Earlier in the pandemic many news and magazine organizations would proudly write about how working from home always actually can lead to over working and being too “productive”. I am yet to collect some evidence on it but I think we remember a good amount about this.
Now after a bunch of companies want their remote workers back at the office, every one of those companies are being almost propaganda machines which do not cite sound scientific studies but cite each other and interviews with higher ups in top companies that “remote workers are less productive”. This is further cementing the general public’s opinion on this matter.
And research that shows the opposite is buried deep within any search results.
Have you noticed this? Please share what you have observed. I’m going paranoid about this.
Yup, corporations need to justify owning the big-ass office buildings they bought out, so they’re paying to make their own opinions be reported on over the actual truth. As usual.
It’s not just the corporations renting those offices, it’s the politicians of downtown areas that fear a downturn in tax revenue due to more empty offices and less people getting their daily coffee/lunch/after work drinks.
And of course, if everyone’s working remotely, this means it’s a lot easier to find a better job without even needing to leave the house to interview, which gives employees a better bargaining position (downside is that employers will start looking at employees in lower paying countries as well).
All of this is happening with my company as we speak. I actually did a remote interview today while on my lunch hour. And my current company has just rolled out plans for “clerical help” based out of India. I’m in the U.S.
deleted by creator
The city of Seattle was literally crumbling before most of the major tech giants RTO.
Im not sure Republicans have had much control there in a few decades.
Republicans did a shitty job of planning New York City? When did this happen?
Eh, all those cities are Democrat run. Economically they’re essentially the same.
downside is that employers will start looking at employees in lower paying countries as well).
Tale as old as time
I find it real fascinating how many people are blindsided by the fact that the people who own things that focus on making a profit skew the information they put out to benefit themselves. Did they think they were impartial or something? I mean they claim their neutral they don’t ever show that they’re neutral.
And the proven financial benefit of having people work from home must not be as profitable as corporate real estate, or companies wouldn’t be requiring in-office work again!
It’s because a huge amount of business is centered around made up things for going to work.
Things you need to work in an office: suits, dry cleaning for the suits, dress shoes, a car (because public transportation is woefully inadequate for this reason), gas for the car, maintenance for the car, lunch, daycare, a dog walker, you have less time so you are more likely to eat out for dinner, also more likely to hire maids, you are stuck in a commute and radio is awful, so a music subscription, maybe a new phone, and might have to go out for drinks with the coworkers on the way home.
Staying at home, and much of the country on highly limited income, taught us how much we spend on the “privilege” of work. Everyone is still shocked at the emotional and opportunity cost work had, we’re just starting to realize that most of what it sold to us either isn’t real or isn’t needed.
If people don’t go back to work a sea of businesses will fail.
You missed the most important thing. Real estate investments that aren’t allowed to go down in value, which they would if offices became superfluous. Just imagine how many buildings would become “worthless”/could be used for something else.
Yeah, this is BY FAR the biggest reason. Pretty much all the rich people and most big companies have huge investment in portfolios that contain a lot of commercial office spaces. If we were all allowed to work from home those investments would plummet and all the rich people and big companies would take MASSIVE losses on those investments. Which is why all the media and even companies like Zoom are trying to pull a 180 on working from home.
Zoom forcing employees back to offices still baffles me
The video conferencing software that saved the world during covid and made all the companies survive the lockdown.
I feel like we need to talk about this more. Their whole model is promoting remote experiences and yet they are also forcing folk back to the office. I can’t think of a reason outside of external pressures that would happen.
That is a huge pressure, but it’s less obvious why a company in a business unrelated to real estate would want real estate prices high.
The secret is that companies aren’t in the business of making a good or providing a service, they actually are just giant schemes for raising money for “investments”. For example, airlines don’t make their money off of selling tickets, but through prospecting jet fuel. Most companies aren’t as direct and clear about what their business actually is.
Also the link between real estate and all of jobs isn’t very clear and is very abstract. It’s easy to see the costs and interactions with companies forced by working in an office, it’s difficult to see how a building losing value effects anyone.
In the Wall Street area of Manhattan, some of the biggest buildings are already being converted to apartments. It’s been a trend for a while, because the older buildings are too expensive to rewire for computers/HVAC.
A forward-thinking wealthy person would start buying these buildings at fire-sale prices and converting them to residential buildings.
You have to be very choosey, because most office buildings aren’t easily convertable
I love the “might HAVE to go out for drinks with the coworkers on the way home”. This is my most dreaded fear.
Edit: and clothes/getting ‘ready’ (hair, makeup, underwear, etc.) is double time for women.
