1403
The back-to-office backfire: Companies ending WFH perks lose out on top talent, who view flexible work as equivalent to an 8% raise (www.businessinsider.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
156 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/1125686

Archived version: https://archive.ph/vL1mC
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230806071111/https://www.businessinsider.com/employees-work-from-home-benefits-as-good-as-raise-2023-8

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 58 points 3 years ago (8 children)

The push has nothing to do with anything but getting money back into real estate. The majority of wealthy people's money is tied up in either oil or real estate. Billion dollar office buildings going unused is unexplainable to the oligarchy. And I don't use the word Oligarchy lightly. Combined with less oil being used moving people around, and you have the most powerful people in the western world yelling at business executives to get their workers back in the office or they'll be unable to barrow money from the 0.0001% small companies don't have a lot of debt from the Oligarchy so they don't have to listen to them. But if you know anything, wealthy people don't like it when the poors don't filter their money upwards so this fight is long from over.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 3 years ago

    It's pressure from real estate and also managers who do nothing but hover and stare. So multiple sides.

    The only people I feel bad for are restaurant/coffee shop workers who definitely aren't getting nearly as much money

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    It's not like the land wouldn't be viable for high end housing if the corps could push for rezoning. It doesn't have to stay only office space.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago

    Conversion would cost billions for most of those buildings. And many of those areas can't support a population increase on the level of hundreds of thousands of people. It's do able but these people are not willing to do anything that improves humanity.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    If Zoom is trying to get people back into offices, it may not be a real estate issue.

    After all, are you going to argue that companies that are more than happy to outsource and offshore work overseas and sell off industrial assets are suddenly going to care about keeping their 4-year leases?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Zoom is beholden to the same investors trying to force everyone back to the office. They are likely required to use office space owned by one of their investors... That or poor leadership that hasn't adapted to the new environment

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    Unless I'm invested in commercial real estate, why would I, as an investor, want to pay for commercial real estate?

    What makes commercial real estate so precious compared to other capital investments?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent