|
|
|
|
|
|
by lennixm
1213 days ago
|
|
|
> Companies don't want the financial hit of large HQs staying empty because of some specific arbitrary regulations/requirements. This argument needs to stop. The financial hit of paying for office properties is orders of magnitude higher than any sort of lease break fee or regulation penalty. If these huge tech companies could safe money by getting rid of their office locations in favor of remote work they would do it in a heartbeat. Forcing people to come back to the office due to some sunk-cost-fallacy for paying for office space makes zero sense. > Going by CEOs' statements and seemingly coordinated actions, there is cultural stigma against remote work, implying that its unproductive, lazy, or whatever, hence these blanket policies read more like political statements than measured, data driven responses. The CEO of Amazon doesn't make a decision of this magnitude based on a whim. They'll have mountains of productivity data on remote work by now and it even says so in the post. |
|
|
If it says so it must be true. There's no data in that post, just platitudes management like to use about collaboration and creativity that is absolute BS.
Shame I left the company I was at during the pandemic because I could dig the data but there was a very clear 20% sustained benefit in terms of productivity when WFH: faster to close tickets, bigger releases, less bugs. Did culture suffer? Yes. Did it matter, no, because culture is some vague notion only HR and senior management cares about, or at least pretends to. They still mandated RTO in the end, which cost them half of their more senior engineers, positions they still have not managed to fill, what a surprise when you want to force people through unproductive hoops.
I now work in a remote first company and in 16 years of career it's the most productive team I've been part of, shit gets done at all levels more so than in any other company I've been part of.