3 ms·

Leaving is likely the policy aim. Especially as it avoids the legal risk, paperwork and expense of making mainly older people redundant.

• red-iron-pine 3y ago
  the goal may be to push out the old people but they're not going to be chasing promotion the way the Gen Z folks will. paradoxically, the cat is out of the bag for Gen Z, and remote is seen as a given for them. it's a way to freeze the pay of the quiet-quitter remote types. older (as in nearish to retirement) workers will accept what they have while remote until their out. the mid-level folks in their late 20-40s will be most impacted, and I suspect the qualified ones will split instead of being frozen. that may be the goal, but it's also going to push out a crop of otherwise qualified folks that would be major drivers of future initiatives. like, a future director (currently manager) is going to accept this, sit on it for 3 years, and then jump to another org that will tolerate their remoteness. there is a "prove your serious" angle by forcing them into the office, but I suspect that's only going to get mediocre talent who can't negotiate elsewhere for better bennies. or else "true believers" which generally mean suckers, in the Ribbonfarm-Clueless-Losers-Psychopaths sense.