12 ms·

Defeated CEOs are now conceding hybrid working is here to stay

164 points by safaa1993 2y ago

phendrenad2 2y ago
I think that there's value in in-office work, if you can build up the proper work culture. Sadly, it seems like that culture has been lost, and it's going to be a long time before people rediscover it. (Hint: it's not about the boss looking over your shoulder every 5 minutes, it's about the conversations that happen only at the air hockey table over a pint of beer.)
theandrewbailey 2y ago
A lot of business executives fall into the demographic that heavily invests into commercial real estate, which is facing some substantial depreciation. Telling everyone they need to get back to the office would help to keep those prices up. To everyone else, they have no incentive to keep fighting traffic every day (and paying for it) to go to an uncomfortable place full of maybe awful people.
- postalrat 2y ago
  Is that true everywhere or just the USA? As far as I know remote work really only stuck around in the USA.
  - izacus 2y ago
    TBH this sounds like a massive conspiracy theory that somehow gets continiously propagated. Your average small software company CEO doesn't give a crap while still forcing people to RTO.
    - solarpunk 2y ago
      all the small companies my friends work for in my neck of the woods stopped leasing office space
      - izacus 2y ago
        Indeed, which is why this real-estate conspiracy is downright bizarre.
        away271828 2y ago
        And even a larger company I'm familiar with has been looking very hard at lease renewals and has been walking away from a bunch of them. There's a certain lip service to the energy associated with having people back in the office but, in practice, people are being switched to fully remote if they don't come in and offices are being eliminated or swapped out for smaller spaces.
  - LtWorf 2y ago
    I've never been in USA and I wfh.
- Lammy 2y ago
  The drive to get people back into the office isn't due to any sunk cost on commercial real estate — it's a strategy to prevent workers from working multiple jobs simultaneously.
  - brk 2y ago
    When did all the CEOs meet to decide this? I missed that one.
    - arcastroe 2y ago
      There's a large whatsapp group containing hundreds of Silicone Valley CEOs. I imagine they keep up with gossip and coordinate policies in that group. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38583253 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38583253
  - lolinder 2y ago
    Is there any evidence that this is actually happening and going undetected in large enough numbers for it to be rational to allow the possibility to dictate the official remote/not-remote policy of large companies? This feels more like a meme that circulates among management/executive types than it does an actual problem in the real world.
    - izacus 2y ago
      The thing about executives is... they don't need evidence, they can operate on feelings. And there's certanly enough of overemployed people around to have managers convinced its a problem.
    - jeremyjh 2y ago
      It has a pretty active subreddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/overemployed/ https://www.reddit.com/r/overemployed/
      - billy99k 2y ago
        While this is happening, I don't think it's happening at a large enough scale to matter or long enough timespan. Most people burn out after a year or so of working multiple jobs. It's posted all the time in /overemployed.
- searchableguy 2y ago
  The simplest reason is lack of effective communication, team bonding, and morale. People behave differently behind a screen even if incentivised by money. This becomes a problem at the scale of big companies. Eg - without body language, tone and context - everyone needs to be extra charitable to avoid miscommunication or distrust. This might cause people to be overly defensive in their approach to communicate.
  - jonahhorowitz 2y ago
    I've said this in other places, but as a _manager_ it's much nicer to work in the office, in person. That gets more true the higher up the management chain you go. Managers spend most of their time in meetings. Meetings suck over video chat. This is the entire reason CEOs (and pretty much everyone between them and line employees) would rather everyone come back to work. It makes their workday more pleasant.
    - FridgeSeal 2y ago
      Managers and execs ought to already know that not everyone else is an exec, and don’t have the same face-to-face requirements, and do actually need time to do the “productivity” that nets execs their fat pay checks.
    - theandrewbailey 2y ago
      Meetings tend to be some the least productive activities, especially when everything "discussed" could have been sent out as an email (which can be read remotely).
      - LoganDark 2y ago
        Depends on the type of meeting. Where I work, we have a short 15-minute meeting every morning that's done over video call, just to see who's working that day and make sure everyone is on the same page. The CEO constantly does screen-share meetings with clients so they can show him what they're trying to do with the product, and he can watch the recording later and break it into tasks to give to us. I'd say it works pretty well. Without this the product would lose out on a lot of valuable feedback.
- nickff 2y ago
  Do you have a source for the view that executives invest in commercial real estate, or is the view based on anecdotes? I have not observed any such trend/relationship, and am under the impression that most MBA-types are generally averse to CRE and similar markets, but this is anecdotal, and I have no data to support it.
  - diggernet 2y ago
    I have heard rumors (yes, completely lacking proof) that some major banks with huge commercial loan portfolios are using those loans as leverage to coerce companies into loudly demanding return to office. That's actually pretty easy to believe, because they'd really be hurting if commercial real estate values were to plummet.
    - BobaFloutist 2y ago
      How are they using those loans as leverage? The terms are set, your student loan company couldn't make you, I don't know, tweet something you didn't want to.
      - nickff 2y ago
        It could be a line of credit, which might be modified. There could also be an ongoing relationship, related to the issuance of a series of loans used for financing inventory or something like that.
      - diggernet 2y ago
        Student loans are different from commercial loans. Student loans are long term, with all the details fixed for the life of the loan. Commercial loans are more fluid, and generally have short terms, adjustable rates, and other fun things. Two possible approaches to leverage quickly come to mind: - The carrot: "You've got a loan with us for $xM at y%. If you show you are committed to this office by maximizing occupancy, that lowers our risk and we can give you a 0.1% discount." - The stick: "Your loan term is expiring soon. I know it'd hurt to need to make that big balloon payment. Let's discuss our conditions for rolling you over into a new loan."
- llm_trw 2y ago
  The funny thing is that if they invested more and made offices into, you know, offices people would want to work there. Instead we have these open floor plan monstrosities for the hoi polloi and private offices for the masters of the universe. I have no idea what brain damage causes this but if you can't work efficiently in the space you give to your workers to work in how do you expect them to work? A more or less verbatim conversation between the CEO and myself as CTO shortly before I quite: >The new office is so stuffy. I'm going to work from home. >>We need to get a new office. >No we paid too much to break the lease. >>But you can't work there. >I can work from home most of the time. I'll only come in for the big company meetings.
  - jldugger 2y ago
