1st day back in office, this is truly horrible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes I’m sure all the doctors, nurses and school teachers are crying a river for you

Exactly. I honestly didn't know people were still working from home 3 YEARS after Covid hit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is why Gen Z and z boomers get along. It is tge two lazy self entitled generations in middle that are losers.

Here is an example. My company next Thursday is throwing a big Thirsty Thursday. As the new people, single people and bosses want to meet each other.

The hard core hermits between 34–55 are boycotting. Last time we had 100 percent under 30 and over 55.

I am 60 my kids are fully grown I hate WFH full time and remote with no office. The “kids” under 30 single Want to go in.


Should be fun. We are doing two same night. One in LA and one in NYC.

I am taking Amtrak, checking in hotel, we have a club rented out. Then let’s me last year do some bar hopping, was a blast. And I am old. It is kinda like the over 55 is the moms and Dads of the under 30 and it is fun. The middle people are just angry hermits.

I have been giving out best pizza. Bagels, best sites to see best bar info as a lot of young people new hires never even been clubbing or partying in NYC. Usually around 1am us
old folks turn in. Last year the young crowd stayed out till 4am.

Guess what no one needs you 36-49 years olds at work you are Debbie downers.

They’re not hermits, they have kids in school and the flexibility of WFH has improved their quality of life tenfold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM shows who it is all along - a bunch of middling, unimpressive boomer middle managers stuck in a dinosaur mindset of the 20th century.

Can you all please retire and let the workforce modernize already? You are a huge drag on worker productivity with all of your inane micromanaging and stupid office culture that only wastes tons of time.

Amen. Back before COVID I had to work in person and as a manager I had to run the dishwasher and put away boomer dishes. Never again

Gen X here who prefers hybrid. For the arrogant younger generation who thinks they know it all, I hope that you accept that one of the results of having a fully remote workforce is that companies can now replace you with lower paid resources in low cost areas who can do the job just as well or even better than you . Don't act like you have some irreplaceable skill or talent that someone else can't do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM shows who it is all along - a bunch of middling, unimpressive boomer middle managers stuck in a dinosaur mindset of the 20th century.

Can you all please retire and let the workforce modernize already? You are a huge drag on worker productivity with all of your inane micromanaging and stupid office culture that only wastes tons of time.

Amen. Back before COVID I had to work in person and as a manager I had to run the dishwasher and put away boomer dishes. Never again

Gen X here who prefers hybrid. For the arrogant younger generation who thinks they know it all, I hope that you accept that one of the results of having a fully remote workforce is that companies can now replace you with lower paid resources in low cost areas who can do the job just as well or even better than you . Don't act like you have some irreplaceable skill or talent that someone else can't do.

Yes but I’m that scenario people can work anywhere while living anywhere. Turnover at companies will be much higher as people can consider better jobs from all over the country. Good employers will have to pay well and treat people well to attract and keep talent. And if you are not that talented, you should still have more employers to choose from.

I think what fully remote would really signal is the rise in 1099 work and having fewer workers who are permanent employees with decent benefits. But if down the road we could divorce the ability to get affordable health coverage from work, everyone would benefit, workers and employers alike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM shows who it is all along - a bunch of middling, unimpressive boomer middle managers stuck in a dinosaur mindset of the 20th century.

Can you all please retire and let the workforce modernize already? You are a huge drag on worker productivity with all of your inane micromanaging and stupid office culture that only wastes tons of time.

Amen. Back before COVID I had to work in person and as a manager I had to run the dishwasher and put away boomer dishes. Never again

Gen X here who prefers hybrid. For the arrogant younger generation who thinks they know it all, I hope that you accept that one of the results of having a fully remote workforce is that companies can now replace you with lower paid resources in low cost areas who can do the job just as well or even better than you . Don't act like you have some irreplaceable skill or talent that someone else can't do.

Yes but I’m that scenario people can work anywhere while living anywhere. Turnover at companies will be much higher as people can consider better jobs from all over the country. Good employers will have to pay well and treat people well to attract and keep talent. And if you are not that talented, you should still have more employers to choose from.

I think what fully remote would really signal is the rise in 1099 work and having fewer workers who are permanent employees with decent benefits. But if down the road we could divorce the ability to get affordable health coverage from work, everyone would benefit, workers and employers alike.

