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.

Honestly, I am sick and tired if the FT WFH evangelists acting like these are not valid concerns. They are. Acting as if they are not is making the RTO worse. If you’re unwilling to meet halfway with hybrid, they’ll just make everyone come in all the time. The war path is over. People go back now.

Not true. There are still companies and jobs that ate fully remote. They will be more desirable.

Anonymous wrote:I’m for the corporates here. Workers have become entitled. Look at the pay, benefits, and severance packages of employees recently dumped by FANG companies. These workers were waayyy overpaid and sometimes doing nothing, and then they complained about being let go. What gives! Corporations are not welfare. What I hear from the non-RTO crowd is an acknowledgment that their situation is too good to be true but they want to milk it for as long as they can. So, they protest wildly, oftentimes wrapping themselves in the flag of community, home, and the environment. Underneath though, they know that their argument, and even their self, is a sham.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m for the corporates here. Workers have become entitled. Look at the pay, benefits, and severance packages of employees recently dumped by FANG companies. These workers were waayyy overpaid and sometimes doing nothing, and then they complained about being let go. What gives! Corporations are not welfare. What I hear from the non-RTO crowd is an acknowledgment that their situation is too good to be true but they want to milk it for as long as they can. So, they protest wildly, oftentimes wrapping themselves in the flag of community, home, and the environment. Underneath though, they know that their argument, and even their self, is a sham.

Surely you realize that 99% of corporate jobs are a sham, right?

You are delusional. If most jobs were a sham, the economy would produce nothing. The products and services you use everyday are the proof that there is something very wrong with you and your ilk.

I’m exaggerating with the 99%. I’d go with 50%.

Sorry but a large portion of OFFICE jobs are completely unnecessary. Read the book titled “Bullsh*t jobs”

Manufacturing and real in-person jobs like doctors, surgeons, nurses, police officers etc are actually necessary. Most of the people working for tech companies, large corporations could not show up to work ever again and you’d likely never notice.

If you feel that way, you should relinquish your job to someone who better appreciates a paycheck. Again, I find it ironic that someone who has a “bullsh*t” job would blame their employer for hiring them and asking just a bit of cooperation from them. To be clear, you want to have your cake and to eat it too: my job is a scam; now pay me well and let me do nothing from home.

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.

Honestly, I am sick and tired if the FT WFH evangelists acting like these are not valid concerns. They are. Acting as if they are not is making the RTO worse. If you’re unwilling to meet halfway with hybrid, they’ll just make everyone come in all the time. The war path is over. People go back now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m for the corporates here. Workers have become entitled. Look at the pay, benefits, and severance packages of employees recently dumped by FANG companies. These workers were waayyy overpaid and sometimes doing nothing, and then they complained about being let go. What gives! Corporations are not welfare. What I hear from the non-RTO crowd is an acknowledgment that their situation is too good to be true but they want to milk it for as long as they can. So, they protest wildly, oftentimes wrapping themselves in the flag of community, home, and the environment. Underneath though, they know that their argument, and even their self, is a sham.

Surely you realize that 99% of corporate jobs are a sham, right?

You are delusional. If most jobs were a sham, the economy would produce nothing. The products and services you use everyday are the proof that there is something very wrong with you and your ilk.

I’m exaggerating with the 99%. I’d go with 50%.

Sorry but a large portion of OFFICE jobs are completely unnecessary. Read the book titled “Bullsh*t jobs”

Manufacturing and real in-person jobs like doctors, surgeons, nurses, police officers etc are actually necessary. Most of the people working for tech companies, large corporations could not show up to work ever again and you’d likely never notice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m for the corporates here. Workers have become entitled. Look at the pay, benefits, and severance packages of employees recently dumped by FANG companies. These workers were waayyy overpaid and sometimes doing nothing, and then they complained about being let go. What gives! Corporations are not welfare. What I hear from the non-RTO crowd is an acknowledgment that their situation is too good to be true but they want to milk it for as long as they can. So, they protest wildly, oftentimes wrapping themselves in the flag of community, home, and the environment. Underneath though, they know that their argument, and even their self, is a sham.

Surely you realize that 99% of corporate jobs are a sham, right?

You are delusional. If most jobs were a sham, the economy would produce nothing. The products and services you use everyday are the proof that there is something very wrong with you and your ilk.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m for the corporates here. Workers have become entitled. Look at the pay, benefits, and severance packages of employees recently dumped by FANG companies. These workers were waayyy overpaid and sometimes doing nothing, and then they complained about being let go. What gives! Corporations are not welfare. What I hear from the non-RTO crowd is an acknowledgment that their situation is too good to be true but they want to milk it for as long as they can. So, they protest wildly, oftentimes wrapping themselves in the flag of community, home, and the environment. Underneath though, they know that their argument, and even their self, is a sham.

Surely you realize that 99% of corporate jobs are a sham, right?

Anonymous wrote:I’m for the corporates here. Workers have become entitled. Look at the pay, benefits, and severance packages of employees recently dumped by FANG companies. These workers were waayyy overpaid and sometimes doing nothing, and then they complained about being let go. What gives! Corporations are not welfare. What I hear from the non-RTO crowd is an acknowledgment that their situation is too good to be true but they want to milk it for as long as they can. So, they protest wildly, oftentimes wrapping themselves in the flag of community, home, and the environment. Underneath though, they know that their argument, and even their self, is a sham.

Anonymous wrote:My circle of friends are still fully remote or hybrid… I don’t know anyone going in four or five days a week.

I will never go back to a job that requires more than probably once a week in the office… But I am late 40s making really good money and my skills lend themselves really well to remote work, I do a lot of data analysis and writing. If something happens to this job, I will probably spend the rest of my career just consulting on my own.

My (tech) company has a fully remote option, teams get together in person regularly but not weekly. There are some folks that like coming into the office a few days a week and for them, they do catered lunch and things, but we gave up a bunch of our space and we can figure the office mostly for meeting in groups.

The office concept will never go away, but I think you are delusional If you don’t see that it is revolutionizing, and it’s never going to go back to the way it was. The world has just changed too much.

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....

Not that poster, but yes - that’s basically what I do. Each day my hours are roughly the same - up at 6:00 and turning my attention to family/other commitments at 5:00. On days I go into the office I spend about 1.5 hours of that time commuting. that’s twice a week now, but there are rumblings of requiring 3 or 4. So the org is saying he’d rather not get those extra hours from me so that they see my face.

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....

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.