Pre-pandemic. Maybe 2005 [?] one of the big American news companies assembles a team of financial experts to study various big companies. Then they deicde to apply all that brain power to an average American family. Husband and wife with three kids, two jobs and two cars. Both have middle class jobs. After running the numbers, the experts told the wife to quit her job. The savings on childcare, running the second car, no fast food dinners, etc. more than made up for the second salary.
Or the husband can. I’ve never been with a man who made more than I do. They just don’t have the drive, and the ones who do are generally insufferable.
If you read what I wrote, the experts looked at all aspects of the couple’s situation. The experts decided that the wife’s job was the one to go.
If you’re having a problem finding dates, maybe you should look at what common factor all your relationships have.
I don’t have a problem finding dates. I don’t want to date. Men aren’t worth the cost, in my experience. But nice attempt, trying to attack me personally to cover up your misogyny and the misogyny of the “experts”" you quote. Such a “surprising” tactic. Too bad for you that I’m quite comfortable in my choice to live relatively male-free.
Tacking the words “expert” and “study” onto misogynistic propaganda doesn’t make it scientifically rigorous. And even though there is still truth in women making less in general, that’s changing. Women need men less and less every year. Thankfully.
You funny.
If you look up the actual article you’ll see it went as I wrote. In that particular case, the wife was earning less, so it made sense for her to give up her job.
Anything you’ve added is on you.
If you’re not dating because ‘men aren’t worth it’ that says more about you than it does about the men.
This is why it costs a lot less than people think, to retire. A lot of the costs of working go away.
I have noticed that working remotely really opened up the job market for me. Instead of being limited to where public transportation can bring me within 45 minutes, I can work for any company within Europe from the comfort of my home office. It makes switching jobs so much easier and I am willing to tolerate much less shit before I quit. That degree of freedom might scare companies. They can’t trap me anymore with the costs of uprooting my life for a better job.
I’ve never worked from home, but it seems to me that even if everything else were kept equal, you just saved an hour and a half commute plus the cost of doing so, every day! When you add in the lower cost of food and healthier diet eating at home and a whole host of other advantages. It’s a huge win! Congrats.
I worked from home for ~6 months full time, my experience was that I will never do it full time again. For me, it was waking up, watch the same four walls for 8 hours, eat dinner, sleep, repeat. Perhaps my office could have been better but because I was working with support and had to be available on the phone, I could not really leave my computer for an extended period of time (except for lunch break).
A lot of people make it out to be heaven, working from home. I really missed having people to talk to. I believe that it would have been a much better experience if I could have worked from home 0-5 days per week as I saw fit. Bad morning? Work from home. Waking up fresh? Go to work. I’m assuming that you can walk or bike to work. Few things are worse than being stuck in traffic or being on a crowed bus/train, or missing the bus with 1 min, having to wait 15 min for the next one, when with the bike I can leave whenever I want.
Conversely, I found out just how many spoons I was using to function interacting with folks on a daily basis and that the strains my extroverted colleagues were talking about without having people were things I’d just lived with and normalized for my entire life because our society forced you to be around people all of the time.
Give me my four walls, pls. I spend every waking hour on a computer anyway, either working or personal, so it’s going to be four walls one way or another.
I think it’s very situational. I’m already a big shut-in. Working full time at home might not be great for my mental health. It’s sad to admit I use work for social contact, but it’s true. If you have good social connections outside of work, great.
All that said, this whole debate is very classist. There are loads of jobs, including mine incidentally, that require physically being there. I mostly haven’t paid attention to this debate because it doesn’t apply to me or the people I know, and probably never will.
The negativity comes almost entirely from two sorts of people
- Rich property owners who are seeing their valuable office buildings plummet in value.
- People who socialize primarily with work-mates and don’t have other groups
To 1, fuck 'em. To 2, eh, maybe find a hobby now that you don’t have to commute 2 hours a day
One of my sups from my old job was recently complaining that people weren’t required to come in more than two days a week and pushing to increase it because the office is lonely without them. She and people like her are the absolute worst. Main character syndrome doesn’t even begin to describe them and I wish nothing but the worst for them in life tbh
That’s not main character syndrome, that’s just sad.
Some extroverts think it’s everyone else’s duty to energize them.
That’s not an extrovert, that’s an energy vampire.
deleted by creator
For sure it is, but I at least feel with have to emphasize with them a little to solve this situation
I say fuck em to 2. I hated those people in the office. They wouldn’t leave me alone. It was irritating.
Can’t agree more.
Yeah its the PR machine in action.
There’s money in real estate. There’s even more in commercial real estate. There’s less money in commercial real estate that’s vacant because people work from home.
