this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
367 points (96.2% liked)
Technology
59257 readers
2536 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Those assholes should have never pushed the shit in the first place. Giving people the freedom to work from home and still live their life at the same time, then trying to snatch it away and force a return to the office, is clearly going to cause some serious push back. But these fucks were more worried about justifying their expensive office leases, than actually listening to and respecting their employees. A lot of those shit companies got what they deserved, empty offices, weakened workforce, and less overall productivity. Good job assholes.
Working from home is a benefit that is worth money. People are willing to get paid less for the benefit of working from home all else equal. Effectively, if you got to work from home, you got a raise. Forcing people to come back to the office after allowing working from home is like giving a raise and then taking it back. I agree that this is shitty and sucks.
However, when you negotiated your pay it was for a particular job with certain benefits. Complaining about your company not giving you a benefit that wasn't initially part of your hiring negotiation is basically asking for a raise that they aren't obligated to provide.
Edit: I guess this isn't a popular opinion. I felt I was contributing to a conversation that seemed a little one sided by offering an alternative look at it. From an economic perspective there's nothing wrong about what I've said. I don't agree that it's a nice or even ethical thing to do, but the backlash (against companies that push for RTO) seems overly dramatic to me.
The way you keep employees and build a strong team is by giving them things you aren’t obligated to provide.
Honestly, I'm playing devil's advocate here. I love working from home and feel that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks in almost all ways. I agree with your sentiment, but without a good understanding of what companies are giving away and whether they can afford it is a big part of why back to office was hurried along.
HR has to basically rewrite the book on everything after such a big shake-up in the culture of employment. New calculations for salaries, new requirements for liability, new hurdles for IT, infrastructure, and security. These are all costs to companies because the culture shifted. Working from home was mandatory for a short time, but it wasn't obvious that companies could make it all work without time to sort out how to best do it.
Yeah the problem is there would never be any reason for companies to even try to make working from home work unless some life or death event like COVID forced them to.
There was never going to be an easy transition for them. It was either nothing or against their will.
They weren't obligated to provide it, no. The local Taco Bell never did (essential).
But once given (out of necessity), it becomes baseline. It is now the basis of comparison and part of the competition for talent. As many CEOs are finding out.
Well, employees aren't obligated to not resign either.
Yeah, that's how employment works.
Doing the best work in the best place shouldn't be considered a benefit given to you. It's a benefit alright but mutually so.