    > if you can't work efficiently in the space you give to your workers to work in how do you expect them to work? I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that most CEOs and COOs use private offices as private, perpetual conference room space. I know my own executive manager has office space he barely uses because he's in conference rooms all day.
    - candiddevmike 2y ago
      Privacy for me but none for thee?
      - iraqmtpizza 2y ago
        Code monkeys need conference rooms twice a month
        ghaff 2y ago
        Even fairly mid-level execs are probably in meetings--whether in their offices, at home, or in conference rooms--maybe 6+ hours a day.
        maerF0x0 2y ago
        I often have to hide from folks who want to interrupt me doing my work so I can do their work for them. If I turn them down I get a bad peer review and get labelled a "Jerk" (no jerks allowed!). If I help them, I don't get to begin doing my own work till 5PM.
- bevekspldnw 2y ago
  Yup, the biggest class of assets in SV are boring single family homes owned by multimillionaires. Once you take the proximity to offices out of the picture the SV property bubble pops. Make the drones come in a few days a week and the assets value keeps going up due to artificial scarcity.
- cjbgkagh 2y ago
  I think it’s more that the big asset holders spent marketing money in CEO monthly magazine and it was effective.
- datascienced 2y ago
  That doesn’t make sense unless the CEO owns the building the company rents. If you have money in REIT then your company’s little decision wont affect it. Anymore than buying a single share of Apple will affect the price.
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    I've never understood the "because CEOs invest in commercial real estate" angle. Like really? Why would senior executives be more likely than the general investing public to invest in that one very specific asset class? It seems like a small tail wagging a big dog.
    - jdlshore 2y ago
      Yeah, it feels like conspiracy thinking to me.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - notabee 2y ago
    It's called class solidarity, which the wealthy are smart enough to have and everyone else gets grind culture and crab bucket mentality instead.
    - datascienced 2y ago
      Still I’d rather SPX500 it than commercial real estate. In general.
- ineptech 2y ago
  Any source for this at all? I've seen it before and it's a top-rated comment here, but it doesn't sound plausible and it's exactly the opposite of what game theory would predict.
- sergiotapia 2y ago
  To quote ishowspeed: "simple as that bro". Who benefits from keeping everybody in these offices? People who have a financial interest in maintaining those real estate prices high.
digger495 2y ago
If just one of them had improved ventilation, maybe some of us might have felt safe enough to give a shit.
- ndkxmwnrbto 2y ago
  it’s been 4 years, it’s time to move on
  - nashashmi 2y ago
    Yeah. Won’t make a difference anymore. Not like things will reverse
  - aaomidi 2y ago
    Ventilation is also for co2, and more than just covid.
  - jasongill 2y ago
    it's time to move on from what, exactly? from the global realization that maybe the idea of forcing people to come to work or school when they have any sort of contagious respiratory disease isn't the best idea?
    - kbolino 2y ago
      Hybrid for two years and fully remote for another two haven't gotten me sick any less often or any less severely.
    - al_borland 2y ago
      When everyone was coming to work sick during flu season, I worked from home for a month or two. If they weren’t going to be responsible, I wasn’t going to subject myself to it.
  - bsder 2y ago
    > We've tried nothing, and it didn't work. Time to move on. Uh, yeah, no. Offices are havens of particulates, volatile organics, carbon dioxide, etc. How long does it take that burnt popcorn smell to disappear from your office? That gives you an idea of how bad your office is. HVAC systems can have HEPA filters, UV lights, good air exchange, etc. But the cheap ones don't. And, without pressure, nobody is going to install good ones. Welcome to the pressure.
tootie 2y ago
Brought to you by the people who promised us offshoring would have no effect on productivity.
- ein0p 2y ago
  They might have been right actually: if you’re paying 1/5th the salary and getting 1/5th the value added per hour in exchange, there is no net effect on productivity. Only half kidding - most people don’t realize that productivity is measured in dollars of value added per dollar spent on labor.
diggernet 2y ago
CEOs who don't want to allow full remote work "concede" that you only need to be in the office most of the time.
nine_zeros 2y ago
So many CEOs will lay people off (or implement mandatory attrition policies) at any time. Employees have learned to look out for themselves and themselves alone. CEOs and productivity can go die.
- andsoitis 2y ago
  > productivity can go die. If someone on my team had that attitude I would hate to work with them. They would hold me and my projects back. So I’m glad you’re not my colleague.
  - ndkxmwnrbto 2y ago
    your projects aren’t actually important
    - sojournerc 2y ago
      How do you wake up and go to work with this attitude? I've been nihilistic, but don't you think you should spend your short time on this planet doing something that matters, at least marginally? And if not, maybe make a change?
      - derwiki 2y ago
        Do something outside of work that matters
        sojournerc 2y ago
        I don't disagree, but maybe both? Also do work that matters if you can... We only have so many trips around the sun
      - ndkxmwnrbto 2y ago
        the time i spend with my wife and kids is what matters. work is just a means to provide for them. in fact im currently not working because i quit my job for a while to spend time with them full time. this matters more to me than service health metrics and kpis
wetpaws 2y ago
https://web.archive.org/web/20240412115205/https://fortune.com/2024/04/12/kpmg-study-us-ceos-accept-hybrid-working-employee-return-to-office/ https://web.archive.org/web/20240412115205/https://fortune.c...
charlie0 2y ago
Hybrid work is the worst of both worlds. Can't move out of a HCOL and now you have to co-ordinate with your co-workers to reap any "benefits" of being in-office. What would be really cool is reconceptualizing hybrid work as quarterly retreats, where the company provides housing and other amenities for 1 to 2 weeks every quarter. This gives everyone time to bond and work on harder problems. I get this wouldn't work as well for those with families because being away for that long is tough, but this would be great for say juniors and seniors with greater flexibility. It also solves some of the other issues, ie I could move to an MCOL and just fly in once a quarter to work together with everyone. The "retreat" aspect of it would also incentivize more people to be there. On the company side of things, instead of leasing out a building for a long time, they can just rent short term and use the money they are saving to make the retreat more fun and productive.
- TexanFeller 2y ago
  It makes it bearable to live more cheaply in the suburbs and make the long drive to downtown only a couple times a week. Live in MCOL suburb and work a couple days in HCOL city seems like a fair compromise to me.
  - charlie0 2y ago
    Really depends on the area though. In LA for example, you'd have to move 1-2 hours away to get into MCOL or LOCOL. What would be really cool is reconceptualizing hybrid work as quarterly retreats, where the company provides housing and other amenities for 1 to 2 weeks every quarter. This gives everyone time to bond and work on harder problems. I get this wouldn't work as well for those with families because being away for that long is tough, but this would be great for say juniors and seniors with greater flexibility. It also solves some of the other issues, ie I could move to an MCOL and just fly in once a quarter to work together with everyone. The "retreat" aspect of it would also incentivize more people to be there.
    - futureshock 2y ago
      And that would be perfect if you only have to go in once a week. Many of my coworkers are in that situation and had been commuting 4 hours round trip for years before the pandemic.
TexanFeller 2y ago
I have ADHD and am autistic so loud open floor plan offices are a challenge. I'm in the category of people most likely to benefit from remote. Honestly it's been a much bigger challenge trying to collaborate and connect with coworkers in the new world than trying to cope with an office. People often don't perceive you as an actual human if you've only ever been a video square to them. And quick collaboration just doesn't happen anymore, or happens in a much slower and more frustrating way on Slack. Juniors especially struggle and I watch them take many times longer to ramp up than pre-pandemic. I honestly desperately wish my team worked in a room together 2-3 days a week.
- NegativeLatency 2y ago
  I do miss the old "whiteboard brainstorming session" sometimes
  - from-nibly 2y ago
    Lets figure out how to make that work from home.
    - namibj 2y ago
      Large screen plus Wacom.
- teaearlgraycold 2y ago
  We do 3 days in person, 2 days from home. Seems like a good split.
  - kyleyeats 2y ago
    The ideal I think is 2 days in person, 2 days from home.
- lolinder 2y ago
  I hate to be the guy who says "you're holding it wrong", but complaints like this usually indicate that a company is trying to manage their remote work the same way they did in the office, with no adjustments. Some specifics: > People often don't perceive you as an actual human if you've only ever been a video square to them. My remote company does regular on-sites and off-sites, which for me strikes a perfect balance between not having to deal with the headaches of an office (mostly commute and open floor plan) while still having time to meet my coworkers face-to-face. > quick collaboration just doesn't happen anymore, or happens in a much slower and more frustrating way on Slack Slack's huddle feature is great for the times where you need to quickly drop into collaboration mode with someone. Doing that occasionally and then structuring your work to be more parallel works very well in my experience. > Juniors especially struggle and I watch them take many times longer to ramp up than pre-pandemic. This is one that I actually have seen, even in my current org. I think the root of it is that going remote revealed just how much time senior engineers spend mentoring juniors by requiring that that time be scheduled. The most successful junior onboarding I've seen is when people make a conscious effort to schedule in lots of time for mentoring and training and to ensure that there's a space where juniors can get feedback quickly on Slack. It's not that you need more time than you'd otherwise need, it's that you have to be intentional about creating the learning spaces, which doesn't come naturally to many organizations.
atleastoptimal 2y ago
I agree that there is a real difference between being at work vs working from home. You build a connection to the workplace. Your brain shifts into "work mode" by default. People talk to each other, culture develops, etc. These are obviously all good things. The problem is, most jobs people do have an element of mindlessness and aren't cutting edge, innovating spaces. Most white-collar jobs people work in are satellite offices of large companies where the day-in day-out is simply maintaining and attending to larger systems, applying general verbal reasoning, keeping up appearances, etc. A lot of it is bullshit work, as has been articulated before. This work, stripped to its productive essence, can be done faster, more efficiently and in a fraction of the 9-5 work day at home, but part of the charade is for employers and managers to not admit this truth.
- maerF0x0 2y ago
  > Your brain shifts into "work mode" by default. I never found this to be the case in office. However I would agree with you on the shift out. 30 mins into the gym or drive home and I was able to stop thinking about work. Whereas now it's often 8-9pm at home before I go "whoa, I should dim these blue lights and do something with my life"
  - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
    If you really want this to change, have kids. Note: this is bad advice.
    - maerF0x0 2y ago
      Can you tell me more about how it changes? (either your perception or anecdote)
      - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
        The kids become a lot more important than work, firstly. Secondly you need to collect them, feed them and generally care for them so that tends to put a hard stop and start on your workday. Just my experience, obviously.
bdw5204 2y ago
When the interest rates finally come back down and we're in the middle of the Greater Resignation, these CEOs will be admitting that getting rid of fully remote work was a mistake.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
stephc_int13 2y ago
Offices or remote, nothing is perfect, it's a tradeoff. And the habits and practices are far from settled at this point. I think that most companies are doing remote wrong, too many meetings, not enough async communication, not enough written communication overall. The open source world is a good example of the possible efficiency.
- jasongill 2y ago
  everyone is different, but remote is perfect for me and most (but not all) of the people I know
- good_intentions 2y ago
  The problem I am finding is that I put a lot of energy into well written comms and trying to enforce async, but the less tech savvy peers of mine cannot seem to make the efficiencies work. Too much time is spent finding that file or assigning tasks to "we" instead of calling out or asking individuals to do their actual jobs. A lot of "email passing" happens which eventually leads me to booking a Zoom meeting to sort things out. It is very frustrating to watch.
chgs 2y ago
I’ve been WFH for over a decade, but still make effort to meet up with colleagues across the country and indeed world on a regular basis. Pre covid I would be able to doorstep them, book a trip to Glasgow or london or singapore or whatever and catch up with all number of people reliably with just a quick “you free for coffee” message. Since covid it needs effort on both sides to be at the same location. It’s not impossible, but it does need people to appreciate the benefits of meeting physically and make it happen.
bhaney 2y ago
Then they aren't defeated enough yet. Hybrid is fine for the people who want hybrid working, but fully remote still needs to be an option for people who want to be fully remote.
paxys 2y ago
"Hybrid" is such a scam. What does it even mean? You come in to work 3-4 days a week? Cool, that's called "working from the office". If I still have to live in the same city/region as the office building and still have to commute most days of the week then what have they changed exactly? Most tech workers I know would do random WFH days when they needed to without a problem pre-Covid, and now that is just branded as "hybrid" and sold as a perk. Give me a break.
- izacus 2y ago
  Yep, the great WFH revolution didn't seem to have happened. Also somehow the explosion of prodictivity of WFH-only companies didn't happen either.
- Spooky23 2y ago
  It means you don’t get offshored right away.
- BobaFloutist 2y ago
  My wife has one day a week team office day that they try to keep free from meetings so they can touch base, spend time with the team, and, often, plan a happy-hour event afterwards. It's not quite as flexible as full on remote working, since, yes, we have to be in the same region, but it saves a lot of commute time, gives more flexibility for things like doctors/dentists appointments, would theoretically let her do laundry/dishes relatively easily (I mostly do them), and we could reasonably live a fair amount further away since the commute is only one day a week. That seems like a noticeable benefit to me.
