this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
715 points (98.9% liked)

Work Reform

10142 readers
277 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 18 points 5 days ago

When the lockdowns happened due to COVID, it was just incredible at the sheer number of jobs that could have been done at home.

Some people, like Sam Seder from The Majority Report, speculated that people will use this in the future to leverage their power as employees for added privacy and flexibility in working.

The other thing is that businesses could save on massive costs by simply not, as others have mentioned here, leasing/building/renting/whatever large office spaces, and those former office spaces can be made into something else, like more afforable housing.

But everyone just kinda forgot, or seriously underestimated, at the desire for businesses to have control over their employees. This is one major reason why so many businesses want private healthcare. It allows them to fuck over their employees more than they would otherwise, even if it is much more expensive for them to do so than just paying a tax for public healthcare.

[–] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 62 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I work in commercial real estate. Two years before the start of the pandemic, my company considered downsizing our office to have most employees work from home and just come in when needed. We also discussed how we expected the office building market to struggle in the future. (Thinking in 10 years, not two).

Anyways, we got a deal from the property owners to sign another lease, so we stayed put. And now, big surprise, they forced RTO. Someone asked our president about it in a quarterly call. He basically said “we’re never ever going back to WFH and you can quit if you don’t like it”.

So, naturally, we’re struggling with turn over and our headcount is down about around 10% so far.

For many of us, our teams are split up amongst multiple offices so there is no difference from working in the office and working from home. It’s all about that empty lease.

[–] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 11 points 6 days ago

Also! I should add that for many property owners in commercial real estate, they can be “punished” for tenants that go dark, or stop operating at the location, even if they are still paying rent.

For example, say you own a strip mall with a grocery store and a few restaurants. If the grocery store stops operating in that location, there are less customers at the restaurants, making it more likely that they will stop paying rent also.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

Yeah, too bad that a condo refit of a building is super expensive and needs some deep pockets to actually do it. Still worth the consideration if the building is a good candidate.

[–] bouh@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

That's so, so stupid... They really are the dumbest of morons. They lost money, so they waste even more money and make their best workers flee.

[–] Seasm0ke@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

This article misses the real point.. they want voluntary turnover, when you layoff there's severance and unemployment costs...

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 21 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Bunch of real Einstein's running these places, huh? Fucking morons, just don't waste the money leasing large offices.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It's all about status. Big building = big dick. And more buildings spread all over the place is the equivalent to them having tons of kids.

It's such a primitive, ape-brain thing to do, but that's how these psychopaths operate.

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 4 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Seriously. Every job I had, the C-level were all about flexing the size of the company.

One Fintech company I worked at got a giant skyscraper in front of city hall as a Fuck You to the mayor because they had beef with them a few years back. Another tech company constantly bragged about how much square footage of campus they had, constantly comparing themselves to empires.

All just dick measuring.

In my experience CXX folks were all about being seen and having something tangible to show off to potential partners and customers. It's one thing to give people a tour of your facility. It's another to meet up at a co-working space and settle in for a PowerPoint presentation full of abstract numbers and graphs about your "virtual "company. I'm not saying that's right, and I'm certainly not arguing for RTO, but it helps explain that motivation and total lack of confidence in WFH.

It's still a "primitive ape-brain" thing to do though.

[–] shawn1122@lemm.ee 2 points 5 days ago

constantly comparing themselves to empires.

Good thing empires never fall, right?

[–] ClockNimble@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Sell the desks, save money on the office, utilities, and office supplies?

[–] Mushroomm@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

That would require an admission of fault for the last year of these attacks on WFH. No no we don't do that here

[–] ClockNimble@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Or, even WORSE: Give up their hatred of poor people in order to save money.

[–] hayes_@sh.itjust.works 20 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Why do we have to preface this with “Like Elon Musk…”?

Who cares what that nonce thinks? Surely not anyone who would read this article or be receptive to its content.

[–] DerArzt@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Probably (at least in the US perspective) he's the CEO of 3 companies and is going to be a high ranking government official.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 days ago

Awww cute, they have an idol like real people.

[–] ALilOff@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Unless they signed long leases with “commercial real estate” the company can just you know save a load of money not renting those spaces and just liquidate the office for quick cash.

Or if they own, they can always sell unless “it’s an investment” so we can sell it in the future for more.

[–] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

A company I worked for got into a long lease for 3 floors in an office building. Never used one of them. Ended up subletting it to another company until they were out of that lease.

[–] hovercat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

But you can only sell if someone is buying, and the moment you list that huge skyscraper on the market and find out that the only offers you're getting are 1/10 the asking price, suddenly the other massive commercial buildings you have on your balance sheets (and those of all your rich buddies) suddenly drop 90% in value, and it's revealed the emperor has no clothes

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

It would take some renovation but I imagine buying even just a couple of floors of space for apartments in the middle of NYC could be extremely desirable.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

If you want to open your eyes even more, check out the neat overlap between commercial real estate and large businesses that require an office. Often, it's one and the same, so it's easy to see why they wouldn't want their buildings nearly empty.

[–] shawn1122@lemm.ee 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

So the only people going to the Dunkin's in the office building are office workers. If we don't go back, that Dunkin's could go out of business. Is that something we can really allow on our collective conscience?

