7 ms·

JPMorgan CEO: "I don't care how many people sign that f—ing [WFH] Petition"

54 points by Zaheer 2y ago

CurtHagenlocher 2y ago
Jamie Dimon earned $39 million in 2024.
- Alupis 2y ago
  Ok, and?
  - oniony 2y ago
    That's probably why he's happy to work in the office seven days a week.
    - apwell23 2y ago
      i would work for the taliban if they paid me that much
      - whynotminot 2y ago
        Ok I laughed so hard at this. But yeah, really tired of CEOs criticizing their workforces when they make as much money as they do. Pay me your salary and I’ll live in the office.
        Alupis 2y ago
        We have FAANG'ers bringing in hundreds of thousands and still complaining about RTO. We never had WFH before - it was an experiment. For many businesses, the experiment didn't work. If you don't want RTO, find some other business that allows WFH. It's pretty much that simple...
        whynotminot 2y ago
        Where’s that data that it didn’t work? No one can show me this. It works fine.
        Alupis 2y ago
        The data is all of the companies saying it doesn't work and calling for RTO. Does anything really think they're doing this for funsies? Does anyone comprehend how expensive it is to operate office buildings? We think of these mega-corps as inhuman, penny pinching, stingy monoliths - yet we then believe they're blowing tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars a month on office space that's unnecessary. The math ain't mathin'..
        whynotminot 2y ago
        You think these ego-maniac CEOs are entirely rational machines? They’re just as into vibes as the corner shop trying to sell you spirit crystals. Show me one CEO with a building and I’ll show you one who doesn’t have one. ThE MaTh AiNt MaThInG
        olyjohn 2y ago
        https://apnews.com/article/jpmorgan-chase-bank-earnings-profit-38c5a832fdb4503d8483d6115b4a8ee1 https://apnews.com/article/jpmorgan-chase-bank-earnings-prof... Speaking of "math that ain't mathin'" what about the fact that their best year ever was a year while they had a shitload of remote workers?
        mneil 2y ago
        If it didn't work how did JP Morgan bring home record profits in 2024? And in 2023, and in 2022, and in 2021? Nothing is failing. Bro likes the office. He thinks everyone should too.
        whynotminot 2y ago
        It’s insane to me how all these companies have profit numbers up and to the right for half a decade under hybrid policies, but then are like “you know what will make us do even better? Pissing off the whole work force all at once for no good reason.” It’s just comically stupid.
    - placardloop 2y ago
      My guess is that it probably has more to do with the fact that Dimon probably has an entire floor all to himself with all kinds of customized artwork, couches, lounge chairs etc, with personal assistants, likely a private elevator, maybe even a private chef or personal catering everyday etc. He doesn’t have to deal with fighting for conference rooms, loud office mates, a shitty cubicle, etc. Dimon’s office is likely bigger and nicer than most of his employees homes, so of course he doesn’t mind working from there.
    - mitthrowaway2 2y ago
      Does he? I wonder what his attendance record is.
      - oniony 2y ago
        I doubt it, but he apparently claimed he does.
- silverquiet 2y ago
  That's such a strange number to me these days. If I got paid that much in a year, I'd instantly retire, and yet it's still essentially nothing compared to $1 billion, which Elon Musk probably makes or loses in an average day (and has lost much more than that over the past few months due to the drop in TSLA) and has no actual effect on his lifestyle.
  - deadbabe 2y ago
    Why retire? You work just a few more years and you’ll have $100million+
    - jemmyw 2y ago
      because you can do everything you want to do for the rest of your life for $30million and don't need to continue working for 100?
      - deadbabe 2y ago
        No you can’t? You can blow $20 million on a house that then costs $500k a year in maintenance, and that’s just the beginning. And then you might say well just buy a regular house?? Why bother going through the struggle of becoming a CEO just to work for one year as CEO then go live in a regular house? Does not make sense at all.
        disambiguation 2y ago
        Warren buffet would like a word. https://www.fancypantshomes.com/celebrity-homes/warren-buffett-house-in-omaha/ https://www.fancypantshomes.com/celebrity-homes/warren-buffe... > For six decades, Buffett has lived in the same residence in the central Dundee neighborhood of Omaha, Neb. The “Oracle of Omaha” purchased the home for $31,500, which would be worth about $250,000 in today’s dollars. > As it turns out, the house was the “third-best investment” he’s ever made, Buffett wrote in a letter to his shareholders in 2010.
        marssaxman 2y ago
- legitster 2y ago
  That's not actually a huge number in the grand scheme of things. That's entertainer/pro athlete money. Especially considering he runs one of the most powerful companies in the country and his net worth is $2.6 billion.
  - drawkward 2y ago
    >That's not actually a huge number in the grand scheme of things. Your comment seems to lack any awareness of the distribution of annual income.