cebert 2y ago
I think a lot of executives are part of the boomer generation who had a stay-at-home partner as they climbed to the top. They have no idea how much more complex the workplace is when two partners work and have kids. We have to work in open floor spaces while they have a private office. Their reality isn’t our reality.
junto 2y ago
I question the competency of any CEO that enforces people return to the office on a whim. We have crossed the rubicon on remote work. The shift has been well and truly paradigmed. To choose to restrict your candidate pool to a small geographical location, pay relocation, pay higher salaries, have a lower employee NPS, have higher company carbon emissions, whilst your competitors have a much larger non-geographically constrained talent pool, with more attractive, flexible, family-friendly working conditions and pay less for those employees, making their companies more competitive. It’s a no-brainer. The status quo has completely shifted. Any CEO that doesn’t yet realize that should consider quitting.
- joeax 2y ago
  What is happening is people who are being forced into RTO are demanding a higher salary. Basic supply and demand dynamics are coming into play. Those CEOs are now learning this perhaps the (not surprising) hard way. Source: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240322-us-salaries-higher-in-office-jobs https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240322-us-salaries-hi...
- Aloisius 2y ago
  I'm rather amazed at the short-sightedness of the highly paid engineers here who don't see the dangers of full remote actually being adopted. If a company is no longer limited to just hiring people physically nearby, then you're competing for jobs against a whole lot of people who'd accept much lower salaries.
  - arghnoname 2y ago
    It's almost inconceivable to me that companies would go fully remote and not over time adjust salary downwards to something more like the median demands of the available labor force (i.e., those whose workday fits within a 8:00-6:00 window. I live in the Bay Area, but if I moved back to the low cost of living area I'm from with low income taxes, I'd come out ahead even with 30% pay cut. I like living in a HCOL area, so I'm not happy about fully remote work. The most I can hope for is that the wage drop doesn't too far outpace the concomitant drop in the cost of living in these expensive areas.
aaron695 2y ago
[dead]
charlieyu1 2y ago
Don’t even understand what they are fighting for. The lowest cost option is there to stay
cookie_monsta 2y ago
My boss (middle management) is very staunchly opposed to more than 1 day per week of WFH. She spends about 90% of her time on video calls, so I was always confused by that until she was telling me that when she does WFH she's always distracted by other things which doesn't happen in the office. Maybe a lot of the WFH opposition is really just managers projecting their own work ethic onto others?
- kcrwfrd_ 2y ago
  When I work in the office I’m distracted by other things which don’t happen at home
  - nomel 2y ago
    This is why I like to work in the office at work from home days. It's usually just me and one other person in the entire building.
- Terr_ 2y ago
  > projecting their own work ethic Alternately, they're projecting their own home environment, which won't always be the same level of distractions/benefits across different employees life-styles/situations. "My house is filled with screaming two-year-olds and my commute is five minutes away, so obviously office-work is superior."
- Bjartr 2y ago
  In general people struggle to consider how others' experiences might differ from their own.
  - cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
    Which is why it’s just as absurd to say “remote work is superior”. Just don’t try saying that to anyone here.
    - devin 2y ago
mberning 2y ago
People brazenly defy the RTO requests at my company. I suppose management could start turning the screws on people, but I have a feeling enough people are still willing to quit to make that impractical.
- arghnoname 2y ago
  Where I work, they mandated RTO three days a week. It was largely ignored. Eventually they started checking badge-in access and strictly enforced the mandate. There was a lot of grumbling about people quitting, but anecdotally I didn't notice much uptick in turnover at all. It's very hard to tell what will really make people quit. If the labor market hadn't softened a bit I'm sure we'd have seen more, but my guess is the disgruntled people weren't able to get full WFH without a salary decrease larger than they wanted to tolerate.
backtoyoujim 2y ago
There is no reason to count them as defeated. They are just properly informed.
wyldfire 2y ago
I still opt to go into the office two/three days a week. It's a bummer that nearly none of my old workmates are there anymore. And yet, I can't help to acknowledge that there's no going back. And of course I can see that some things are remarkably convenient when working from home. So even though I miss the way things were, I understand this is here to stay.
notnmeyer 2y ago
> It’s a complete 360 on their stance last year, whoops. who’s reading these before pressing publish in wordpress?
- from-nibly 2y ago
  But it is a 360 they want people back in office just with different words.
throwiforgtnlzy 2y ago
FYI: Meta is de-facto insisting on RTO and not offering a remote option for new employees. This trend has nothing to do with productivity and is all about the egos of control-freak managers "maintaining control" over employees in a way that wastes employees' time and money and harms the company's reputation.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- disgruntledphd2 2y ago
  Meta has always, always always sucked at remote. The culture just doesn't support it. I worked from an office many timezones away from my team for a long time and it was incredibly difficult to be productive.
grugagag 2y ago
Where I currently work we have only office work. I wouldnt mind it if it wasn’t for my manager who loves the sound of his own voice and who doesn’t give us peace to finish the damn work, always interrupting... In my current situation hybrid would literally enable me to work.
- deterministic 2y ago
  Vote with your feet. Find a job that is WFH flexible.
runcibleai 2y ago
The best part about hybrid work and, even more so, fully remote work is the benefit to the business’s productivity. The ability to lay off or replace employees without ever meeting them in person allows for rapid adjustments to the work force and faster replacement of low performers. Better yet, replacing employees with AI solutions is much easier and more convenient without worrying about a physical element. The APIs for the AI based workers have effectively been established already. I think it’s very brave of employees to recognize the writing on the wall and help make themselves more easily replaceable.
latenightcoding 2y ago
Or they just outsource jobs to cheaper markets.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kkfx 2y ago
Ehm, no thanks. REMOTE work YES, hybrid no. Hybrid, short workweeks etc are made as kind of cadeau to keep people in cities, witch is at all illogical and unsustainable. People in cities in the modern time means just service slaves who live spending the 100% they earn in services, as human puppet of some large puppeteer.
deterministic 2y ago
I would never accept a job without a flexible WFH policy. Unless there is literally no other choice. I am not the only one. So companies that are not flexible will be less competitive in the job market.
deterministic 2y ago
“Research has echoed that nearly half of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated, and 29% of companies enforcing office returns are struggling with recruitment.” Excellent! Vote with your feet people. That’s the only thing CEO’s will respect. I will only send my CV to a non-WFH company if there is literally no other choice available to me.

