Companies are on the war path against remote work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cities threatening to get rid of tax breaks for companies if they don’t RTO, because apparently small businesses are suffering, downtowns are becoming ghost towns, CRE values are plummeting & public transportation is being crime-filled due to normies no longer taking it.

Public transit is doomed. After 3 years of hygiene obsession and isolation, cramming onto subway trains is just too traumatic for most people. If they are RTO for 3 days a week, they can drive the super commute for those 3 days and recover before the weekend. Still better than before times and train transit.

People are full on murdering each other on trains. Traffic is going to get really really bad, but more people will invest in AI cruise control and watch movies as their car creeps along following the car in front of it.

Uh have you not been on Metro recently? Lots of people are riding

It feels more crowded because of less frequent and shorter trains.

They are at half ridership of pre pandemic. I’m sure it’s the people who can’t afford downtown parking.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2023/03/02/metro-pandemic-ridership-record/

[Anonymous]

No, our company is planning on selling the building and moving to reservable stations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am back in office five days a week. You can’t run out the door at end of hours with in person. The CEO, CFO, CIO, Sr Mgr, controller, HR are in person and often there early or late.

So my new schedule is leave for work 745 am get home 6:30 pm five days a week.

The last people home are slowly realizing unless you are over 63 the game will end in 1-3 years and will get let go perhaps in next recession.

At my job it is moms with young kids, people goofing off, folks near retirement pushing Back

What's going on here is that your company and mgmt sucks.

My mgt is great. I love it. My kids now have a dad with a real job as opposed to an unshaved guy in a hoodie walking around in socks all day looking like a homeless man.

LOL! This is the J1, J2, J3… clown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am back in office five days a week. You can’t run out the door at end of hours with in person. The CEO, CFO, CIO, Sr Mgr, controller, HR are in person and often there early or late.

So my new schedule is leave for work 745 am get home 6:30 pm five days a week.

The last people home are slowly realizing unless you are over 63 the game will end in 1-3 years and will get let go perhaps in next recession.

At my job it is moms with young kids, people goofing off, folks near retirement pushing Back

What's going on here is that your company and mgmt sucks.

My mgt is great. I love it. My kids now have a dad with a real job as opposed to an unshaved guy in a hoodie walking around in socks all day looking like a homeless man.

LOL! This is the J1, J2, J3… clown.

Or it might be don't hire women of childbearing age man. I don't see how you go into the office 5 days with 3 jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am back in office five days a week. You can’t run out the door at end of hours with in person. The CEO, CFO, CIO, Sr Mgr, controller, HR are in person and often there early or late.

So my new schedule is leave for work 745 am get home 6:30 pm five days a week.

The last people home are slowly realizing unless you are over 63 the game will end in 1-3 years and will get let go perhaps in next recession.

At my job it is moms with young kids, people goofing off, folks near retirement pushing Back

What's going on here is that your company and mgmt sucks.

My mgt is great. I love it. My kids now have a dad with a real job as opposed to an unshaved guy in a hoodie walking around in socks all day looking like a homeless man.

LOL! This is the J1, J2, J3… clown.

Or it might be don't hire women of childbearing age man. I don't see how you go into the office 5 days with 3 jobs.

Ps yes of course I hate myself for being on DCUM so much I recognize these guys

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I’m going to RTO, I refuse to do anything after hours from home, either. If I’m not allowed to WFH, that means I’m not required to.

Does this apply only if you are required to go in five days a week? What if it is 2? or3?

m

On any of the days I’m required to go in. It’s basic logic. If WFH is bad, then it’s bad & I shouldn’t do it.

If your employer is allowing you to do both WFH and work onsite, how are they saying either is bad?

So if you go into the office on a Monday, you shut it down completely after 8 hours, but if you WFH on Tuesday you'll put in some extra hours in the evening? Just trying to see how this plays out in practice....

Correct.

And if I’m RTO 5 days a week, I won’t put in any extra hours whatsoever.

This is the mindset of a child, and a not particularly bright one at that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am back in office five days a week. You can’t run out the door at end of hours with in person. The CEO, CFO, CIO, Sr Mgr, controller, HR are in person and often there early or late.

So my new schedule is leave for work 745 am get home 6:30 pm five days a week.

The last people home are slowly realizing unless you are over 63 the game will end in 1-3 years and will get let go perhaps in next recession.

At my job it is moms with young kids, people goofing off, folks near retirement pushing Back

What's going on here is that your company and mgmt sucks.

My mgt is great. I love it. My kids now have a dad with a real job as opposed to an unshaved guy in a hoodie walking around in socks all day looking like a homeless man.

LOL! This is the J1, J2, J3… clown.

Or it might be don't hire women of childbearing age man. I don't see how you go into the office 5 days with 3 jobs.

I only have two jobs now!! I did RTO on the highest paying one. I quit the middle paying one. I kept my one WFH job.

My WFH job I attend two meetings each week at lunch timeI have it loaded on iPhone on the company meeting app and if I go through app same appearance as work laptop. Or do laptop in car with cellular hot spot with blurred background. My other biweekly meeting is 7am to 815 with Europe I do before work. I catch up late at night or Sunday morning. I work maybe 5-6 hours a week for $196k comp. My real job pays a lot more.

My j2 I ended paid $188k. That was like 5-6 hours a day WFH not worth it.


WFH is a joke. I do a full 8 hours in the office. Plus I get nice lunches, a big office, secretary, expense account, paid cell phone, staff to hang out with, off site board meetings at fancy hotels, fancy Xmas party, get to do business lunches.