    - legitster 2y ago
      No, I'm aware. It's just $39 million a year is not actually a salacious number. It's actually a semi-reasonable salary given the size and performance of the company in question. If only compensation for the 0.1% stopped there. But unfortunately, the distribution of income pretty closely follows the Pareto principle.
      - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
        Your claim requires the belief that $39M is a reasonable compensation rate for anything at all. I dispute that. However, I also acknowledge that I don't have a solid proposal to deal with how to distribute vast revenue/profits within organizations that successfully raise them. Mostly I think it indicates they should be charging customers/clients less, but I'm not a proponent of any sort of simplistic "maximimum salary" rules.
      - drawkward 2y ago
        I find it morally repugnant that anyone makes $39 million in a year.
      - happytoexplain 2y ago
        I find it hyper salacious. Driving a boat twice as big doesn't make you inherently deserving of double the pay, just as investing double the money doesn't make you inherently deserving of double the return. And the oft-cited accountability of leadership over large machines does not come even an additional 5% closer to validating that salary. I am of course speaking from a human context, which I realize is not the context normally used when talking about these things. You're utterly right: It's not salacious in the capitalistic context from which we have yet to find a viable escape.
duxup 2y ago
His call. I will say this: >I’ve been working seven days a goddamn week since COVID, and I come in, and—where is everybody else? I remember when my employer was acquired from another company. Executives were on the 4th floor. After the acquisition they were gone and the 4th floor was open. I went up and found that the offices were palatial, private bathrooms, they had a bar, a lounge area... let alone all the personal assistants to do things for them. They had good parking spaces, lunch brought in for them, and so on. I had a cube with a wall that they wouldn't fix, no window (I was about half a dozen cubes from a window in the middle of a room), no natural light, my cube was along a busy cube hallway where everyone looked into my cube as they walked down the hall. So yeah it's different going in as an IC rather than executive, comparing them is hilariously narrow sighted. Having said that after they left, the 4th floor was the best place to go to the bathroom. So I got that for a little while.
- trilobyte 2y ago
  This is fascinating to me, having been at a few companies with market caps north of $50B in the tech space. The senior exec's office space aren't fundamentally different from anyone else's. I wonder if it's an old-money vs. new-money industry thing.
  - duxup 2y ago
    This was an older company. It was one of those "IBM satellite companies" (that's what I called them before they used that term for something else). It did business with a lot of IBM customers providing services and hardware that IBM didn't choose to do so, but did so with their blessing and cooperation. Very much an old company style.
- BoorishBears 2y ago
  Expensify's CEO ran an experiment opening up an office to the public with a free open bar and daily champagne saberings and still couldn't get people to show up more than once I don't think amenities make or break WFH for the average person, the commute and the fact you're not home period probably rank a lot higher
- 2y ago
turpie 2y ago
This is really interesting. On one hand there's no going back to exactly what we had pre-covid, on the other hand there's a big power imbalance here. Something tells me in the end most of us will have to RTO.
4d4m 2y ago
Probably also doesn't care about: -attrition -smartest talent leaving -salary to output ratio -innovation Mask is off, watch your best people go work for Chime.
- apwell23 2y ago
  Incumbents with no competition don't care about any of that stuff
  - 4d4m 2y ago
    totally agree
- scarab92 2y ago
  Working from home is significantly less productive for the average worker. I can see how it might make sense to accept that you’ll lose some of your best people, in order to significantly increase the average.
  - pllbnk 2y ago
    No, it's not. My statement is exactly as well-sourced as yours.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Dimon does not care because he isn’t affected and because JP Morgan Chase is too big to fail. He’s rich enough that he can own multiple residences, commute on a helicopter, and all that. And to him, this job is his whole life and he probably does not care much about sacrificing other things. Employees don’t have the same situation. But the real issue is that this company is immune to competition and consequences from a large number of employees fighting all this. All the large banks are propped up by our political, regulatory, and financial systems. You can’t start a new competitive and sustainable bank easily. Why would he listen when reduced competition and too big to fail protect him and the company from consequences?
- freejazz 2y ago