164 points by safaa1993 2y ago

I think that there's value in in-office work, if you can build up the proper work culture. Sadly, it seems like that culture has been lost, and it's going to be a long time before people rediscover it. (Hint: it's not about the boss looking over your shoulder every 5 minutes, it's about the conversations that happen only at the air hockey table over a pint of beer.)

theandrewbailey 2y ago

A lot of business executives fall into the demographic that heavily invests into commercial real estate, which is facing some substantial depreciation. Telling everyone they need to get back to the office would help to keep those prices up. To everyone else, they have no incentive to keep fighting traffic every day (and paying for it) to go to an uncomfortable place full of maybe awful people.

postalrat 2y ago
Is that true everywhere or just the USA? As far as I know remote work really only stuck around in the USA.
- izacus 2y ago
  TBH this sounds like a massive conspiracy theory that somehow gets continiously propagated. Your average small software company CEO doesn't give a crap while still forcing people to RTO.
  - solarpunk 2y ago
    all the small companies my friends work for in my neck of the woods stopped leasing office space
    - izacus 2y ago
      Indeed, which is why this real-estate conspiracy is downright bizarre.
      - away271828 2y ago
        And even a larger company I'm familiar with has been looking very hard at lease renewals and has been walking away from a bunch of them. There's a certain lip service to the energy associated with having people back in the office but, in practice, people are being switched to fully remote if they don't come in and offices are being eliminated or swapped out for smaller spaces.
- LtWorf 2y ago
  I've never been in USA and I wfh.
Lammy 2y ago
The drive to get people back into the office isn't due to any sunk cost on commercial real estate — it's a strategy to prevent workers from working multiple jobs simultaneously.
- brk 2y ago
  When did all the CEOs meet to decide this? I missed that one.
  - arcastroe 2y ago
    There's a large whatsapp group containing hundreds of Silicone Valley CEOs. I imagine they keep up with gossip and coordinate policies in that group. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38583253 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38583253
- lolinder 2y ago
  Is there any evidence that this is actually happening and going undetected in large enough numbers for it to be rational to allow the possibility to dictate the official remote/not-remote policy of large companies? This feels more like a meme that circulates among management/executive types than it does an actual problem in the real world.
  - izacus 2y ago
    The thing about executives is... they don't need evidence, they can operate on feelings. And there's certanly enough of overemployed people around to have managers convinced its a problem.
  - jeremyjh 2y ago
    It has a pretty active subreddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/overemployed/ https://www.reddit.com/r/overemployed/
    - billy99k 2y ago
      While this is happening, I don't think it's happening at a large enough scale to matter or long enough timespan. Most people burn out after a year or so of working multiple jobs. It's posted all the time in /overemployed.
searchableguy 2y ago
The simplest reason is lack of effective communication, team bonding, and morale. People behave differently behind a screen even if incentivised by money. This becomes a problem at the scale of big companies. Eg - without body language, tone and context - everyone needs to be extra charitable to avoid miscommunication or distrust. This might cause people to be overly defensive in their approach to communicate.
- jonahhorowitz 2y ago
  I've said this in other places, but as a _manager_ it's much nicer to work in the office, in person. That gets more true the higher up the management chain you go. Managers spend most of their time in meetings. Meetings suck over video chat. This is the entire reason CEOs (and pretty much everyone between them and line employees) would rather everyone come back to work. It makes their workday more pleasant.
  - FridgeSeal 2y ago
    Managers and execs ought to already know that not everyone else is an exec, and don’t have the same face-to-face requirements, and do actually need time to do the “productivity” that nets execs their fat pay checks.
  - theandrewbailey 2y ago
    Meetings tend to be some the least productive activities, especially when everything "discussed" could have been sent out as an email (which can be read remotely).
    - LoganDark 2y ago
      Depends on the type of meeting. Where I work, we have a short 15-minute meeting every morning that's done over video call, just to see who's working that day and make sure everyone is on the same page. The CEO constantly does screen-share meetings with clients so they can show him what they're trying to do with the product, and he can watch the recording later and break it into tasks to give to us. I'd say it works pretty well. Without this the product would lose out on a lot of valuable feedback.
nickff 2y ago
Do you have a source for the view that executives invest in commercial real estate, or is the view based on anecdotes? I have not observed any such trend/relationship, and am under the impression that most MBA-types are generally averse to CRE and similar markets, but this is anecdotal, and I have no data to support it.
- diggernet 2y ago
  I have heard rumors (yes, completely lacking proof) that some major banks with huge commercial loan portfolios are using those loans as leverage to coerce companies into loudly demanding return to office. That's actually pretty easy to believe, because they'd really be hurting if commercial real estate values were to plummet.
  - BobaFloutist 2y ago
    How are they using those loans as leverage? The terms are set, your student loan company couldn't make you, I don't know, tweet something you didn't want to.
    - nickff 2y ago
      It could be a line of credit, which might be modified. There could also be an ongoing relationship, related to the issuance of a series of loans used for financing inventory or something like that.
    - diggernet 2y ago
      Student loans are different from commercial loans. Student loans are long term, with all the details fixed for the life of the loan. Commercial loans are more fluid, and generally have short terms, adjustable rates, and other fun things. Two possible approaches to leverage quickly come to mind: - The carrot: "You've got a loan with us for $xM at y%. If you show you are committed to this office by maximizing occupancy, that lowers our risk and we can give you a 0.1% discount." - The stick: "Your loan term is expiring soon. I know it'd hurt to need to make that big balloon payment. Let's discuss our conditions for rolling you over into a new loan."
llm_trw 2y ago
The funny thing is that if they invested more and made offices into, you know, offices people would want to work there. Instead we have these open floor plan monstrosities for the hoi polloi and private offices for the masters of the universe. I have no idea what brain damage causes this but if you can't work efficiently in the space you give to your workers to work in how do you expect them to work? A more or less verbatim conversation between the CEO and myself as CTO shortly before I quite: >The new office is so stuffy. I'm going to work from home. >>We need to get a new office. >No we paid too much to break the lease. >>But you can't work there. >I can work from home most of the time. I'll only come in for the big company meetings.
- jldugger 2y ago
  > if you can't work efficiently in the space you give to your workers to work in how do you expect them to work? I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that most CEOs and COOs use private offices as private, perpetual conference room space. I know my own executive manager has office space he barely uses because he's in conference rooms all day.
  - candiddevmike 2y ago
    Privacy for me but none for thee?
    - iraqmtpizza 2y ago
      Code monkeys need conference rooms twice a month
      - ghaff 2y ago
        Even fairly mid-level execs are probably in meetings--whether in their offices, at home, or in conference rooms--maybe 6+ hours a day.
      - maerF0x0 2y ago
        I often have to hide from folks who want to interrupt me doing my work so I can do their work for them. If I turn them down I get a bad peer review and get labelled a "Jerk" (no jerks allowed!). If I help them, I don't get to begin doing my own work till 5PM.
bevekspldnw 2y ago
Yup, the biggest class of assets in SV are boring single family homes owned by multimillionaires. Once you take the proximity to offices out of the picture the SV property bubble pops. Make the drones come in a few days a week and the assets value keeps going up due to artificial scarcity.
cjbgkagh 2y ago
I think it’s more that the big asset holders spent marketing money in CEO monthly magazine and it was effective.
datascienced 2y ago
That doesn’t make sense unless the CEO owns the building the company rents. If you have money in REIT then your company’s little decision wont affect it. Anymore than buying a single share of Apple will affect the price.
- ryandrake 2y ago
  I've never understood the "because CEOs invest in commercial real estate" angle. Like really? Why would senior executives be more likely than the general investing public to invest in that one very specific asset class? It seems like a small tail wagging a big dog.
  - jdlshore 2y ago
    Yeah, it feels like conspiracy thinking to me.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- notabee 2y ago
  It's called class solidarity, which the wealthy are smart enough to have and everyone else gets grind culture and crab bucket mentality instead.
  - datascienced 2y ago
    Still I’d rather SPX500 it than commercial real estate. In general.
ineptech 2y ago
Any source for this at all? I've seen it before and it's a top-rated comment here, but it doesn't sound plausible and it's exactly the opposite of what game theory would predict.
sergiotapia 2y ago
To quote ishowspeed: "simple as that bro". Who benefits from keeping everybody in these offices? People who have a financial interest in maintaining those real estate prices high.

