this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
457 points (95.2% liked)

Work Reform

9958 readers
1192 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] yote_zip@pawb.social 150 points 1 year ago (7 children)

The main thing I don't get is that the top talent at your company are the ones that can easily find another job instead of putting up with your BS. The people that aren't competent enough to leave on a whim are the ones you're going to be keeping.

[–] frickineh@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago

Yep. One of my friends works in sales and has worked from home for 3 1/2 of her 4 years with her current company. She's in the top 10 performers out of 250-ish people in her division and her company is going to lose her if they stick to the demand that people return to the office. She's waiting to see what happens, but she's already had recruiters put out feelers once the tentative plan got out, and there are other top performers ready to jump ship too.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Buddy of mine straight up laughed at his boss when they told him to return to office, and strangely it has never come up again.

When you know the value you bring, it's hard to muscle you around.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Have you ever had a middle manager above you who constantly has to interfere to prove their own necessity?

This is similar. It's not always about the amount/quality of your work or even about the money; sometimes it's just about control. Those who don't actually do much (again, managers and CEOs, etc) want desperate people they can rule over.

[–] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Even better, the competent ones ask for more money

Seriously the actions of all these big companies shows they don't really give a shit about retaining top talent. Unfortunately, for big name companies, they'll always have an inflow of talented new grads who are willing to give up their dignity to get their name on their resumes, and it's cheaper (in the short term, which is all shareholders care about) to churn and burn them then to invest in long term talent

[–] meyotch@slrpnk.net 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We are all freely interchangeable widgets in their calculations. They don’t have time to consider that some people might be better than the job than others.

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

Because profit is in the tail.

They're betting that some will leave, most will stay, and even if the some that leave are the best, most of their money is made by the vast majority of people behind them.

They're looking at trends, not individuals. Individuals don't matter to them.

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

They don’t have time to consider that some people might be better than the job than others.

I'm way better than the job!

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I put up with hellish demands and a nightmare commute because I thought working at Important Company was a privilege. And to so degree it was. But I don’t put up with bullshit anymore and that was a lesson I had to learn on my own, the hard way.

[–] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

yup - early on in my career, working at a specific FAANG company was my life's greatest ambition, now I don't think there's any amount of money they might feasibly offer me that would make me work there lol - Once you have enough income to be comfortable, work life balance is worth more than anything

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jonne@infosec.pub 12 points 1 year ago

They don't see workers as people, they're a commodity like everything else.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 84 points 1 year ago (6 children)

That’s part of it. Another part is middle management can’t function without seeing you. Finally, it’s not worth it to a company to maintain a lease on a building if nobody works there and it’s not easy getting out of those leases.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago (4 children)

What doesn't make sense is why they're not firing the useless middle managers.

[–] glad_cat@lemmy.sdf.org 32 points 1 year ago

Where I work, it’s the middle managers who make a list of useless people. They obviously won’t put their own names on the list.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Even a structure that is only a house of cards still depends on the cards of the middle tiers to hold itself up.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MisterD@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Then middle management is either incompetent or like micro manage.

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 year ago (3 children)

There are so many fucking managers and administrators in modern organizations.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bouh@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

The lease is already paid, or the money is planned to be paid. You can't recover this money anyway. But you can still save on energy and cleaning.

Getting out of the lease is as easy as not renewing it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] starbreaker@kbin.social 50 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not going to quit or return to the cubefarm. These coprophagous donkey molesters can fucking well fire me and pay unemployment.

[–] kemsat@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

TIL the word “coprophagous.”

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

For the lazy

A coprophagous organism is one that eats the faeces/excrement of another animal. Many insect species are coprophagous and often specialise in the consumption of faeces from large herbivores.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ArdMacha@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago (6 children)

It isn't, it's all the office space they own, if people are allowed to keep working from home the retail office market will crash pretty hard.

[–] Darkhoof@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

It can be both.

