The Rush To Return to the Office Is Stalling (msn.com)
- Reference: 0179460566
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/09/22/149228/the-rush-to-return-to-the-office-is-stalling
- Source link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/human-resources/the-rush-to-return-to-the-office-is-stalling/ar-AA1N1Kpa
The New York Times ordered opinion and newsroom staff to four days weekly starting November. Microsoft mandates three days beginning February for Pacific Northwest employees. Paramount and NBCUniversal gave staff ultimatums: commit to five and four days respectively or take buyouts. Amazon faced desk and parking shortages after its full-time mandate, temporarily backpedaling in Houston and New York. Nearly half of senior managers would accept pay cuts to work remotely, a BambooHR survey of 1,500 salaried employees found.
[1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/human-resources/the-rush-to-return-to-the-office-is-stalling/ar-AA1N1Kpa
There's stealth layoffs (Score:3)
And there so they don't have to pay severance and unemployment.
So yeah of course if you want one of the people they're trying to lay off they don't really care if you come in the office.
This is the kind of nonsense you get when you refuse to pass laws to protect workers' rights and you refuse to organize to protect those rights. It's going to get a lot worse.
Re: (Score:2)
They are indeed stealth layoffs, but they are extra stupid layoffs. The people who will quit over RTO mandates aren't the ones you want to quit. They are the most in-demand positions and the hardest to replace because those are the people who can easily go out and get something else. Yeah, you save a bit on severance, but you end up spending a lot more than that down the line on recruiting costs and increased salaries to replace key positions that have left.
Re: (Score:1)
If you're someone that they can't afford to lose, they will make an exception for you. No high value employees are getting let go over RTO mandates, period.
The Rush? (Score:2)
When was covid over?
Re: (Score:2)
> the current variants are very mild. If you're a chain smoker, elderly, morbidly obese, weak of constitution etc. sure get your shot if you're worried.
> But for most of us it's "the sniffles"
> Not a reason to stay away from work. If you're that close to death the next bad "common cold" or flu not covered by vaccine will do you in.
> Getting my flu shot next month, like every year. Had shingles series too. But covid? Pfffftttt
Tell that to the people who are suffering the effects of "long Covid", some of which last a LONG time and can be quite debilitating. Both my wife and I came down with fairly mild cases - even though we're vaccinated - and had mild-but-persistent tiredness and 'brain fog" for the following 18 months or so. And we're lucky - lots of people are way worse off.
I've never had long-term effects from the flu - even cases bad enough that I thought I might need to be hospitalized. So in response to your "Pfffftttt" I
Re: (Score:1)
When they release Omicron.
If only teleportation was real... (Score:2, Offtopic)
I've got no problem with working from the office. In fact, I prefer it. Proper work/home separation, no cabin fever and no need to allocate an extra room/space for an office at home. As long as you get an allocated desk and decent coffee at the office, that is.
It's the commute that I have an issue with. Hours of your life wasted in traffic that no one pays for and that you'll never get back.
Perhaps we should ditch this silly AI bubble and start working on teleportation instead. It would surely be a better u
Re: (Score:2)
Hire a chauffeur service. Do an hour of "increasingly less remote" work during your commute in the back of a home office minivan, 6 hours of office work, and another hour of "increasingly more remote" work on the way home.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why I prefer flexible/hybrid arrangements. I don't think I could handle 100% work from home with no office. I like actually being able to see people face to face. But forcing people to commute 5 days a week is a colossal waste of everyone's time. A 2-3 day soft mandate (with reasonable exceptions made) is a good compromise. You can see people in-person, but you can also work from home when you need/want to. People with special needs can be accommodated with more or less WFH.
Re: (Score:2)
We don't actually need teleportation. "Simple" hyperloop would do the trick (but it would most likely cost too much).
Cheaper alternative would be to have apartments, companies, schools, shops etc. in the same big building, so you could just walk to where ever you need to go.
Remote for me but not for thee (Score:3)
"Nearly half of senior managers would accept pay cuts to work remotely, a BambooHR survey of 1,500 salaried employees found."
And how many of that 50% would support the same for their own workers? Certainly not 100%, and most likely a whole lot less. As though the convenience of doing laundry, making a quick run to the bank or grocery store and picking up kids is something that only they should have. Remote for me nut not for thee.
Re:Remote for me but not for thee (Score:4, Insightful)
I did accept a pay cut to work remotely, but once you factor in the commuting costs it wasn't actually a cut at all.
Re: (Score:2)
> "Nearly half of senior managers would accept pay cuts to work remotely, a BambooHR survey of 1,500 salaried employees found."
The key in the survey question is how much money one is wiling to give up. 1 or 2 percent, sure we'd all be willing to give up an insignificant portion of our compensation. 50%? Well, I imagine very few would be willing to give up that much.
These quixotic thoughts are just that. Most of those who are willing to say that they would accept a pay cut or quit or move out of an area not only wouldn't but wouldn't actually seriously consider it. Just like those surveys a few years ago saying that the majorit