It’s not only real estate…cities give incentives to companies that meet a quota of in-office employees since it drives the local economy
Corpo news outlets are spewing out bullshit PR hitpieces to protect their investments on real-estate offices. COVID lockdown got them with their pants down and now are fighting tooth and nail to pull them back up lmao
if you pay attention, a lot of it’s opinion articles from insufferable people
Yep, 100%. They’re fucked too because smaller companies aren’t shying away from remote work. They’ll never kill it now. They reaped the fruit of their shitty investment strategies.
Reminder that Google itself is one of the companies that wants to end remote work so their real estate doesn’t dive in value.
So don’t be surprised about how search results reflect this bias as well.
When you’ve fully digested that, think about who owns the systems that keep capitalism in place.
deleted by creator
Corpos actively trying to get people back to the office so middle management doesn’t feel as useless.
Commutes are a detriment to the worker, but not to the company.
I think it’s not so much about middle management. They implement the policies of the actual decision makers.
I think it’s because the people who actually make these decisions perform their work mostly via face-to-face meetings, handshakes, projecting personal charisma, reading body language, and personal networking. This leads to an overestimation of how much of other jobs depend on time spent in the same room with others.
The executive imagines the meetings they missed, leading to lost opportunities. So they see a loss of productivity.
They don’t appreciate how much easier it was to edit that manual or analyze that data without Joe the human tuba trying to breathe around his phlegm in the cube next door, or without the folks three rows over arguing about which director’s vision of Superman was best.
The executive imagines the meetings they missed, leading to lost opportunities. So they see a loss of productivity.
This is a fantastic point, and one I had not considered.
From this standpoint, the side pushing for return to office really does feel like they’re in the right. I think I would argue that a subset of those folks are still pushing a return for the wrong reasons (e.g. thinking that remote work lowers productivity naturally, not just based on an observation of their own missed meetings or face time), but otherwise I agree entirely.
They need to fake working and that’s hard to do when remote is based on output. Ie, did the work get done or not. Being a middle manager w people to bother in office means they can fake it or have issues all day and be talking …
This hits the nail on the head at my work. Immediate manager couldn’t care less where we are, and has said frequently that the team is more productive from home.
It’s the higher ups that are pushing for return to office, constantly sending out surveys, arranging free-form “open door” meetings and things like that because they’re lost without seeing people face to face.
I can concentrate far more effectively at home, where I’m in full control of my environment, and I spend up to half of my day in video calls with people in different locations anyway.
You are forgetting the value of commercial real estate portfolios. If the buildings are empty and no one wants to use them, they drop in value.
https://www.newsweek.com/crash-worse-2008-crisis-predicted-commercial-real-estate-1792758
Commutes are a detriment to the worker, but not to the company.
It should be, count commuting in my eighth hour work day and let’s see how much they prefer WFH.
Yes and here is some irony I found.
My company requires us to take various learning course throughout the year. Some assigned - some pick your own. A lot of it is the usual B.S. that everyone has to do.
I was browsing thru the managerial list and picked one of the ones that sounded interesting the other day about ‘How to be a better Manager’ and smack in the middle of the first chapter was this big video with this woman giving this speech about being accepting of people who wanted/needed to work from home or telecommute.
My ears instantly perked up.
The video went on to throw up all this data showing how more and more people were doing this and it had this graph from 2012 on and how this was the natural progression in the workplace and how we as managers needed to be accepting of peoples position and feelings toward this and learn to be accommodating as we would see more of it.
I was like WTF??!
When the course ended I scrolled through it looking for a date and I believe it was 2017.
Amazing how the tune has changed but the data hasn’t.
I think it’s partially rage bait at this point. At the start of the pandemic remote work was a new idea and it was easy to get views on an article about it. Now you need a shocking title that’ll enrage people to get engagement on the topic.
New idea? I remember it being a new idea in the early 2000s
Since companies adopted computers and the Internet it’s been possible. I remember my dad working from home every now and then. But the idea that almost any desk job could be done remotely full time is new.
The pandemic definitely pushed companies into finally adopting it, but believe me, it was not a new concept. I remember reading an article 20 yrs ago about Best Buy adopting it, for example, and how it increased productivity and morale, etc. Since then, it’s been catching on, I’ve had plenty of friends that have worked from home since long before the pandemic, it’s just that a lot of companies were still afraid of giving their employees that much autonomy.
It wasn’t a new idea and it wasn’t rage bait. My company internally praised us for increased productivity during the pandemic, and now they’re trying to gaslight us into RTO.