digger495 2y ago

If just one of them had improved ventilation, maybe some of us might have felt safe enough to give a shit.

ndkxmwnrbto 2y ago
it’s been 4 years, it’s time to move on
- nashashmi 2y ago
  Yeah. Won’t make a difference anymore. Not like things will reverse
- aaomidi 2y ago
  Ventilation is also for co2, and more than just covid.
- jasongill 2y ago
  it's time to move on from what, exactly? from the global realization that maybe the idea of forcing people to come to work or school when they have any sort of contagious respiratory disease isn't the best idea?
  - kbolino 2y ago
    Hybrid for two years and fully remote for another two haven't gotten me sick any less often or any less severely.
  - al_borland 2y ago
    When everyone was coming to work sick during flu season, I worked from home for a month or two. If they weren’t going to be responsible, I wasn’t going to subject myself to it.
- bsder 2y ago
  > We've tried nothing, and it didn't work. Time to move on. Uh, yeah, no. Offices are havens of particulates, volatile organics, carbon dioxide, etc. How long does it take that burnt popcorn smell to disappear from your office? That gives you an idea of how bad your office is. HVAC systems can have HEPA filters, UV lights, good air exchange, etc. But the cheap ones don't. And, without pressure, nobody is going to install good ones. Welcome to the pressure.

tootie 2y ago

Brought to you by the people who promised us offshoring would have no effect on productivity.

ein0p 2y ago
They might have been right actually: if you’re paying 1/5th the salary and getting 1/5th the value added per hour in exchange, there is no net effect on productivity. Only half kidding - most people don’t realize that productivity is measured in dollars of value added per dollar spent on labor.

diggernet 2y ago

CEOs who don't want to allow full remote work "concede" that you only need to be in the office most of the time.

nine_zeros 2y ago

So many CEOs will lay people off (or implement mandatory attrition policies) at any time. Employees have learned to look out for themselves and themselves alone. CEOs and productivity can go die.

andsoitis 2y ago
> productivity can go die. If someone on my team had that attitude I would hate to work with them. They would hold me and my projects back. So I’m glad you’re not my colleague.
- ndkxmwnrbto 2y ago
  your projects aren’t actually important
  - sojournerc 2y ago
    How do you wake up and go to work with this attitude? I've been nihilistic, but don't you think you should spend your short time on this planet doing something that matters, at least marginally? And if not, maybe make a change?
    - derwiki 2y ago
      Do something outside of work that matters
      - sojournerc 2y ago
        I don't disagree, but maybe both? Also do work that matters if you can... We only have so many trips around the sun
    - ndkxmwnrbto 2y ago
      the time i spend with my wife and kids is what matters. work is just a means to provide for them. in fact im currently not working because i quit my job for a while to spend time with them full time. this matters more to me than service health metrics and kpis

wetpaws 2y ago

https://web.archive.org/web/20240412115205/https://fortune.com/2024/04/12/kpmg-study-us-ceos-accept-hybrid-working-employee-return-to-office/ https://web.archive.org/web/20240412115205/https://fortune.c...

charlie0 2y ago

Hybrid work is the worst of both worlds. Can't move out of a HCOL and now you have to co-ordinate with your co-workers to reap any "benefits" of being in-office. What would be really cool is reconceptualizing hybrid work as quarterly retreats, where the company provides housing and other amenities for 1 to 2 weeks every quarter. This gives everyone time to bond and work on harder problems. I get this wouldn't work as well for those with families because being away for that long is tough, but this would be great for say juniors and seniors with greater flexibility. It also solves some of the other issues, ie I could move to an MCOL and just fly in once a quarter to work together with everyone. The "retreat" aspect of it would also incentivize more people to be there. On the company side of things, instead of leasing out a building for a long time, they can just rent short term and use the money they are saving to make the retreat more fun and productive.

TexanFeller 2y ago
It makes it bearable to live more cheaply in the suburbs and make the long drive to downtown only a couple times a week. Live in MCOL suburb and work a couple days in HCOL city seems like a fair compromise to me.
- charlie0 2y ago
  Really depends on the area though. In LA for example, you'd have to move 1-2 hours away to get into MCOL or LOCOL. What would be really cool is reconceptualizing hybrid work as quarterly retreats, where the company provides housing and other amenities for 1 to 2 weeks every quarter. This gives everyone time to bond and work on harder problems. I get this wouldn't work as well for those with families because being away for that long is tough, but this would be great for say juniors and seniors with greater flexibility. It also solves some of the other issues, ie I could move to an MCOL and just fly in once a quarter to work together with everyone. The "retreat" aspect of it would also incentivize more people to be there.
  - futureshock 2y ago
    And that would be perfect if you only have to go in once a week. Many of my coworkers are in that situation and had been commuting 4 hours round trip for years before the pandemic.

