|
|
|
|
|
by cableshaft
1186 days ago
|
|
So what if they are? (And I'd argue there's not much hard evidence of that, and the in-person working together I did a couple months ago at an engineering summit was completely ineffective and far from innovative, and I think the pandemic in general has proven that people don't need to be in-person to be effective and innovative.) Why must a company hyper-maximize the effectiveness of every employee at the expense of their work-life balance and happiness (assuming they would rather be remote, of course)? And if the employee isn't happy, they're probably a lot less effective in-person than you might think, but you assume they are just because they're physically present. |
|
Yes, for some subset of people.
Many people found they did prefer to be in-person to be effective, innovative, and enjoy their work. Some companies are going to want to hire those people and avoid hiring the ones who don’t prefer in-person work.
Nothing wrong with that. It’s somebody at the the company’s decision to make. And maybe it’s a bad decision or a good decision, who knows.