Agree but it's important to note that living in a high cost area like DC will actually be a disadvantage for majority of knowledge workers who want a full time remote job. Companies who have these amazing WFH policies will naturally seek candidates who don't have to be paid a ton of money. And the idea that companies want only rock stars is a myth. Most companies need people to just get the work done (for majority of roles), not superstars. Just look around your company and I bet many of us are working with people who aren't doing anything extraordinary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM shows who it is all along - a bunch of middling, unimpressive boomer middle managers stuck in a dinosaur mindset of the 20th century.

Can you all please retire and let the workforce modernize already? You are a huge drag on worker productivity with all of your inane micromanaging and stupid office culture that only wastes tons of time.

Amen. Back before COVID I had to work in person and as a manager I had to run the dishwasher and put away boomer dishes. Never again

Gen X here who prefers hybrid. For the arrogant younger generation who thinks they know it all, I hope that you accept that one of the results of having a fully remote workforce is that companies can now replace you with lower paid resources in low cost areas who can do the job just as well or even better than you . Don't act like you have some irreplaceable skill or talent that someone else can't do.

Yes but I’m that scenario people can work anywhere while living anywhere. Turnover at companies will be much higher as people can consider better jobs from all over the country. Good employers will have to pay well and treat people well to attract and keep talent. And if you are not that talented, you should still have more employers to choose from.

I think what fully remote would really signal is the rise in 1099 work and having fewer workers who are permanent employees with decent benefits. But if down the road we could divorce the ability to get affordable health coverage from work, everyone would benefit, workers and employers alike.

Agree but it's important to note that living in a high cost area like DC will actually be a disadvantage for majority of knowledge workers who want a full time remote job. Companies who have these amazing WFH policies will naturally seek candidates who don't have to be paid a ton of money. And the idea that companies want only rock stars is a myth. Most companies need people to just get the work done (for majority of roles), not superstars. Just look around your company and I bet many of us are working with people who aren't doing anything extraordinary.

My company unless a rockstar SME or C level Type we have banned new hires from DC, Boston, NYC, LA, San Fran etc. People in those hire cost areas are ineligible to receive a raise until their salary falls below average for country.

We are fully remote. Last month I hired a
CPA with an MBA bright person and great worker for $85,000. She lives in middle of no where in central Texas and has a young kid. One before I got a person 16 years financial services experience also 85k central Florida.

In NYC or DC these are $120k to 180k hires.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why Gen Z and z boomers get along. It is tge two lazy self entitled generations in middle that are losers.

Here is an example. My company next Thursday is throwing a big Thirsty Thursday. As the new people, single people and bosses want to meet each other.

The hard core hermits between 34–55 are boycotting. Last time we had 100 percent under 30 and over 55.

I am 60 my kids are fully grown I hate WFH full time and remote with no office. The “kids” under 30 single Want to go in.


Should be fun. We are doing two same night. One in LA and one in NYC.

I am taking Amtrak, checking in hotel, we have a club rented out. Then let’s me last year do some bar hopping, was a blast. And I am old. It is kinda like the over 55 is the moms and Dads of the under 30 and it is fun. The middle people are just angry hermits.

I have been giving out best pizza. Bagels, best sites to see best bar info as a lot of young people new hires never even been clubbing or partying in NYC. Usually around 1am us
old folks turn in. Last year the young crowd stayed out till 4am.

Guess what no one needs you 36-49 years olds at work you are Debbie downers.

They’re not hermits, they have kids in school and the flexibility of WFH has improved their quality of life tenfold.

Did it? 15 years ago when I had young kids 1, 5 and 7 pre WFH and remote I had an in person job no flexibility. I made $320k and wife stayed home.

Today same exact jobs are remote paying 160k so my wife and I would both need to work from home full time to equal one in person salary. Don’t see how it is a perk. Plus 20 years ago people my job had 3-4 kids. Today it is 1-2 kids. Just murder 1-2 of your unborn kids and have husband take a 50 percent pay cut is price you pay for full time WFH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why Gen Z and z boomers get along. It is tge two lazy self entitled generations in middle that are losers.

Here is an example. My company next Thursday is throwing a big Thirsty Thursday. As the new people, single people and bosses want to meet each other.

The hard core hermits between 34–55 are boycotting. Last time we had 100 percent under 30 and over 55.

