this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2023
126 points (97.7% liked)

Not The Onion

11849 readers
973 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca 48 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I don't get it. Companies want to make money. Study after study proves that WFH generates greater productivity on average and, therefore, more output and more money. Surely, it must be costing more to maintain massive office buildings and overpay useless middle managers to lord over employees?

[–] dmonzel@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

They're still paying to rent/lease, and to maintain the empty office buildings. They're trying to get their money's worth, even if it ends up costing them in the long run.

[–] donut4ever@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My company just sold about 90% of their buildings. Then consolidated whoever left that likes to work in office (I don't know why anyone would lol) in one building. They're still only occupying 8% of that one building.

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago

My company is letting our lease expire & getting a smaller place for equipment.

[–] krayj@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They can't be dumb enough to fall for the sunk cost fallacy can they? I think it must be something else.

[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Control. It's all about control, because something something traditions something something profit.

[–] Chetzemoka@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Yep, standard issue throwing good money after bad instead of just taking the L now and moving forward

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

being devils advocate here, they probably are blinded by the reports of workers who are inefficient at remote work. I want remote work as much as the next guy, I am deeply passionate for it; but I can see why management teams would want inhouse. Easier to monitor and ~~punish~~ mentor the under-performers if you are physically present in the building. The higher ups don't generally care about stats, they only care about what issues are being brought to their plate/causing more work for them... and the underperforming workers are a pretty big additional work for them.

[–] spiderman@ani.social 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

mentor the under-performers if you are physically present in the building

how the mentoring would be different if the under-performers are in the building or they work from home?

[–] Benjaben@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Just anecdotally, I noticed that more junior team members were FAR more willing to ask me for help with something after we were pulled back to the office. That can be mitigated with thoughtful collaboration efforts when operating fully remote, but I didn't even know they needed help until they could just pop by my desk and ask for something. And they started doing it frequently.

But to be clear, I greatly prefer full remote for myself and again, thoughtful approaches to team management can solve or mitigate a bunch of the remote work downsides, probably.

[–] sadreality@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

What is this mentoring y'all talking about lol

Is it in the thread now with us?

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

It's good for companies that rent office space, but not for companies that own those offices. This is corporate landlords throwing a shitfit, and they have a lot more money and own more news outlets than companies who rent.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 points 1 year ago

There have been further studies that show that work from home may not be as productive. The science doesn't seem to be as settled.

You also may have issues with coordination where some face time would be good on an as-needed basis. It may not need to be full time in the office, but I can see wanting some in person meetings.

[–] eltimablo@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

They get huge tax breaks for the bodies those buildings were supposed to bring to their cities. Now that nobody's in them, those cities aren't getting the extra tax money from the office workers anymore, so they're pressuring companies to bring workers back to the office. No giant, money-thirsty corporation wants to maintain a huge, expensive office building, but they're stuck doing so unless they want to sell it at a loss and risk pissing off the owners of whatever palms they had to grease to get the deal in the first place.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

And if your employees live in a lower COL area, you can literally pay them less.

[–] MD756@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Further proves just how disconnected these people are

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] TIEPilot@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Cue the "Company Script" you can only spend at the company store...

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 1 year ago

They're soooo close to understanding.

Having people stay at this hotel eliminates the commute.

Remote work eliminates the commute.

Now, if the company would simply get with it, they could save money both by not having this asinine hotel idea and by not having all the office space.

[–] ciberConas3000@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Don't live where you work. Everyone is going to start feeling so much more annoying.

[–] skellener@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

It’s over Google. Let people work wherever they want. If the work is getting done, there’s nothing to complain about.

[–] mayo@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I just read "Remote: Office Not Required (2013)" and I'd recommend it for anyone who is having these talks at work. It's a quick read and I found my copy at the library. We have to advocate for your interests. I will take an in person meeting over a video call any day of the week, but that in no way means that you can't get the same work done virtually as you can in person and it is significantly less pleasant spending life in an office than having to do a video call zero or more times a day.

It is clear that remote work works just fine. I think the problem runs deeper than productivity or social needs and is more about some unknown insecurities and values that workers and managers have about work. Traditionally work is something that happens above all else. We orchestrate our lives around work. Remote work changes this and that's a huge deal. IMO that's why it's hard to debate this topic using facts around productivity or mental health or even company success, because it's a philosophical debate about how we live.

[–] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

so they're going to let me work at work and then sleep at work? where do I sign up????

[–] Four_lights77@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey google, I heard people like money. Maybe if you pay willing employees a reasonable amount to commute, they’ll be willing to come in. Otherwise, shut it.

[–] _sideffect@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I'd take a slight decrease to work fully remote

[–] Aldursil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

"We want to foster a collaborative work environment."

/s

[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

He's doing British politician thumbs!