TexanFeller 2y ago

I have ADHD and am autistic so loud open floor plan offices are a challenge. I'm in the category of people most likely to benefit from remote. Honestly it's been a much bigger challenge trying to collaborate and connect with coworkers in the new world than trying to cope with an office. People often don't perceive you as an actual human if you've only ever been a video square to them. And quick collaboration just doesn't happen anymore, or happens in a much slower and more frustrating way on Slack. Juniors especially struggle and I watch them take many times longer to ramp up than pre-pandemic. I honestly desperately wish my team worked in a room together 2-3 days a week.

NegativeLatency 2y ago
I do miss the old "whiteboard brainstorming session" sometimes
- from-nibly 2y ago
  Lets figure out how to make that work from home.
  - namibj 2y ago
    Large screen plus Wacom.
teaearlgraycold 2y ago
We do 3 days in person, 2 days from home. Seems like a good split.
- kyleyeats 2y ago
  The ideal I think is 2 days in person, 2 days from home.
lolinder 2y ago
I hate to be the guy who says "you're holding it wrong", but complaints like this usually indicate that a company is trying to manage their remote work the same way they did in the office, with no adjustments. Some specifics: > People often don't perceive you as an actual human if you've only ever been a video square to them. My remote company does regular on-sites and off-sites, which for me strikes a perfect balance between not having to deal with the headaches of an office (mostly commute and open floor plan) while still having time to meet my coworkers face-to-face. > quick collaboration just doesn't happen anymore, or happens in a much slower and more frustrating way on Slack Slack's huddle feature is great for the times where you need to quickly drop into collaboration mode with someone. Doing that occasionally and then structuring your work to be more parallel works very well in my experience. > Juniors especially struggle and I watch them take many times longer to ramp up than pre-pandemic. This is one that I actually have seen, even in my current org. I think the root of it is that going remote revealed just how much time senior engineers spend mentoring juniors by requiring that that time be scheduled. The most successful junior onboarding I've seen is when people make a conscious effort to schedule in lots of time for mentoring and training and to ensure that there's a space where juniors can get feedback quickly on Slack. It's not that you need more time than you'd otherwise need, it's that you have to be intentional about creating the learning spaces, which doesn't come naturally to many organizations.

atleastoptimal 2y ago

I agree that there is a real difference between being at work vs working from home. You build a connection to the workplace. Your brain shifts into "work mode" by default. People talk to each other, culture develops, etc. These are obviously all good things. The problem is, most jobs people do have an element of mindlessness and aren't cutting edge, innovating spaces. Most white-collar jobs people work in are satellite offices of large companies where the day-in day-out is simply maintaining and attending to larger systems, applying general verbal reasoning, keeping up appearances, etc. A lot of it is bullshit work, as has been articulated before. This work, stripped to its productive essence, can be done faster, more efficiently and in a fraction of the 9-5 work day at home, but part of the charade is for employers and managers to not admit this truth.

maerF0x0 2y ago
> Your brain shifts into "work mode" by default. I never found this to be the case in office. However I would agree with you on the shift out. 30 mins into the gym or drive home and I was able to stop thinking about work. Whereas now it's often 8-9pm at home before I go "whoa, I should dim these blue lights and do something with my life"
- disgruntledphd2 2y ago
  If you really want this to change, have kids. Note: this is bad advice.
  - maerF0x0 2y ago
    Can you tell me more about how it changes? (either your perception or anecdote)
    - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
      The kids become a lot more important than work, firstly. Secondly you need to collect them, feed them and generally care for them so that tends to put a hard stop and start on your workday. Just my experience, obviously.

bdw5204 2y ago

When the interest rates finally come back down and we're in the middle of the Greater Resignation, these CEOs will be admitting that getting rid of fully remote work was a mistake.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

stephc_int13 2y ago

Offices or remote, nothing is perfect, it's a tradeoff. And the habits and practices are far from settled at this point. I think that most companies are doing remote wrong, too many meetings, not enough async communication, not enough written communication overall. The open source world is a good example of the possible efficiency.

jasongill 2y ago
everyone is different, but remote is perfect for me and most (but not all) of the people I know
good_intentions 2y ago
The problem I am finding is that I put a lot of energy into well written comms and trying to enforce async, but the less tech savvy peers of mine cannot seem to make the efficiencies work. Too much time is spent finding that file or assigning tasks to "we" instead of calling out or asking individuals to do their actual jobs. A lot of "email passing" happens which eventually leads me to booking a Zoom meeting to sort things out. It is very frustrating to watch.

chgs 2y ago

I’ve been WFH for over a decade, but still make effort to meet up with colleagues across the country and indeed world on a regular basis. Pre covid I would be able to doorstep them, book a trip to Glasgow or london or singapore or whatever and catch up with all number of people reliably with just a quick “you free for coffee” message. Since covid it needs effort on both sides to be at the same location. It’s not impossible, but it does need people to appreciate the benefits of meeting physically and make it happen.

bhaney 2y ago

Then they aren't defeated enough yet. Hybrid is fine for the people who want hybrid working, but fully remote still needs to be an option for people who want to be fully remote.

paxys 2y ago

"Hybrid" is such a scam. What does it even mean? You come in to work 3-4 days a week? Cool, that's called "working from the office". If I still have to live in the same city/region as the office building and still have to commute most days of the week then what have they changed exactly? Most tech workers I know would do random WFH days when they needed to without a problem pre-Covid, and now that is just branded as "hybrid" and sold as a perk. Give me a break.

izacus 2y ago
Yep, the great WFH revolution didn't seem to have happened. Also somehow the explosion of prodictivity of WFH-only companies didn't happen either.
Spooky23 2y ago
It means you don’t get offshored right away.
BobaFloutist 2y ago
My wife has one day a week team office day that they try to keep free from meetings so they can touch base, spend time with the team, and, often, plan a happy-hour event afterwards. It's not quite as flexible as full on remote working, since, yes, we have to be in the same region, but it saves a lot of commute time, gives more flexibility for things like doctors/dentists appointments, would theoretically let her do laundry/dishes relatively easily (I mostly do them), and we could reasonably live a fair amount further away since the commute is only one day a week. That seems like a noticeable benefit to me.