I am 60 my kids are fully grown I hate WFH full time and remote with no office. The “kids” under 30 single Want to go in.


Should be fun. We are doing two same night. One in LA and one in NYC.

I am taking Amtrak, checking in hotel, we have a club rented out. Then let’s me last year do some bar hopping, was a blast. And I am old. It is kinda like the over 55 is the moms and Dads of the under 30 and it is fun. The middle people are just angry hermits.

I have been giving out best pizza. Bagels, best sites to see best bar info as a lot of young people new hires never even been clubbing or partying in NYC. Usually around 1am us
old folks turn in. Last year the young crowd stayed out till 4am.

Guess what no one needs you 36-49 years olds at work you are Debbie downers.

They’re not hermits, they have kids in school and the flexibility of WFH has improved their quality of life tenfold.

Did it? 15 years ago when I had young kids 1, 5 and 7 pre WFH and remote I had an in person job no flexibility. I made $320k and wife stayed home.

Today same exact jobs are remote paying 160k so my wife and I would both need to work from home full time to equal one in person salary. Don’t see how it is a perk. Plus 20 years ago people my job had 3-4 kids. Today it is 1-2 kids. Just murder 1-2 of your unborn kids and have husband take a 50 percent pay cut is price you pay for full time WFH.

How did you make 320 with such shite logic skills?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why Gen Z and z boomers get along. It is tge two lazy self entitled generations in middle that are losers.

Here is an example. My company next Thursday is throwing a big Thirsty Thursday. As the new people, single people and bosses want to meet each other.

The hard core hermits between 34–55 are boycotting. Last time we had 100 percent under 30 and over 55.

I am 60 my kids are fully grown I hate WFH full time and remote with no office. The “kids” under 30 single Want to go in.


Should be fun. We are doing two same night. One in LA and one in NYC.

I am taking Amtrak, checking in hotel, we have a club rented out. Then let’s me last year do some bar hopping, was a blast. And I am old. It is kinda like the over 55 is the moms and Dads of the under 30 and it is fun. The middle people are just angry hermits.

I have been giving out best pizza. Bagels, best sites to see best bar info as a lot of young people new hires never even been clubbing or partying in NYC. Usually around 1am us
old folks turn in. Last year the young crowd stayed out till 4am.

Guess what no one needs you 36-49 years olds at work you are Debbie downers.

They’re not hermits, they have kids in school and the flexibility of WFH has improved their quality of life tenfold.

Did it? 15 years ago when I had young kids 1, 5 and 7 pre WFH and remote I had an in person job no flexibility. I made $320k and wife stayed home.

Today same exact jobs are remote paying 160k so my wife and I would both need to work from home full time to equal one in person salary. Don’t see how it is a perk. Plus 20 years ago people my job had 3-4 kids. Today it is 1-2 kids. Just murder 1-2 of your unborn kids and have husband take a 50 percent pay cut is price you pay for full time WFH.

The benefit of having a job— even a $160k job— is that when your wife realizes you’re completely unhinged she can walk out with very little fuss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is why Gen Z and z boomers get along. It is tge two lazy self entitled generations in middle that are losers.

Here is an example. My company next Thursday is throwing a big Thirsty Thursday. As the new people, single people and bosses want to meet each other.

The hard core hermits between 34–55 are boycotting. Last time we had 100 percent under 30 and over 55.

I am 60 my kids are fully grown I hate WFH full time and remote with no office. The “kids” under 30 single Want to go in.


Should be fun. We are doing two same night. One in LA and one in NYC.

I am taking Amtrak, checking in hotel, we have a club rented out. Then let’s me last year do some bar hopping, was a blast. And I am old. It is kinda like the over 55 is the moms and Dads of the under 30 and it is fun. The middle people are just angry hermits.

I have been giving out best pizza. Bagels, best sites to see best bar info as a lot of young people new hires never even been clubbing or partying in NYC. Usually around 1am us
old folks turn in. Last year the young crowd stayed out till 4am.

Guess what no one needs you 36-49 years olds at work you are Debbie downers.

Ew. Gross. You're a 60 year old hanging out with Gen Z after work at happy hour? You sound like a creepy boss who thinks they stand a chance with someone you get than half their age.

No one in their 20s wants to hangout with 60 year olds.

[Anonymous]

You chose to live far from work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You chose to live far from work.