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 1 points 5 days ago

Won't someone think of the ~~children~~ shareholders???

[–] 96VXb9ktTjFnRi@feddit.nl 12 points 6 days ago

Ah, RTO = return to office. That took me a while ..

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 6 days ago

One of the only aspects of my previous employer that was smart and well-run was the attitude about RTO. Before the pan, the owner was planning to rent a second space in the same building to expand. Post-pan, we did a six week experiment where everyone came back two days per week. The metrics didn't meaningfully change and we downsized. Everyone became fully remote unless they needed supplies from the office for a client.

They managed everything terribly, but at least got that right.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago

Empty desks is an opportunity to expand, including shared desks from work sharing or WFH some of the week.

Commercial real estate/rental spaces are also an opportunity to downsize and get out of leases at better per square foot rates. If not getting out of lease, then opportunity to sublet desk areas.

[–] sumguyonline@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

The great reset is coming, it's nipping at their heals, soaking into the top of their eyelids like exhaustion, the darkness is creeping in from all the edges, making them wonder how close it will get, if it will truly envelope them as they've been warned

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I used to work 10-15 hours a day, weekends included, in a small lab. I did not mind it, I felt seen, my boss was happy with my efforts, and I thrived in that atmosphere.

I now work completely remote for significantly more money, spending 10-16 hours indoors interacting with nobody. It's hell. My extra hours are unseen. I barely see the sun. My weight is ballooning.

My point: WFH is great for people with families or partners, or anyone who has essentially a settled home life. But for single people, WFH is torture.

I do 100% agree that it should be a choice, and not a mandate to RTO. I'd take it in a heartbeat if it was an option

[–] sznowicki@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You shouldn’t do extra hours and you shouldn’t work more than 8 hours a day.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Depends in how much you view your work as "work", I guess. In my old job, I used to spring out of bed burning with ideas I wanted to implement, and when you have that freedom to play with your work, the concept of billable work hours quickly falls apart.

In this job, I have less freedoms to play with my work, so I'm with you that 8 hours should be it

[–] sznowicki@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

Nah. I respect your point but I don’t agree. I sometimes have this urge to do some extra hours because what I do is super fun, challenging and I learn a lot. It feels like gaming or hobby projects at times.

But what I learned after decade and a half in my job is that 6 hours of such work is a hard limit. Later one starts to burn out quickly. It’s like going on turbo boost. Nice fly but fuel is going down pretty quickly.

My brain performance goes also down quickly in such a sprint so the outcome quality goes down as well without even me noticing.

8 hours. Then I go with my life doing something completely different. No matter how much fun I have at work.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 166 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Anyone who does not understand the sunk cost fallacy should not be in management.

You've spent $x on office space. You can:

A. Use it, and make your employees hate working for you or

B. Let it go unused, and your employees are happier to continue working for you.

The money is spent either way. The only difference is morale, which does in fact directly contribute to your bottom line.

C. Sublet out the property and make back the cost of the lease or even a bit of profit.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

IMO, it's worse than that. It's not like creating a digital product, paying for a Super Bowl ad, etc. Those desks, phones, computers all still exist and can be sold. Not to mention the real estate! The slightest bit of foresight and planning and these companies could easily offset any costs they're paying, but no; they only focus on the current fiscal quarter...

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 69 points 1 week ago (2 children)

C. Get rid of what you don't need so that everyone is happy

[–] Sabin10@lemmy.world 37 points 1 week ago (7 children)

When you are locked in to a 3/5/10 year lease for the space, that's not actually an option. Most leases signed pre covid should be up by now but clueless management probably renewed anyways.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 84 points 1 week ago (2 children)

We had some slight pushing into going into the office more, but instead of firing people, it was decided to switch to a smaller office space, so the people who like to work in an office can do so, and less money is wasted on a mostly empty office

Understandable that this is not an option for all companies, but insane that people are happier losing talent than at least trying to work something out

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 53 points 1 week ago (15 children)

When the CEO personally owns the building and leases the office space to the company, that's not an option.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 27 points 1 week ago

Ours tried full RTO, and then they compromised with hybrid WFH when they lost many skilled people who had been there for 10+ years to remote positions at other companies. Sometimes with little to no warning.

Some execs gotta learn the hard way.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 55 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You would think that of all people, rich CEOs would understand the concept of the sunk cost fallacy.

The money on desks, rent, insurance, etc. is already spent. You're not getting it back. Asking people to come back to the office "so that it doesn't go to waste" assumes that you aren't taking on additional costs for people coming to the office.

You now have worn carpet, doors, pens, paper, etc...money you could have saved if you weren't such a knob.

[–] Solumbran@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Are you really suggesting that you expect CEOs to be competent? Scamming people and exploiting workers doesn't require skills, except if immorality is one.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 35 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You would think that of all people, rich CEOs would understand the concept of the sunk cost fallacy.

I'd expect that of someone who has to make hard decisions and work hard to get where they are.

A Nepo-Baby is neither of these things.

[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 50 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Early in the pandemic, our CEO asked why we paid so much for real estate if everyone could work from home. They've been trimming leases as quickly as they can.

We've been hiring people who live out of state. They only come onsite very rarely, maybe only once a year.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›