6 ms·

Seems like the goal of RTO is working

• occz 2y ago
  Exactly. Layoff without having to pay severance? What a bargain.
• me_me_me 2y ago
  i am not sure if the goal is to loose senior staff. They are usually most valuable to the company.
  • p0seidon 2y ago
    In my experience, the problem is that junior, extremely motivated people, who are often the ones doing the impactful work, cannot thrive and learn from experienced people in WFH environments.
    • asimovfan 2y ago
      do those junior extremely motivated people who are doing the impactful work want to work in the office?
      • p0seidon 2y ago
        Well, not everybody, but it's quite powerful to be around people who actually care in person about how you are doing. It's a beautiful dynamic. It depends on the actual company and situation, but yes, there are people who find it quite depressing to get a MacBook sent to their home address and never experience a great office. I'm not saying it's the only way. I can understand WFH is extremely practical for most people with kids. At the same time, it deprives people starting their careers of fast learning experiences. There are plenty of examples of extremely successful remote-only companies that attract young talent, but there are also examples of the opposite.
        • p_l 2y ago
          Now if only there was actually a great office and not a shitty open space...
          • p0seidon 2y ago
            Agree.
      • dagw 2y ago
        do those junior extremely motivated people who are doing the impactful work want to work in the office? Much more so than the senior people I find. Post Covid, as soon as we were first allowed back to the office if we wanted, I observed that the under 30s were the first to return.
        • htrp 2y ago
          No life commitments and a social network in a new community built around their officemates
    • vetinari 2y ago
      Not sure whether intentional or not, but I read that as "those people with ambitions have no backs to ride on".
      • p0seidon 2y ago
        I rather meant to teach them stuff... It's not for everybody, but a substantial part of engineers, I would think, really enjoy teaching and passing on their experience and know-how. That's not only limited to engineers, of course.
    • blitzar 2y ago
      In my experience, junior, extremely motivated people, who are often the ones doing the impactful work, can thrive and learn in any environments. The structures and shackles are for the mid employees.
      • p0seidon 2y ago
        I would actually agree with that, notwithstanding what I have written. I still think the learning curve can be steeper in that case and actually more fun.
    • high_na_euv 2y ago
      >cannot thrive and learn from experienced people in WFH environments. Because?
      • p0seidon 2y ago
        I think it is common, especially early in a career, that it is more important to approach people proactively. There is a barrier to asking for help. It can be quite challenging if you are new and maybe a bit shy (not uncommon, as we know, in the STEM field) to get the most out of it. Just sharing my experience, not saying it's impossible.
  • bfrog 2y ago
    Bean counter types claim these people cost too much!!
  • sumtechguy 2y ago
    That is not how layoffs worked in companies I have worked at. The goal is to reduce 'head count' and in the real world cost. They rank you by pay and tenure. Then decided if they can do without you. It almost rarely has anything to do with how good you are. But more 'my project would not finish in x time if y was gone'. Then they decide to keep the whole project or not and if they get rid of the project that means maybe 15 other people can go too. After a particular level in many large companies you become a cost number instead of a person. What you are working on may seem important. At least it is to you. But in the grand scheme of things most of what we work on is ethereal. I have been in this industry coming up on 30 years now. Very little of what I have ever worked on is even in production anymore. Thousands and thousands of lines of code, just gone, of no use anymore. I just hope whatever I did work on can help me with the next few thousand.
  • fmajid 2y ago
    Perhaps they prefer docile to senior.
  • btbuildem 2y ago
    It really depends on the company. Where I work, a lot of the senior employees tend to be actively hindering innovation and progress, more concerned about having a say and being seen doing their little rituals. It's fascinating to watch them sideline and destroy project after a project. The best I understand it's because anything new and competitive puts their little wheelhouses in a bad light, so it cannot stand.
• coldtea 2y ago
  Whether companie they used it as a ploy to get people to voluntarily quit, or not, it hasn't really worked for them. These are now stuck with the desperate second rate employees who are forced to RTO because they're not good enough to find a job elsewhere, and the ones who love RTO because they're all for office politics and wasting time at meetings and the water cooler. Stupid shit like this is how companies commit suicide, and smarter companies end up eating their lunch. From another comment here: "My company recently spun out of a much larger corporation and has just implemented a 4-day week policy after nearly 5 years of flexible work (ie. come in when you need to be in to do your job). Since then, my team has halved and the senior leadership at the site have almost all left to competitors except for a couple of people closing on retirement anyway. We're struggling to get the bare minimum done and have to ZBB almost everything that isn't core work. (...) They've had to cut a couple of things off the product roadmaps that have been worked on for years simply because we now don't have the staff to drive them to completion. Just madness"
  • jjav 2y ago
    > These are now stuck with the desperate second rate employees who are forced to RTO because they're not good enough to find a job elsewhere This assumes that RTO is the one and only factor top people consider. Which for most people isn't true. There are usually dozens of factors that go into the equation of should I quit. My current company is doing a small RTO (2 days), which I don't love, but also don't mind that much. Everything else being equal I'd rather not do that. But I have awesome coworkers, very good management, many growth opportunities and the company has a nice product. I'm not giving all that up to gamble on a different employer who might turn out to be toxic despite all the promises during the hiring process (BTDT).
  • varjag 2y ago
    There is no evidence that WFH preference reflects on employee value or productivity in any way.
  • consp 2y ago
    > These are now stuck with the desperate second rate employees who are forced to RTO because they're not good enough to find a job elsewhere It's always that. My opinion is it is more likely is that most people hate job seeking and don't want to switch unless truly forced. So you end up with people quitting and dissatisfied workers. I have nothing to back this up but the majority of people I suspect don't think of themselves in the "bad" group and thus this argument is mute by default (as it assumes the employees know they cannot or will not find a job).
• zeroCalories 2y ago
  Our second line team lead is being threatened to RTO. No one is saying it, but I feel the excitement from other TLs about the upcoming promotion opportunity. Hope the TL didn't underestimate the difficulty in getting a job!
• JKCalhoun 2y ago
  Just re-watching the classic "Always Be Closing" scene from Glengarry Glenn Ross and thought, perhaps like RTO, what a great way to show your talent the door. If I'm sitting there thinking I could more or less work anywhere else, I would be the first one to take a hike, go find employment elsewhere, say to myself, "I don't need to put up with this shit."