[–] MechanicalJester@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago

Ever see how much real estate companies like Google has? If all those bay area companies said fuckit let's be remote it would crash the market and rock the economy.

We should though, if possible.

[–] phx@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Cool. Then we can convert it to housing

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] bouh@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No one cares about retail office market. A market bubble crashing is merely an opportunity to earn money for the others. Capitalism doesn't care about losers.

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago

America only has capitalism for the poor. For the rich, it's socialism. You better believe retail office owners stand to be losers, and they have power to fight.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jmd_akbar@aussie.zone 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Copying my reply from another similar post -

I would lose my control over my minions... Why don't you understand?

Whoops, I meant, my staff can't be monitored...

Whoops, I actually meant, I will lose the one place in life where I can actually throw around my power...

/s

[–] LavaPlanet@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

That's what I was thinking, it essentially makes bosses obsolete and they don't want the system to be deconstructed from the top down, ever. That's toppling capitalism, kinda talk.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 41 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What if I don’t return to the office and also don’t quit?

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then they get to fire you for non-compliance. And you don't get to collect unemployment. Basically the same as quitting for them.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 41 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s not what my employment contract says, last I checked. And those can’t be changed unilaterally.

[–] Zorque@kbin.social 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You've got it better than most, then.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Zorque@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nice, in theory, proving it is the real problem. Meanwhile you're not getting paid and they have an entire fund just for lawyering you into submission.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tym@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Middle manager here: they want you to quit, and me to do your job plus the jobs of the other 3 who just left after you're gone.

[–] soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

What do middle managers do in WFH jobs? Most companies I've worked in have as many "managers" as bottom level employees. It's hilarious

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Still seems to me the idea of "if people don't come back into work the real estate market implodes" is the most convincing.

Commuters vaporizing and countless city blocks losing their purpose will cause huge upheaval in the real estate market.

And turns out a /lot/ of CEOs have a vested interest in keeping the real estate market artificially propped up.

Thus, they try and force people back to work as hard as they can.

It won't last, the big companies that don't give a shit about real estate due to being even bigger in scale will out compete and the international market will absorb most of the workforce.

If you shackle your success to real estate, then you can't compete with international megacorps that saw this coming awhile ago. Prepare to be acquired.

[–] EuroNutellaMan@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

It's like we didn't learn pur lesson in 2008

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UsernameHere@lemmings.world 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Or maybe…

CEO 1: “Our plan to force everyone back to the office isnt working. They’re just quitting”

CEO 2: “Ok new narrative, convince them it was our plan to get them to quit, and keep forcing them to return to office.”

[–] Cheers@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago

Hey who knew that the best way to make money as a company is have very few workers and be an amazing talker that can dupe others into investing into your pile of shit. Oh wait, Holmes, Neuman and Bankman-fried already came up with that business model. The innovation on that model is just don't get caught.

[–] Beldarofremulak@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Whenever they talk about "Business Innovation" this is the crap they are talking about

[–] murmelade@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

Or is this op-ed 3D chess reverse psychology to get you back into the office?

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There's an often overlooked part that you could call the "extrovert factor." There's always plenty of coworkers that thrive in group settings. Some number, maybe most, middle managers are extroverts, and when forced to work the way the average minion does, they suffer. It's why they became middle managers in the first place. Their productivity suffers in isolation too, so when converted into a wage slave, they can't complete with less extroverted people. Unfortunately they're better situated to promote their own success, getting by in people skills while more competent people get screwed.

Extroverts also seem to suffer in productivity during WFH, even if they aren't managers. They are stuck in a situation that hurts their functionality, offsetting the statistics. If they actually broke down WFH productivity by job description, I suspect that the extrovert/introvert factor will be a huge determiner of productivity.

Optional office hours seem the best fix, but the corporate attitude of obsessively monitoring the workers to be sure they're not wasting time and therefore money is another factor that makes these companies want to favor their preconceptions. The confirmation bias kicks in and then we have to listen to them focus on it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›