  What does any of that have to do with their employees?
apwell23 2y ago
lol what is this petition about? look like corporate version of strongly worded letter
totaldude87 2y ago
The way i see it as a intricate dance between layoffs and attrition. In a way both are forced.
delichon 2y ago
I've worked for an all remote company for over a decade. Dimon is largely correct. There is a huge amount of abuse and we pay a high cost for it. It's not that remote interaction is worse in terms of creativity and productivity, I don't think it is. It's about the discipline to spend the time on task when nobody is watching. It takes a rare character to keep that up over years, and I'm not one of them. (And being free to say that is why I don't put my name on this account.)
- dkjaudyeqooe 2y ago
  You can also waste time in an office. It doesn't make that much difference, ultimately. What matters are deadlines and productivity. If you can be productive in less time than others then good luck to you. Wages are 'flattened' between people employed at the same level so why shouldn't the more productive workers benefit in some way.
- rodgerd 2y ago
  The only formal study that I've seen shows that there is 15% more fraud in remote financial services work. Do you have any studies pointing to this being wrong?
  - tomlue 2y ago
    Where is the study? Isn't 15% huge?
- tomlue 2y ago
  I think it ends up being a sort of an evolved trait. Somebody in a full remote company doesn't show up for work one day, they notice that the next day nobody says anything, nobody noticed, or nobody cared. Over time, this leads to disconnection from work.
- zem 2y ago
  at the least i was super productive during the pandemic, as was my entire team at work. commuting really saps my productivity.
- 2y ago
stuff4ben 2y ago
In other news, old man yells at cloud. I don't care how many days he fucking works in the office. Seriously though, if he's working 7 days a week in the office and can't get a hold of someone, I hope he's planning on paying them his salary. Hell, I'd come in the office 7 days a week for the multi millions of dollars he's worth. I'd do it for a year, retire, and live happily ever after.
bitcharmer 2y ago
[dead]
Alupis 2y ago
When you are an employee, you are literally selling your labor, knowledge and experience in exchange for money and services (healthcare, etc). Think of yourself as your own for-profit business - a business of you. Just like selling anything - if the terms don't satisfy you, then don't sell. Find someone else willing to accept your terms of sale. You have the power folks... not the employers. Many have been led to believe the power-dynamic is reversed, and that the employer holds all of the power. That's absurdly untrue. You have the labor, knowledge and experience (aka talent). Be your own advocate.
- nickpeterson 2y ago
  This is kind of true, but it depends on risking your financial stability in the short term. Better to get a bunch of IT workers on board and then strike. What are they going to do, not have IT? they’d be out of business in a month. Good luck hiring scabs when they don’t have the passwords…
  - Alupis 2y ago
    > Better to get a bunch of IT workers on board and then strike Why would you do that? That is by definition, a hostile work environment. Find a place where you don't need to pull a bunch of shenanigans to get what you want. Especially in the IT field, you have a massive amount of options. People tend to only think about FAANG and friends, but there's millions of SMB's out there that need IT of all levels, pay well and offer generous benefits.
    - nickpeterson 2y ago
      I think a hostile work environment might be a fun outcome of ‘return to office’ mandates.
    - ranger_danger 2y ago
      > Why would you do that? I think they were offering that as a solution to the difficulty of finding new equivalent jobs quickly. While it's true people can "just quit"... there's usually more factors that make that very difficult, like having enough money saved up to last until you get a new job, and actually finding a replacement job that pays enough to let them keep a similar quality of life as they have now.
legitster 2y ago
> “Don’t give me this s–t that work-from-home Friday works,” he said. “I call a lot of people on Fridays, and there’s not a goddamn person you can get a hold of.” I mean, yeah, if you not picking up a phone call from Jamie freaking Dimon during working hours, that does seem messed up. I also don't suspect these are low level people he's trying to get ahold of. One of the things I've learned about WFH is that the problems are not coming from individual contributor productivity - it's that a lot of the problems actually come from managers and executives. Either they lack the understanding of projects that are not in front of them, or they check out completely when needed.
dpweb 2y ago
Been WFH for many years, but I can understand why some companies prefer (demand) in office. Sorry, but unless its written into employment law, no-one has a "right" to it. I would think this could be a perk that companies could use to get an advantage in hiring. Although, maybe those who it appeals to on the whole may be lower performers? Would love to see some real data on this.