Not everyone can afford $1M homes and apartments that are close to work. Maybe employers should pay more then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You chose to live far from work.

I don't live far but even if I lived within 10 minutes of driving distance from my job, I would have to pay for private schools because the local schools are awful. My job is 16-18 miles from my house, depending on the route, but it can take 25-50minutes depending on the day and time of commuting. Public transport is 2 hours and biking is 1.5 hours.

The issue in larger, more dense cities is population density and lack of organized public transportation specific to DMV. It's not like I live out in Calvert County, which does require a commute due to distance.

I am not the OP but the idea that you can live within 10-15 miles of your job and still have a reasonable commute is laughable. A reasonable commute is 30 minutes by the way, possibly longer if you are talking about any type of commute that doesn't involve constant sitting. Anything more and you are spending an hour plus a day in the car. Even a 45-minute train ride with a walk provides better movement and time spent (reading, music, meditation, podcasts, etc).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM shows who it is all along - a bunch of middling, unimpressive boomer middle managers stuck in a dinosaur mindset of the 20th century.

Can you all please retire and let the workforce modernize already? You are a huge drag on worker productivity with all of your inane micromanaging and stupid office culture that only wastes tons of time.

Amen. Back before COVID I had to work in person and as a manager I had to run the dishwasher and put away boomer dishes. Never again

Gen X here who prefers hybrid. For the arrogant younger generation who thinks they know it all, I hope that you accept that one of the results of having a fully remote workforce is that companies can now replace you with lower paid resources in low cost areas who can do the job just as well or even better than you . Don't act like you have some irreplaceable skill or talent that someone else can't do.

Yes but I’m that scenario people can work anywhere while living anywhere. Turnover at companies will be much higher as people can consider better jobs from all over the country. Good employers will have to pay well and treat people well to attract and keep talent. And if you are not that talented, you should still have more employers to choose from.

I think what fully remote would really signal is the rise in 1099 work and having fewer workers who are permanent employees with decent benefits. But if down the road we could divorce the ability to get affordable health coverage from work, everyone would benefit, workers and employers alike.

Agree but it's important to note that living in a high cost area like DC will actually be a disadvantage for majority of knowledge workers who want a full time remote job. Companies who have these amazing WFH policies will naturally seek candidates who don't have to be paid a ton of money. And the idea that companies want only rock stars is a myth. Most companies need people to just get the work done (for majority of roles), not superstars. Just look around your company and I bet many of us are working with people who aren't doing anything extraordinary.

My company unless a rockstar SME or C level Type we have banned new hires from DC, Boston, NYC, LA, San Fran etc. People in those hire cost areas are ineligible to receive a raise until their salary falls below average for country.

We are fully remote. Last month I hired a
CPA with an MBA bright person and great worker for $85,000. She lives in middle of no where in central Texas and has a young kid. One before I got a person 16 years financial services experience also 85k central Florida.

In NYC or DC these are $120k to 180k hires.

Yup! For those of you who want your companies to go fully remote- be careful of what you ask for!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why Gen Z and z boomers get along. It is tge two lazy self entitled generations in middle that are losers.

Here is an example. My company next Thursday is throwing a big Thirsty Thursday. As the new people, single people and bosses want to meet each other.

The hard core hermits between 34–55 are boycotting. Last time we had 100 percent under 30 and over 55.

I am 60 my kids are fully grown I hate WFH full time and remote with no office. The “kids” under 30 single Want to go in.


Should be fun. We are doing two same night. One in LA and one in NYC.

I am taking Amtrak, checking in hotel, we have a club rented out. Then let’s me last year do some bar hopping, was a blast. And I am old. It is kinda like the over 55 is the moms and Dads of the under 30 and it is fun. The middle people are just angry hermits.

I have been giving out best pizza. Bagels, best sites to see best bar info as a lot of young people new hires never even been clubbing or partying in NYC. Usually around 1am us
old folks turn in. Last year the young crowd stayed out till 4am.

Guess what no one needs you 36-49 years olds at work you are Debbie downers.

Ew. Gross. You're a 60 year old hanging out with Gen Z after work at happy hour? You sound like a creepy boss who thinks they stand a chance with someone you get than half their age.

No one in their 20s wants to hangout with 60 year olds.

Gen Zs are the grandkids of Boomers.