cebert 2y ago

I think a lot of executives are part of the boomer generation who had a stay-at-home partner as they climbed to the top. They have no idea how much more complex the workplace is when two partners work and have kids. We have to work in open floor spaces while they have a private office. Their reality isn’t our reality.

junto 2y ago

I question the competency of any CEO that enforces people return to the office on a whim. We have crossed the rubicon on remote work. The shift has been well and truly paradigmed. To choose to restrict your candidate pool to a small geographical location, pay relocation, pay higher salaries, have a lower employee NPS, have higher company carbon emissions, whilst your competitors have a much larger non-geographically constrained talent pool, with more attractive, flexible, family-friendly working conditions and pay less for those employees, making their companies more competitive. It’s a no-brainer. The status quo has completely shifted. Any CEO that doesn’t yet realize that should consider quitting.

joeax 2y ago
What is happening is people who are being forced into RTO are demanding a higher salary. Basic supply and demand dynamics are coming into play. Those CEOs are now learning this perhaps the (not surprising) hard way. Source: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240322-us-salaries-higher-in-office-jobs https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240322-us-salaries-hi...
Aloisius 2y ago
I'm rather amazed at the short-sightedness of the highly paid engineers here who don't see the dangers of full remote actually being adopted. If a company is no longer limited to just hiring people physically nearby, then you're competing for jobs against a whole lot of people who'd accept much lower salaries.
- arghnoname 2y ago
  It's almost inconceivable to me that companies would go fully remote and not over time adjust salary downwards to something more like the median demands of the available labor force (i.e., those whose workday fits within a 8:00-6:00 window. I live in the Bay Area, but if I moved back to the low cost of living area I'm from with low income taxes, I'd come out ahead even with 30% pay cut. I like living in a HCOL area, so I'm not happy about fully remote work. The most I can hope for is that the wage drop doesn't too far outpace the concomitant drop in the cost of living in these expensive areas.

aaron695 2y ago

[dead]

charlieyu1 2y ago

Don’t even understand what they are fighting for. The lowest cost option is there to stay

cookie_monsta 2y ago

My boss (middle management) is very staunchly opposed to more than 1 day per week of WFH. She spends about 90% of her time on video calls, so I was always confused by that until she was telling me that when she does WFH she's always distracted by other things which doesn't happen in the office. Maybe a lot of the WFH opposition is really just managers projecting their own work ethic onto others?

kcrwfrd_ 2y ago
When I work in the office I’m distracted by other things which don’t happen at home
- nomel 2y ago
  This is why I like to work in the office at work from home days. It's usually just me and one other person in the entire building.
Terr_ 2y ago
> projecting their own work ethic Alternately, they're projecting their own home environment, which won't always be the same level of distractions/benefits across different employees life-styles/situations. "My house is filled with screaming two-year-olds and my commute is five minutes away, so obviously office-work is superior."
Bjartr 2y ago
In general people struggle to consider how others' experiences might differ from their own.
- cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
  Which is why it’s just as absurd to say “remote work is superior”. Just don’t try saying that to anyone here.
  - devin 2y ago

mberning 2y ago

People brazenly defy the RTO requests at my company. I suppose management could start turning the screws on people, but I have a feeling enough people are still willing to quit to make that impractical.

arghnoname 2y ago
Where I work, they mandated RTO three days a week. It was largely ignored. Eventually they started checking badge-in access and strictly enforced the mandate. There was a lot of grumbling about people quitting, but anecdotally I didn't notice much uptick in turnover at all. It's very hard to tell what will really make people quit. If the labor market hadn't softened a bit I'm sure we'd have seen more, but my guess is the disgruntled people weren't able to get full WFH without a salary decrease larger than they wanted to tolerate.

backtoyoujim 2y ago

There is no reason to count them as defeated. They are just properly informed.

wyldfire 2y ago

I still opt to go into the office two/three days a week. It's a bummer that nearly none of my old workmates are there anymore. And yet, I can't help to acknowledge that there's no going back. And of course I can see that some things are remarkably convenient when working from home. So even though I miss the way things were, I understand this is here to stay.

notnmeyer 2y ago

> It’s a complete 360 on their stance last year, whoops. who’s reading these before pressing publish in wordpress?

from-nibly 2y ago
But it is a 360 they want people back in office just with different words.

throwiforgtnlzy 2y ago

FYI: Meta is de-facto insisting on RTO and not offering a remote option for new employees. This trend has nothing to do with productivity and is all about the egos of control-freak managers "maintaining control" over employees in a way that wastes employees' time and money and harms the company's reputation.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
disgruntledphd2 2y ago
Meta has always, always always sucked at remote. The culture just doesn't support it. I worked from an office many timezones away from my team for a long time and it was incredibly difficult to be productive.

grugagag 2y ago

Where I currently work we have only office work. I wouldnt mind it if it wasn’t for my manager who loves the sound of his own voice and who doesn’t give us peace to finish the damn work, always interrupting... In my current situation hybrid would literally enable me to work.

deterministic 2y ago
Vote with your feet. Find a job that is WFH flexible.

runcibleai 2y ago

The best part about hybrid work and, even more so, fully remote work is the benefit to the business’s productivity. The ability to lay off or replace employees without ever meeting them in person allows for rapid adjustments to the work force and faster replacement of low performers. Better yet, replacing employees with AI solutions is much easier and more convenient without worrying about a physical element. The APIs for the AI based workers have effectively been established already. I think it’s very brave of employees to recognize the writing on the wall and help make themselves more easily replaceable.

latenightcoding 2y ago

Or they just outsource jobs to cheaper markets.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

kkfx 2y ago

Ehm, no thanks. REMOTE work YES, hybrid no. Hybrid, short workweeks etc are made as kind of cadeau to keep people in cities, witch is at all illogical and unsustainable. People in cities in the modern time means just service slaves who live spending the 100% they earn in services, as human puppet of some large puppeteer.

deterministic 2y ago

I would never accept a job without a flexible WFH policy. Unless there is literally no other choice. I am not the only one. So companies that are not flexible will be less competitive in the job market.

deterministic 2y ago

“Research has echoed that nearly half of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated, and 29% of companies enforcing office returns are struggling with recruitment.” Excellent! Vote with your feet people. That’s the only thing CEO’s will respect. I will only send my CV to a non-WFH company if there is literally no other choice available to me.