this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
395 points (95.8% liked)

Technology

58143 readers
5014 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Bosses mean it this time: Return to the office or get a new job! — As office occupancy rates stagnate, employers are giving up on perks and turning to threats::undefined

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Tar_alcaran@lemmy.world 169 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

worker: Gets new job

Employer: Shockedpikachu.jpg

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 98 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, companies that are sticking to optional office attendance are going to snap up the best employees. Look for innovation coming from them.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.fmhy.net 87 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This exactly.
A year or two back there was an article about companies trying to return to office- the CEO of some upstart engineering company had a quote like 'every time one of our competitors announces return to office we kick our recruitment into overdrive. We get all the best people that way'.

The companies that push return to office aren't going to keep their most productive and intelligent workers. They're going to keep the ones who can't find anything better.

It's really kind of funny... this is a combination of short-sighted management who think that being able to physically see their employees working somehow makes them more productive, and real estate- lot of dollars invested in commercial real estate and CEOs don't want to admit their flashy new HQ in Silicon Valley was wasted money.

[–] errer@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is why big business and the government want a “mild” recession so badly…unemployment is below 4% right now so employees have the upper hand in a lot of things (wages, union negotiations, working from home). Push the unemployment back to 8% or so and big business is hoping the workers lose most of their leverage on these issues.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.fmhy.net 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wish I could say you're wrong and that's tinfoil hat paranoid... but sadly maybe not.

Right now there's a resurgence of the workers rights and unionization movement, and low unemployment helps push that. Businesses need their employees more than the employees need their employers and the smart employers are skimming the cream of the crop.

I don't think federal government gives a crap but local governments in business districts are pushing return to office as hard as everyone. They see their (way overvalued) commercial office districts sitting empty, and every worker that doesn't commute is a worker not riding the metro / buying Starbucks / buying a paper / otherwise stimulating the downtown economy.

Smarter cities are starting to realize that their downtown property values are a fucking bubble that is not sustainable, and they're exploring turning office space into desperately needed apartments. But that takes time and isn't easy and it involves hosing a lot of commercial real estate developers and their investors who invested on absurd property values.

Fact is though- real estate (especially in downtown districts) is a bubble that's long due to be popped. There's no valid reasons humans have to cluster together like that, the country's more than big enough to spread people out and not have people paying through the nose for shitty apartments.

[–] Angry_Maple@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Regarding the unionizing, for me, a big push towards it was seeing what's happening in many companies without one. A good union can help in so many ways. I've seen the writing on the wall with some situations that have happened over the last 5 to 10 years. Bad companies are trying to remove a lot of worker protections, and it feels like we really need to remind them that they aren't invulnerable.

My union for example, has some of the best employment lawyers in the country, and we don't have to pay on the spot if we need one. Previously, fighting a wrongful dismissal over unsafe working conditions would have taken time and money that many of us don't have. Now, we know we won't be screwed.

I would argue that a good company should want a union. They protect and guide both "sides", and if they're doing everything right, a union really shouldn't be a hassle for a company to deal with.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WidowsFavoriteSon@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Of course Biden wants a recession now, that looks sooo good on the campaign trail.

/s

[–] artair@pawb.social 74 points 1 year ago (2 children)

My partner's employer recently tried this. He works for a mental health agency. That mental health agency has issues with compensation, recruiting, and retention. Yet the CEO insisted that everyone come back, despite the fact that productivity has improved with remote work. In fact, a lot of their patients prefer telehealth.

"Take a title demotion, come back into the office, or quit. Pick one."

The mass exodus has been astounding. There's no chance they'll be able to fill in the gaps left by senior clinicians. Demand for psychologists is sky high right now, and just about every other employer pays more and allows telework.

The patients will be the real victims of this attempt at a "power play."

[–] kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Take a title demotion, come back into the office, or quit. Pick one."

"No, I think I'll keep working from home until you fire me despite you dramatically altering my working requirements."

[–] ArgentRaven@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

They just disabled my VPN access and demanded I come back to the office. I had to quit at that point. I suppose they could've fired me for job abandonment eventually, though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MyNameIsIgglePiggle@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Please keep us updated on this situation

[–] Rooty@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (14 children)

At this point businesses have two options:

  • Bite the bullet, terminate lease agreements and pay the fines associated, then advertise yourself as a full remote company and attract global talent.
  • Be penny wise and pound foolish, stomp your feet, slowly hemmorage the best employees until you're left with people whose only talent is playing office politics.

We'll see how this plays out in the long run, it wouldn't be out of character for the owner class to start needling their pet politicians to devalue currency even more to put those pesky workers in their place.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] expected_crayon@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s funny how at least American employers act like we’re not at full employment. While the market isn’t as good for employees as it was about a year ago, the employees still have more leverage than the employers.

[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It’s not quite that simple. The job market is pretty wonky right now. Around 180,000 tech workers got laid off at the beginning of the year (including myself) and even in high-level somewhat niche roles, I see job postings that have 300-1200 applicants.

[–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We posted for a support team member. Got over 200 applications. Many were programmers. Some quite senior. This is in Australia.

[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

From certain perspectives it’s very hard to feel like it’s a job-seeker’s market. Programmers clamoring for a support role is a sign of people desperate to get a paycheck.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

With all those laid off people searching at the same time it's also very hard for anyone with pretty much zero work experience on their resume trying to break into the workforce.