akaike 2y ago
He earns so much money, of course he loves to work and doesn’t give a damn about people who don’t even earn a fraction of his salary. He also seems to forget that people who actually work for him bring these high profits for the company. How about being thankful for having smart employees who help you to keep your business so profitable? If I were to get paid as much as he does, I wouldn’t even leave the office; I would sleep there.
- sandspar 2y ago
  You're on HackerNews so I assume you work in software. Your income is top 0.1% globally. But that doesn't solve your problems, does it?
  - akaike 2y ago
    You’re correct :) I think I understand what you’re trying to say, and I agree, but I still don’t understand his arguments. It’s not like his company is not profitable, or the employees work not well enough
  - pllbnk 2y ago
    This is a very abused fact. When you are comparing the incomes, you are competing in your region, not globally and then your income goes from top 0.1% to top 10%. And then you realize that you won't be able to buy that house or that you don't have as much flexibility to change your employer. If you want to feel like top 0.1%, then you probably have to move to some forgotten place in Africa (most large cities do not count due to income inequality and corruption) but then your standard of living with your top 0.1% income is even worse. Statistics is too easy to abuse without critical thinking.
rvz 2y ago
Yeah, why would he care? In fact they'll just lay you off and displace you with AI. Won't be surprised to see JPM participating in the WEF 2030 jobs of the future report and being part of those companies that would love to reduce the majority of their 200k+ employees with AI. First it was Meta x2 then Microsoft, Salesforce, Klarna, and now JPM. More to come and as predicted in. [0] Are you now getting what "AGI" really is? [1] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42490692 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42490692 [1] https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2025/ https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-repo...
dkjaudyeqooe 2y ago
> JPMorgan has 14,000 open positions. That sort of speaks for itself.
- Gothmog69 2y ago
  What does it say?
drawkward 2y ago
What a small, small man.
proc0 2y ago
I think WFH is another point of leverage for employees. If something doesn't work out with the job it's easier to deal with it on your own terms, whether that's taking more breaks or silent quitting. This leverage is exactly what employers are afraid of and want to rollback completely. Companies treat employees like just another resource, so I personally think it's fair when employees try to game the system back. If you can work less and get away with it, I think that's fair because companies do the exact same in the opposite direction. If it were up to companies they would select for indentured servitude, if not slavery, because that maximizes profits, and that's the bottom line. Companies even admit as much, and they're going to fight to remove as much leverage from employees as possible.
sparrish 2y ago
RTO is just a cheaper way of reducing the workforce. The 'star' talent will sign contracts that say they can work from home 1-3 days a week and as soon as they make enough seats empty, WFH privileges for the rank and file will come back as well.
nunez 2y ago
I'll play devil's advocate because I have the karma to burn. I don't remember Dimon ever committing to making work-from-home permanent. From my brief time working with/interviewing for JPMChase, I never got the impression that they would ever do this. They were always very attached to their offices. If this is true, then I think it's totally within his right to call it back. It would be a whole other thing if he pulled a Sundar and said "wfh really works! wfh forever" in 2021 when vaccines were being rolled out only to cry "but my efficiency" in 2025 and roll it all back. I also don't think Chase is going to lose much of their top talent over this. Most of the super highly paid/highly-talented people in tech that work there live near their central offices anyway, and the folks that worked for the business never really had a choice since finance is very tightly coupled to a few geos (NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, Houston for O&G, London, Hong Kong).
kirykl 2y ago
Labor is the biggest fixed cost. Employees are liabilities to the owners
OutOfHere 2y ago
100% RTO (return to office) is coming back later this year with a vengeance, and it's going to mean a lot of layoffs without severance. It's what they're getting at.
hnburnsy 2y ago
Well yeah JPM is spending three bills on its new headquarters at 270 Park Avenue and wants to fill it with 14,000 employees.
faanganarchist 2y ago
just go work elsewhere at another company until the loss of top tier talent causes one of these companies to reconsider their position. no one stays as ceo forever. CEOs can be dumb and have their head in the sand but they are the CEO so no sense in punching a wall. they don't care. The majority of workers won't work more than 3 days a week in office 10 years from now
sincerecook 2y ago
[dead]