This isn’t about productivity. These companies are lying. This is 100% about real estate investments, tax breaks, and flexing power over their employees’ lives. They were scared by how much employee power grew during the pandemic and they’ll invent whatever bullshit lie they can to sweep that under the rug.
If you could look into the investment portfolios of big companies and the rich people that run them you would see that the biggest sector is commercial real estate. In the UK pre pandemic, 40% of investments went into commercial real estate. So thats the main reason they are pushing it.
People working from home aren’t consuming much anymore.
Of course there’s commercial property leases and micromanaging bosses, but I think the uptick in this messaging is in response to people spending less money.
Less money on cars, gas, clothes, eating out, fancy coffee, hair/nails, dry cleaning, kid/animal care, gym (?), and probably so much more that I’m not thinking of.
And when we do spend money on those things, they’re lasting longer and we’re getting more discerning. When I do consider spending money on eating out, I’ll def choose going hungry over getting something lower quality.
Hell yeah. I eat out like twice a month now but both are carefully planned experiences at excellent restaurants.
Same. I use reclaimed commute time to get groceries and cook now. Wife is thrilled now when I call it ‘my’ kitchen (it was hers by default when my commute + work had me out of the house 12-16 hours a day), and I can whip up a decent meal these days pretty quickly without having to go out
I think allot of Banks have a ton of assets tied up in commercial real estate. This is the real reason they are pushing everyone to go back to work. A lot of powerful people will loss money if the commercial real estate market crashes.
You’re not crazy.
Fact is, at the beginning, remote work was a requirement for companies to keep operating (aka, printing money for the execs and shareholders), so it was freely discussed as a positive thing.
Now that shareholders and execs can require RTO, the narrative is reversed. If you look at most of the articles surrounding WFH “not working” there’s a very high chance that the motivation for such statements revolves around what management says about WFH, with no actual data to corroborate the message.
If you do your own research, a lot of what was true for WFH at the start of the pandemic is still true. The numbers and studies show that on the whole in the majority of circumstances, WFH increases productivity and makes workers happier overall. There are a few exceptions to this, I’m sure of that, and for each person, WFH or in office should be a personal choice, but it’s not. You should be allowed to work where you feel most productive and happy. As long as it doesn’t negatively impact your output, then it shouldn’t matter, but to execs, it does matter.
IMO, the motivation for forced RTO is twofold: first, control. The company you work for wants to exert control over you, so you have to do something that maybe you’re not a big fan of doing, simply because they say so. Additionally, they have more control over your day to day actions while you’re at the office. When you get to converse with others, monitoring how much time you’re spending away from your desk, the ability to walk up to you and grill you for any reason (or no reason). The second, is justifying office expenses. Either to be able to write it off, or pay their real estate owning buddies so those people can get money that could otherwise go to, IDK, wages (lol, it wouldn’t, but you know), and by having the vast majority of their workforce in house all the time, they can keep that going.
I’m sure there’s more to it, but that’s my impression. Fact is, very few companies are allowing RTO to be just an option. Everything is either part-in-office (aka hybrid), or forced full time RTO. Full remote positions are evaporating.
Companies exerting control is most of my issue personally. When you realize how much of your life they own and control, you don’t want to give that back. And I never will.
I’d say it’s not all black or white. In my industry (software) most of my friends and colleagues have strong opinions about staying remote. It’s mostly along the lines of “either let me continue to work from home or find someone else”. Also most of the headhunter messages I get on LinkedIn offer up to 100% remote jobs. Of course this is all anecdotal and depends heavily on the field of work. But maybe it’s worth considering that you have the power to shape your own future. If you do not want to work in an office, you’ll find something else. Don’t let those corporations fool you.
I think remote work is here to stay exactly because of what you’ve said. Companies always want highly skilled workers and experts. Those people have a lot of leverage when it comes to offers and hiring. Offering and maintaining remote work is a big plus when weighing offers, especially when you consider who these knowledge workers are.
They’re at least 5 years out of college and many have started families. And they’ve realized that they want to spend more time with their family and kids and not waste it commuting to work. Most are probably 10+ years of experience in their relevant industry and with 12-15 year olds. I feel like that demographic had a massive awakening with COVID about where their priorities lie.
I think it’s unlikely for remote work to stay at just the experienced knowledge professional level. Hell with 3 years of semi relevant experience I was able to leverage +$5000 on my salary for a remote job. Companies need more and more skilled office workers. This opposition to remote work won’t last, I think.
See I’m in software dev and I am constantly getting recruiter calls asking me for in-office work. I’m the guy saying “you literally cannot pay me enough to go back in an office”… but I’d gladly take 2/3 or maybe even 1/2 my current pay for a 4-day, 32 hour work week.