[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

100%. A ton of people are being forced to downvalue their experience just to start getting a paycheck again. It’s gotta be brutal for the entry-level set.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] selfcleaningtaint@lemmy.sdf.org 48 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm lucky my role is remote and even though it's not required I spend a day fortnight in my office as we still have staff who have to be on site.

Head of our company is pushing to get rid of our offices in Australian capital cities as they were just for administrative roles and client meetings.

The staff who have roles that need to be on site have been given extra training to be able to do other roles with remote options.

Maybe we are fortunate to not care about work/city culture here and making work more difficult to keep cities "bustling" seems like a real cunt of a move aimed at the worker.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

I highly doubt the push is due to anything but the profitability of commercial real-estate, hospitality, probably councils etc, and a range of other businesses that benefit from millions of daily customers coming to their locales — all the businesses built around a high level of centralization, and refuse to adapt to the changing world.

Micromanagement and extroverts who love the social routine are the minority being used to distract us from the scared capital.

[–] johnthedoe@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

Same. The only reason I took the role I’m in is for fully remote. If that’s gone I’m out. That being said I still go in once in a while just to get out of the house. I’ll try and go in more in the summer to save on turning on the aircon at home. If companies are reasonable so will employees.

[–] EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For such "genius" "business leaders" they sure can't understand the concept of supply and demand

They just want to make people they view as lesser than them suffer.

Suffer on the way to work, suffer finding a parking spot, suffer getting into the building, suffer working, suffer getting out of the building, suffer getting back to the car, suffer on the way home

Over and over your asshole bosses are getting off on your suffering

[–] Rambi@lemm.ee 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Well yeah, but also I think it's just that the same people who own these businesses that people work for, and the friends and family of those people, also own lots of property much of which is office space which they don't want to lose money. That and all of the businesses (e.g. Starbucks) and the property they're in that partially make money from people on their way to work. And if you want to go even deeper, if people are WFM then they may not have to eat out as often, might not need to pay for a lot of things as often if they have more time.

So much money can be lost and rich people all know each other and have class consciousness, I think that's why we're seeing so much anti-WFM propaganda

[–] primal_buddhist@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

This is the key, and it cuts in different ways and needs planning strategy.

If we don't go into town, then the businesses associated with going to work in town are in trouble, so coffee, lunch, snack, may as well get a book, after work drinks and then late food. All have less customers. Some of whom are themselves!

So a spiral of decline, less retail jobs in town, less secondary and tertiary employment "in town".

Theoretically we can now spend some of that money locally IF the local has the supply and this is where political strategy is needed to replan where we sleep as always where we spend our casual cash. And in many cases these dormitories are not well planned for that.

So unfortunately we need to wait out this next phase of resistance in order to build political consensus for zoning and planning for more sustainable local hubs.

[–] cantrips@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What's WFM? I usually see WFH.

[–] Rambi@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Huh, yeah I meant WFH lmao. No idea why my brain decided the acronym should be WFM instead haha.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 42 points 1 year ago (1 children)

return to office or get a new job

I've chosen the latter twice and have been thrilled with the results every time

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You mean you switched to a job you thought would remain remote and they too were like, "Okay, play times over. Back to the office."?

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep. Also turned out they owned the parking garage next to the office and were counting on us as a revenue stream

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Things like this should be outright illegal.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Feck off. Ill give the bastards 2 days in office, no more. I’ll sacrifice salary for personal time. As it stands, I’m considering applying for a 2nd full time remote job. And I’ll code away 90% of that work.

[–] FrostyCaveman@lemm.ee 34 points 1 year ago

Do that and I’ll find another one just to spite you.

[–] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

Headline seems weasel-wordy.

Numerically vague expressions (for example, "some people", "experts", "many", "evidence suggests")

I.e., are most bosses doing this? 50%? 20%?

[–] RidcullyTheBrown@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago
[–] AshMan85@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bold strategy cotton let's see how it plays out for them.

[–] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can tell you the headline the bossman will have in the coming months.

No one wants to work anymore

But, lets me honest, that's basically the free square in bingo now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Executives: But we have a 20 year lease on this enormous office building! You guys have to come back! Besides, we can't breathe down your necks or waste 6 hours of your day (plus commute) if you're at home actually being productive! Wait, why am I telling the truth? I never tell the truth. Not too my wife, my mistress, my kids, my parents, or the IRS, much less you parasites! Don't you know how much more money I could have if I didn't have to pay you ungrateful peasants?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MonkCanatella@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

“The pendulum has shifted from employees having all the power,” wow how could that have possibly happened

[–] qwertyWarlord@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

And they'll win, eventually. They'll take the L, replace employees over time and suffer for it but in the end they will win and we'll all be back in office

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Is anyone actually living this out there or is this all just bullshit?

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago

My old boss started pushing RTO heavy. He was already a stereotypical failure of a manager, doling out useless kudos when we want.fucking.training.budget.keith, and chasing that sales-dick limelight all the time.

He's not my boss anymore. On a day off I came in, dropped off my shit, lobbed a note into my file in HR, and peaced out.

My new company gave me one extra week of holiday but my pay cut was 3% for the first year. 100% WFH and it's in the union agreement. Can't work from outside the country in case it's secret-squirrel (data sovereignty).

Near V5H postal.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›