54 points by Zaheer 2y ago

CurtHagenlocher 2y ago

Jamie Dimon earned $39 million in 2024.

Alupis 2y ago
Ok, and?
- oniony 2y ago
  That's probably why he's happy to work in the office seven days a week.
  - apwell23 2y ago
    i would work for the taliban if they paid me that much
    - whynotminot 2y ago
      Ok I laughed so hard at this. But yeah, really tired of CEOs criticizing their workforces when they make as much money as they do. Pay me your salary and I’ll live in the office.
      - Alupis 2y ago
        We have FAANG'ers bringing in hundreds of thousands and still complaining about RTO. We never had WFH before - it was an experiment. For many businesses, the experiment didn't work. If you don't want RTO, find some other business that allows WFH. It's pretty much that simple...
        whynotminot 2y ago
        Where’s that data that it didn’t work? No one can show me this. It works fine.
        Alupis 2y ago
        The data is all of the companies saying it doesn't work and calling for RTO. Does anything really think they're doing this for funsies? Does anyone comprehend how expensive it is to operate office buildings? We think of these mega-corps as inhuman, penny pinching, stingy monoliths - yet we then believe they're blowing tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars a month on office space that's unnecessary. The math ain't mathin'..
        whynotminot 2y ago
        You think these ego-maniac CEOs are entirely rational machines? They’re just as into vibes as the corner shop trying to sell you spirit crystals. Show me one CEO with a building and I’ll show you one who doesn’t have one. ThE MaTh AiNt MaThInG
        olyjohn 2y ago
        https://apnews.com/article/jpmorgan-chase-bank-earnings-profit-38c5a832fdb4503d8483d6115b4a8ee1 https://apnews.com/article/jpmorgan-chase-bank-earnings-prof... Speaking of "math that ain't mathin'" what about the fact that their best year ever was a year while they had a shitload of remote workers?
        mneil 2y ago
        If it didn't work how did JP Morgan bring home record profits in 2024? And in 2023, and in 2022, and in 2021? Nothing is failing. Bro likes the office. He thinks everyone should too.
        whynotminot 2y ago
        It’s insane to me how all these companies have profit numbers up and to the right for half a decade under hybrid policies, but then are like “you know what will make us do even better? Pissing off the whole work force all at once for no good reason.” It’s just comically stupid.
  - placardloop 2y ago
    My guess is that it probably has more to do with the fact that Dimon probably has an entire floor all to himself with all kinds of customized artwork, couches, lounge chairs etc, with personal assistants, likely a private elevator, maybe even a private chef or personal catering everyday etc. He doesn’t have to deal with fighting for conference rooms, loud office mates, a shitty cubicle, etc. Dimon’s office is likely bigger and nicer than most of his employees homes, so of course he doesn’t mind working from there.
  - mitthrowaway2 2y ago
    Does he? I wonder what his attendance record is.
    - oniony 2y ago
      I doubt it, but he apparently claimed he does.
silverquiet 2y ago
That's such a strange number to me these days. If I got paid that much in a year, I'd instantly retire, and yet it's still essentially nothing compared to $1 billion, which Elon Musk probably makes or loses in an average day (and has lost much more than that over the past few months due to the drop in TSLA) and has no actual effect on his lifestyle.
- deadbabe 2y ago
  Why retire? You work just a few more years and you’ll have $100million+
  - jemmyw 2y ago
    because you can do everything you want to do for the rest of your life for $30million and don't need to continue working for 100?
    - deadbabe 2y ago
      No you can’t? You can blow $20 million on a house that then costs $500k a year in maintenance, and that’s just the beginning. And then you might say well just buy a regular house?? Why bother going through the struggle of becoming a CEO just to work for one year as CEO then go live in a regular house? Does not make sense at all.
      - disambiguation 2y ago
        Warren buffet would like a word. https://www.fancypantshomes.com/celebrity-homes/warren-buffett-house-in-omaha/ https://www.fancypantshomes.com/celebrity-homes/warren-buffe... > For six decades, Buffett has lived in the same residence in the central Dundee neighborhood of Omaha, Neb. The “Oracle of Omaha” purchased the home for $31,500, which would be worth about $250,000 in today’s dollars. > As it turns out, the house was the “third-best investment” he’s ever made, Buffett wrote in a letter to his shareholders in 2010.
      - marssaxman 2y ago
legitster 2y ago
That's not actually a huge number in the grand scheme of things. That's entertainer/pro athlete money. Especially considering he runs one of the most powerful companies in the country and his net worth is $2.6 billion.
- drawkward 2y ago
  >That's not actually a huge number in the grand scheme of things. Your comment seems to lack any awareness of the distribution of annual income.
  - legitster 2y ago
    No, I'm aware. It's just $39 million a year is not actually a salacious number. It's actually a semi-reasonable salary given the size and performance of the company in question. If only compensation for the 0.1% stopped there. But unfortunately, the distribution of income pretty closely follows the Pareto principle.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
      Your claim requires the belief that $39M is a reasonable compensation rate for anything at all. I dispute that. However, I also acknowledge that I don't have a solid proposal to deal with how to distribute vast revenue/profits within organizations that successfully raise them. Mostly I think it indicates they should be charging customers/clients less, but I'm not a proponent of any sort of simplistic "maximimum salary" rules.
    - drawkward 2y ago
      I find it morally repugnant that anyone makes $39 million in a year.
    - happytoexplain 2y ago
      I find it hyper salacious. Driving a boat twice as big doesn't make you inherently deserving of double the pay, just as investing double the money doesn't make you inherently deserving of double the return. And the oft-cited accountability of leadership over large machines does not come even an additional 5% closer to validating that salary. I am of course speaking from a human context, which I realize is not the context normally used when talking about these things. You're utterly right: It's not salacious in the capitalistic context from which we have yet to find a viable escape.

