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

Work Reform

10146 readers
242 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 6 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.

[–] bouh@lemmy.world 11 points 6 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 6 days ago

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

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

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

[–] Mushroomm@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 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 5 days ago

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

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 166 points 1 week ago (7 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.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 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 (2 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.

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

And the really big corporations own their buildings. You think the company locked into leases are mad? The companies who own the building are pissed! Some have a multi million dollar building that's losing value faster than the speed of light.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago

What big company owns their building. Most I k ow build it then sell it to a management company then lease the space back. There is some accounting reason for this.

[–] whostosay@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Good. Turn that shit into housing.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] blazeknave@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

You mean sell it for money and actually make more profit while everyone is happy? Preposterous!

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Or c, keep just enough office space to create rolling “layoffs” as people are asked to return to the office.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

Step 1: Hire staff

Step 2: Train staff to do job

Step 3: COVID! Oh no! Everyone work from home.

Step 4: ???

Step 5: Fire staff to save money.

Step 6: Profit.

load more comments (4 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 (2 children)

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

[–] SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

Then he should act like any other office building owner and rent some space to other companies.

Bonus points if he gets with the future and works to convert some of the building to living space so people don't have to travel to get to work. Not everybody will want that, but it will appeal to enough to make it worth doing. Shopping malls across the country are being converted to such hybrid spaces so most everything one needs is within a convenient distance.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 11 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Bold of you to assume he already doesn't. But WFH across many industries drives down urban office space value overall.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 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.

[–] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 62 points 1 week 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 1 week 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 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.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 17 points 1 week ago

Immorality is sadly a skill, ignoring that voice in your head that says "This doesn't feel right, we can't go othrough with this" and the one that says "Look what we're doing to them!?! We have to make this right!"

Is very hard to do for people like you and I.

[–] 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 (1 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.

[–] bilb@lem.monster 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My company did that too, then they replaced us with cheaper labor from overseas.

[–] HeyJoe@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

Ours did that before the pandemic and not my area. Within a year, it went back to what it was because of how terrible the quality was. Now they are dumping all the buildings that aren't needed and sent a lot of us home. Of course, the main product that my job deals with needs buildings for machines to work so they didn't get rid of everything. No more corporate, and for now, we are all home for the foreseeable future. I also wonder when they will get the bright idea to start outsourcing again now that it's been like 7 years...

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)

At least one in three bosses are shitty bosses. If their responsibility is to the company and the shareholders, telecommuting saves a ton of time and money.

[–] kat_angstrom@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Also, for those companies that love to position themselves as "green", commuting is a horrendous waste of resources and a cause of pollution. My company preaches about how important it is to lower your carbon footprint, then institutes policies that increase carbon footprints by the tens of thousands and don't even blink.

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

constantly comparing themselves to empires.

Good thing empires never fall, right?

[–] hubobes@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We don't even have the office space anymore for full RTO. If at some day too many people would go into the office some wouldn't have desks to work on...

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 19 points 1 week ago

Same here. A smart CEO wouldn't force RTO, they would lease out that unused space or expand using those unused desks.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 1 week ago

I guess they should enjoy the consequences of their actions like... regular people do?

Or maybe these bosses just aren't good at what they do. After all, they wasted millions on real estate and empty desks. Shouldn't the shareholders be demanding new leadership?

[–] hayes_@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 week ago (2 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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Convert to apartments

Make profit

Tada!

[–] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago

I agree this is what should be done! Though it is surprising challenging to convert an office building to an apartment.

One issue, for example, is that the plumbing and electricity lines tend to be located on one end of the building. If you want to convert it to apartments, you have to reroute all the plumbing.

In the US, there are also rules about the number of stair cases. That’s why many apartments here are long and flat buildings of 3-4 floors rather than taller, taking up less space.

[–] morgan_423@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think some of them are also doing it for the tax breaks they get if they pump a bunch of employees into the local area's economy.

And we all know how difficult is is to get companies to voluntarily give up free tax money from the government. It's like trying to take drugs away from an addict.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 96VXb9ktTjFnRi@feddit.nl 12 points 1 week ago

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

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 12 points 1 week 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 6 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 6 days ago

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

[–] ALilOff@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (3 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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] timewarp@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

I thought it was because they couldn't make friends & wanted to force people to be around them.

load more comments
view more: next ›