this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
1398 points (99.2% liked)

World News

32048 readers
1160 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 143 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Honestly. It's about more than money.

If your boss says you must return to the office, after 3 years of WFH. At best, it shows that they do not value or respect you, and are just making an arbitrary decision in a bid to sell more stocks.

At worst, there might be some insidious reason to make employees physically available. Maybe they are getting a kickback somehow, or selling data that they can only get when you are there, or maybe they are just horny and want to seduce you sexually.

A remote worker is often happier, more productive, and cost less to employ even if they are paid the same as an on-site worker. Offices do not have to provide parking, seating, HVAC, power, wifi, and will even have less physical security vectors.

If some people prefer to go into an office, then it should be optional. Not a hybrid model where they force you to come a certain number of days a week.

At the end of the day unless you are on some kind of probation or evaluation period WFH should be the default when ever possible.

[–] [email protected] 80 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Control is another thing. I can't tell you the amount of execs I've heard say "they're losing control of their company" or "I don't feel I have the same control over my people". It's crazy that they think that. What do they think the past 3 years have been when they've gotten record profits "oh, but our profits would be even better if we had people back in the office". Sadly no amount of data will override the entrepreneurial "it could always be more" what if that they throw out.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm working in IT and as my last team lead hasn't had any technical knowledge in my area, and he didn't had to for his job, he wouldn't even be able to control what I'm doing, ...

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

He couldn't control whether you're doing your work properly, but he can control that you "pretend* to be controlled by him.

It's never about making you a better worker, it's just about the illusion of control.

Think about it, when was the last time you had an interaction with your superior that actually had anything to do with your actual job? It's all just a huge charade.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah, but there will also come a tone when the technical lead is being managed by someone with less technical experience than them.

At that point, it is less about telling them what to do and more about making sure they stay productive on tasks and projects that are important to the company.

The last part is important because a lot of the work management does at that level is supposed to be catching all the shit from other departments and setting goals, which does not look like technical work.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)