duxup 2y ago

His call. I will say this: >I’ve been working seven days a goddamn week since COVID, and I come in, and—where is everybody else? I remember when my employer was acquired from another company. Executives were on the 4th floor. After the acquisition they were gone and the 4th floor was open. I went up and found that the offices were palatial, private bathrooms, they had a bar, a lounge area... let alone all the personal assistants to do things for them. They had good parking spaces, lunch brought in for them, and so on. I had a cube with a wall that they wouldn't fix, no window (I was about half a dozen cubes from a window in the middle of a room), no natural light, my cube was along a busy cube hallway where everyone looked into my cube as they walked down the hall. So yeah it's different going in as an IC rather than executive, comparing them is hilariously narrow sighted. Having said that after they left, the 4th floor was the best place to go to the bathroom. So I got that for a little while.

trilobyte 2y ago
This is fascinating to me, having been at a few companies with market caps north of $50B in the tech space. The senior exec's office space aren't fundamentally different from anyone else's. I wonder if it's an old-money vs. new-money industry thing.
- duxup 2y ago
  This was an older company. It was one of those "IBM satellite companies" (that's what I called them before they used that term for something else). It did business with a lot of IBM customers providing services and hardware that IBM didn't choose to do so, but did so with their blessing and cooperation. Very much an old company style.
BoorishBears 2y ago
Expensify's CEO ran an experiment opening up an office to the public with a free open bar and daily champagne saberings and still couldn't get people to show up more than once I don't think amenities make or break WFH for the average person, the commute and the fact you're not home period probably rank a lot higher
2y ago

turpie 2y ago

This is really interesting. On one hand there's no going back to exactly what we had pre-covid, on the other hand there's a big power imbalance here. Something tells me in the end most of us will have to RTO.

4d4m 2y ago

Probably also doesn't care about: -attrition -smartest talent leaving -salary to output ratio -innovation Mask is off, watch your best people go work for Chime.

apwell23 2y ago
Incumbents with no competition don't care about any of that stuff
- 4d4m 2y ago
  totally agree
scarab92 2y ago
Working from home is significantly less productive for the average worker. I can see how it might make sense to accept that you’ll lose some of your best people, in order to significantly increase the average.
- pllbnk 2y ago
  No, it's not. My statement is exactly as well-sourced as yours.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Dimon does not care because he isn’t affected and because JP Morgan Chase is too big to fail. He’s rich enough that he can own multiple residences, commute on a helicopter, and all that. And to him, this job is his whole life and he probably does not care much about sacrificing other things. Employees don’t have the same situation. But the real issue is that this company is immune to competition and consequences from a large number of employees fighting all this. All the large banks are propped up by our political, regulatory, and financial systems. You can’t start a new competitive and sustainable bank easily. Why would he listen when reduced competition and too big to fail protect him and the company from consequences?

