• rjthyen@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Can anyone explain to me why companies are pushing RTO? Simply to justify some management positions? Or justify the big buildings they built? To me work from home would have so many advantages for a company and could actually be problematic for some employees. Not only can they save some costs on office space but it opens up their talent pool in a way that could lower wages. They could find someone living in low cost of living middle of nowhere that would do a job for 60k that someone in an expensive city couldn’t justify doing for less than 120k.

    • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 days ago

      Its not all. I have found that companies that did not own much real estate have embraced wfh big time and have wound down any contracts they had. Ones stuck with offices they own or maybe long term contracts seem to but I doubt its going to be a good long term call. The only possible usage it might have is to encourage people to quit so you can reduce the workforce without lay offs but that is a crazy strategy as you are losing at best random folks and at worst the best you have.

      • rjthyen@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        I overlooked reducing workforce as a possibility. I’m not in the corporate world at all so I have no actual insight on anything. I’ve just been confused by something I’d consider a win-win being done away with by a lot of companies.

        • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          yeah everyone is confused with that. Many back to office scenarios have the people sitting in the office video conferencing all day because many of the folks they work with are not at the local office anyway.

          • futatorius@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            And they’re in panopticon bull-pen offices where it’s impossible to hear yourself because the people next to you are also shouting on Teams.

            That’s very much my situation. 3/4 of my staff are from contracting firms based elsewhere. So regardless of where I work, most of my meetings are via video conferencing.

    • Num10ck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      traditional middle management simply doesnt need to exist of you’re not baby sitting in person. everything else they can do could be AI handled or outsourced. except maybe training up and assessing for promotions. get used to training yourselves and self promotions by job hopping.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        traditional middle management simply doesnt need to exist of you’re not baby sitting in person

        I strongly disagree with that. Properly used, middle managers bring a lot. But I would say that, if a manager requires their staff to be on-site in order to manage them, they’re crap managers who should consider a career transition to frying fast food or gutting fish. They’re typically the ones who judge performance by perceived effort and how well the employee kisses ass, and their main focus is managing upwards by sucking up to their bosses. With remote workers, you need an effective way of assessing results or you’re hosed. I’ve been running remote squads since the 1980s, and for the most part, it’s only a problem if you’re an ineffective manager.