reduced health?
- zer8k 3y ago
  Simply getting in your car and driving to work increases your all-cause mortality significantly. I'd wager more people die in car accidents on their way to work than DUIs. Anecdotally I've been nearly killed several times because someone was late for work and ran a red light, cut me off, etc. Road rage incidents increase because you have to be in the office by X hour. Reduced health, of course, because of driving. You can also consider most employers aren't going to stock a full kitchen so you're probably eating more fast food and garbage snacks. You're more sedentary because you typically can't walk out of the office for a quick trip to the gym, etc. Oh, also, your sleep is probably worse because you have to be up 2 hours early to get ready for work and drive.
  - genocidicbunny 3y ago
    Even if you're not driving to get to work, simply going outside and taking any form of transport (even walking) increases your risk. And for most people, if you can reasonably walk to work, you're probably going to be exposed to all sorts of particulates from the roadway you're likely walking along. Exhaust fumes, rubber particulates..etc, none are exactly health-boosters.
  - kaylynb 3y ago
    Most people don't realize how dangerous automobiles really are. Accidents are one of the leading causes of death in the US until people get to be 45+ and cancer starts overtaking it. Even in 2020-2021 CDC data that probably has less people driving than usual: https://wisqars.cdc.gov/data/lcd/home https://wisqars.cdc.gov/data/lcd/home. One thing I liked about living in a city was being able to walk to work. I'm reluctant to work anywhere I have to commute because the last few years have likely significantly reduced my chance of accidental death purely due to remote work. In some ranges it's the leading cause, although overdose deaths sometimes win out. It's kind of absurd that this isn't brought up in articles about remote work. Newspapers run articles about gun violence every day despite it being wwaaaayyyy less likely than dying in an automobile accident, but the far greater danger of commuting is almost never discussed.

startupsfail 3y ago

The reality is, video conferencing gives you almost all of the benefits of being in office and of face to face communications. While efficiency of using meeting recordings and not being stuck wasting time at the meetings stays. You can cut away useless air travel, hotels costs, remove rush time traffic. And give employees more flexibility. Source global workforce efficiently. Or you can try copying Google and Apple. Without having a $1B half-empty campus that is currently pretty pleasant to work at, because it is not crowded. The results will be very predictable.

read-burn-999 3y ago

Wish Grindr's relatively new CEO was reading your comment. The company was remote-first/friendly since day 1 years ago, and along comes this guy, and gives a RTO ultimatum to all employees. That was couple of weeks ago. 3/4 (no joke) of engineering dept took severance. Other departments lost more than a half too. The company lost more than 60% of employees in 2 weeks. There are lawsuits now because 2 weeks before RTO ultimatum, a employee union was formed so a lot of people think that RTO ultimatum was a Unfair Labour Practice or a union busting move. The move was so boneheaded and uncomprehensible that a lot of people suspect that the CEO simply wanted to destroy the union even if that takes sinks the company.