freejazz 2y ago
What does any of that have to do with their employees?

apwell23 2y ago

lol what is this petition about? look like corporate version of strongly worded letter

totaldude87 2y ago

The way i see it as a intricate dance between layoffs and attrition. In a way both are forced.

delichon 2y ago

I've worked for an all remote company for over a decade. Dimon is largely correct. There is a huge amount of abuse and we pay a high cost for it. It's not that remote interaction is worse in terms of creativity and productivity, I don't think it is. It's about the discipline to spend the time on task when nobody is watching. It takes a rare character to keep that up over years, and I'm not one of them. (And being free to say that is why I don't put my name on this account.)

dkjaudyeqooe 2y ago
You can also waste time in an office. It doesn't make that much difference, ultimately. What matters are deadlines and productivity. If you can be productive in less time than others then good luck to you. Wages are 'flattened' between people employed at the same level so why shouldn't the more productive workers benefit in some way.
rodgerd 2y ago
The only formal study that I've seen shows that there is 15% more fraud in remote financial services work. Do you have any studies pointing to this being wrong?
- tomlue 2y ago
  Where is the study? Isn't 15% huge?
tomlue 2y ago
I think it ends up being a sort of an evolved trait. Somebody in a full remote company doesn't show up for work one day, they notice that the next day nobody says anything, nobody noticed, or nobody cared. Over time, this leads to disconnection from work.
zem 2y ago
at the least i was super productive during the pandemic, as was my entire team at work. commuting really saps my productivity.
2y ago

stuff4ben 2y ago

In other news, old man yells at cloud. I don't care how many days he fucking works in the office. Seriously though, if he's working 7 days a week in the office and can't get a hold of someone, I hope he's planning on paying them his salary. Hell, I'd come in the office 7 days a week for the multi millions of dollars he's worth. I'd do it for a year, retire, and live happily ever after.

bitcharmer 2y ago

[dead]

Alupis 2y ago

When you are an employee, you are literally selling your labor, knowledge and experience in exchange for money and services (healthcare, etc). Think of yourself as your own for-profit business - a business of you. Just like selling anything - if the terms don't satisfy you, then don't sell. Find someone else willing to accept your terms of sale. You have the power folks... not the employers. Many have been led to believe the power-dynamic is reversed, and that the employer holds all of the power. That's absurdly untrue. You have the labor, knowledge and experience (aka talent). Be your own advocate.

nickpeterson 2y ago
This is kind of true, but it depends on risking your financial stability in the short term. Better to get a bunch of IT workers on board and then strike. What are they going to do, not have IT? they’d be out of business in a month. Good luck hiring scabs when they don’t have the passwords…
- Alupis 2y ago
  > Better to get a bunch of IT workers on board and then strike Why would you do that? That is by definition, a hostile work environment. Find a place where you don't need to pull a bunch of shenanigans to get what you want. Especially in the IT field, you have a massive amount of options. People tend to only think about FAANG and friends, but there's millions of SMB's out there that need IT of all levels, pay well and offer generous benefits.
  - nickpeterson 2y ago
    I think a hostile work environment might be a fun outcome of ‘return to office’ mandates.
  - ranger_danger 2y ago
    > Why would you do that? I think they were offering that as a solution to the difficulty of finding new equivalent jobs quickly. While it's true people can "just quit"... there's usually more factors that make that very difficult, like having enough money saved up to last until you get a new job, and actually finding a replacement job that pays enough to let them keep a similar quality of life as they have now.

legitster 2y ago

> “Don’t give me this s–t that work-from-home Friday works,” he said. “I call a lot of people on Fridays, and there’s not a goddamn person you can get a hold of.” I mean, yeah, if you not picking up a phone call from Jamie freaking Dimon during working hours, that does seem messed up. I also don't suspect these are low level people he's trying to get ahold of. One of the things I've learned about WFH is that the problems are not coming from individual contributor productivity - it's that a lot of the problems actually come from managers and executives. Either they lack the understanding of projects that are not in front of them, or they check out completely when needed.