So much better than my basement alone. Plus I save in person company like $400k today. My WFH would never do that as who cares

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am back in office five days a week. You can’t run out the door at end of hours with in person. The CEO, CFO, CIO, Sr Mgr, controller, HR are in person and often there early or late.

So my new schedule is leave for work 745 am get home 6:30 pm five days a week.

The last people home are slowly realizing unless you are over 63 the game will end in 1-3 years and will get let go perhaps in next recession.

At my job it is moms with young kids, people goofing off, folks near retirement pushing Back

What's going on here is that your company and mgmt sucks.

My mgt is great. I love it. My kids now have a dad with a real job as opposed to an unshaved guy in a hoodie walking around in socks all day looking like a homeless man.

LOL! This is the J1, J2, J3… clown.

Or it might be don't hire women of childbearing age man. I don't see how you go into the office 5 days with 3 jobs.

They are the same poster.

[Anonymous]

You guys really have NO power. Companies and agencies are going to order you back to work. You will have no choice but to work in the office for your current employer or if you quit, your future employer. No-one cares if you bring your bologna sandwich from home or not - enough people will buy lunch and coffee and shop at lunchtime for last minute gifts. You guys keep thinking your individual experiences carry so much weight when they don't. In the grand scheme of things, no-one cares and you will find this out soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys really have NO power. Companies and agencies are going to order you back to work. You will have no choice but to work in the office for your current employer or if you quit, your future employer. No-one cares if you bring your bologna sandwich from home or not - enough people will buy lunch and coffee and shop at lunchtime for last minute gifts. You guys keep thinking your individual experiences carry so much weight when they don't. In the grand scheme of things, no-one cares and you will find this out soon.

I will just not work anymore. No big deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You guys really have NO power. Companies and agencies are going to order you back to work. You will have no choice but to work in the office for your current employer or if you quit, your future employer. No-one cares if you bring your bologna sandwich from home or not - enough people will buy lunch and coffee and shop at lunchtime for last minute gifts. You guys keep thinking your individual experiences carry so much weight when they don't. In the grand scheme of things, no-one cares and you will find this out soon.

TF I don’t; I am union.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I’m going to RTO, I refuse to do anything after hours from home, either. If I’m not allowed to WFH, that means I’m not required to.

Does this apply only if you are required to go in five days a week? What if it is 2? or3?

m

On any of the days I’m required to go in. It’s basic logic. If WFH is bad, then it’s bad & I shouldn’t do it.

If your employer is allowing you to do both WFH and work onsite, how are they saying either is bad?

So if you go into the office on a Monday, you shut it down completely after 8 hours, but if you WFH on Tuesday you'll put in some extra hours in the evening? Just trying to see how this plays out in practice....

Correct.

And if I’m RTO 5 days a week, I won’t put in any extra hours whatsoever.

This is the mindset of a child, and a not particularly bright one at that.

Why? WFH is bad apparently. So I won’t do it. Simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"War path?"

Dramatic much, OP?

Put on pants, get to work.

Nah. Have brought in 5M in two years in pajama pants.

Riiggghhhhttttt. If you’re so successful, you wouldn’t care about this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys really have NO power. Companies and agencies are going to order you back to work. You will have no choice but to work in the office for your current employer or if you quit, your future employer. No-one cares if you bring your bologna sandwich from home or not - enough people will buy lunch and coffee and shop at lunchtime for last minute gifts. You guys keep thinking your individual experiences carry so much weight when they don't. In the grand scheme of things, no-one cares and you will find this out soon.

I will just not work anymore. No big deal.

Chances are you’re hardly working now. Please retire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really blows my mind when people think that their own commute, expenses, and productivity are all that matter when companies set these policies.

To be clear, individuals should absolutely advocate and take action that is in their own best interest. Your job is a huge part of your life. If it isn't working for you, change your job or influence your employer to change their policies. Have at it! And if you organize and are effective at preserving permanent WFH flexibility in your particular organization, that is great!

But to argue that work location policies of employers should only depend on productivity, or your commute cost, or whether you will buy a sandwich at lunch is myopic naive view. It is exacerbated when you characterize the people making decisions as out of touch boomers who don't know what they are doing.

It isn't wholly unlike people saying they shouldn't pay taxes for services they don't use, or that changes to roadways that have a negative impact on their quality of life shouldn't happen. It is a public good to spread revenue around to ensure that cities (where the majority of our population, including the most vulnerable, live) remain viable.

Moreover, it is a financially prudent thing for corporations that get subsidies and incentives from municipalities to do what it takes to keep getting them. The less revenue your employer has, the more likely they are to need to cut staff or reduce comp and benefits.

We have seen the impacts of a reduction in corporate real estate values lead to negative effects on the financial system, and will eventually see it lead to decreased tax revenues that in turn lead to a lack of public welfare services.

THAT is why we are seeing these changes now. It is because all things are interconnected, and decisions are not being made based on whether or not you will buy a latte on the two days per week your employer's policy says you will come in.

I'm sorry, are you suggesting corporations / middle management are making coordinated decisions for the public good, to spread revenue around? LOL, get outta here.

There is not a coordinated effort, there is an assortment of differing incentives and priorities. If there were a coordinated effort for public policy reasons, then things like climate change, accessibility, and birthrate-boosting policy should factor in -- WFH is better for all three. But we're not having that conversation: instead we're continually having a conversation about commercial real estate and why allowing commercial landlords to lose money is Bad instead of the natural and arguably predictable outcome of decisions they made. Tiny violins etc.

I agree with you but feel you buried the lede here. WFH decreases carbon emissions, and our collapsing biosphere is infinitely more of an urgent and existential problem than collapsing commercial real estate.

THIS!!!