dpweb 2y ago

Been WFH for many years, but I can understand why some companies prefer (demand) in office. Sorry, but unless its written into employment law, no-one has a "right" to it. I would think this could be a perk that companies could use to get an advantage in hiring. Although, maybe those who it appeals to on the whole may be lower performers? Would love to see some real data on this.

akaike 2y ago

He earns so much money, of course he loves to work and doesn’t give a damn about people who don’t even earn a fraction of his salary. He also seems to forget that people who actually work for him bring these high profits for the company. How about being thankful for having smart employees who help you to keep your business so profitable? If I were to get paid as much as he does, I wouldn’t even leave the office; I would sleep there.

sandspar 2y ago
You're on HackerNews so I assume you work in software. Your income is top 0.1% globally. But that doesn't solve your problems, does it?
- akaike 2y ago
  You’re correct :) I think I understand what you’re trying to say, and I agree, but I still don’t understand his arguments. It’s not like his company is not profitable, or the employees work not well enough
- pllbnk 2y ago
  This is a very abused fact. When you are comparing the incomes, you are competing in your region, not globally and then your income goes from top 0.1% to top 10%. And then you realize that you won't be able to buy that house or that you don't have as much flexibility to change your employer. If you want to feel like top 0.1%, then you probably have to move to some forgotten place in Africa (most large cities do not count due to income inequality and corruption) but then your standard of living with your top 0.1% income is even worse. Statistics is too easy to abuse without critical thinking.

rvz 2y ago

Yeah, why would he care? In fact they'll just lay you off and displace you with AI. Won't be surprised to see JPM participating in the WEF 2030 jobs of the future report and being part of those companies that would love to reduce the majority of their 200k+ employees with AI. First it was Meta x2 then Microsoft, Salesforce, Klarna, and now JPM. More to come and as predicted in. [0] Are you now getting what "AGI" really is? [1] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42490692 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42490692 [1] https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2025/ https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-repo...

dkjaudyeqooe 2y ago

> JPMorgan has 14,000 open positions. That sort of speaks for itself.

Gothmog69 2y ago
What does it say?

drawkward 2y ago

What a small, small man.

proc0 2y ago

I think WFH is another point of leverage for employees. If something doesn't work out with the job it's easier to deal with it on your own terms, whether that's taking more breaks or silent quitting. This leverage is exactly what employers are afraid of and want to rollback completely. Companies treat employees like just another resource, so I personally think it's fair when employees try to game the system back. If you can work less and get away with it, I think that's fair because companies do the exact same in the opposite direction. If it were up to companies they would select for indentured servitude, if not slavery, because that maximizes profits, and that's the bottom line. Companies even admit as much, and they're going to fight to remove as much leverage from employees as possible.

sparrish 2y ago

RTO is just a cheaper way of reducing the workforce. The 'star' talent will sign contracts that say they can work from home 1-3 days a week and as soon as they make enough seats empty, WFH privileges for the rank and file will come back as well.

nunez 2y ago

I'll play devil's advocate because I have the karma to burn. I don't remember Dimon ever committing to making work-from-home permanent. From my brief time working with/interviewing for JPMChase, I never got the impression that they would ever do this. They were always very attached to their offices. If this is true, then I think it's totally within his right to call it back. It would be a whole other thing if he pulled a Sundar and said "wfh really works! wfh forever" in 2021 when vaccines were being rolled out only to cry "but my efficiency" in 2025 and roll it all back. I also don't think Chase is going to lose much of their top talent over this. Most of the super highly paid/highly-talented people in tech that work there live near their central offices anyway, and the folks that worked for the business never really had a choice since finance is very tightly coupled to a few geos (NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, Houston for O&G, London, Hong Kong).

kirykl 2y ago

Labor is the biggest fixed cost. Employees are liabilities to the owners

OutOfHere 2y ago

100% RTO (return to office) is coming back later this year with a vengeance, and it's going to mean a lot of layoffs without severance. It's what they're getting at.

hnburnsy 2y ago

Well yeah JPM is spending three bills on its new headquarters at 270 Park Avenue and wants to fill it with 14,000 employees.

faanganarchist 2y ago

just go work elsewhere at another company until the loss of top tier talent causes one of these companies to reconsider their position. no one stays as ceo forever. CEOs can be dumb and have their head in the sand but they are the CEO so no sense in punching a wall. they don't care. The majority of workers won't work more than 3 days a week in office 10 years from now

sincerecook 2y ago

[dead]