[giraffe_lady]

Ed Zitron wrote about it a lot in his newsletter a while back and I think had some really excellent insights about it. Especially these three factors:

- Executives work in a way that genuinely does probably reward or even require in person interaction. A lot of their job is "intangible" human connection-building stuff with other executives, shareholders, investors, manufacturers, etc. And because of the way executives are selected, a lot of these people haven't worked a "normal" job in decades or sometimes ever. They mistakenly think everyone else's work is, or should be, more like theirs is.

- Ego shit: from executive down to middle management a significant amount of the "reward" of the job is prestige, in the form of authority and control over other workers. Seeing "their" workers all lined up in the office is a visceral experience of this prestige and they don't want to give it up.

- Some significant fraction of middle management is genuinely not necessary or beneficial, but is essentially skimmed off the productivity of the lower workers and presented upwards as managerial competence. And especially, this isn't evenly distributed: maybe all managers do it a little, inadvertently or through bureaucratic structure, but some managers are almost exclusively this. Their actual career is at stake because it makes clear who is doing the work, and prevents them from intercepting it to take credit.

And then finally my own view on it is exposed in the disgusting euphemism "labor discipline." White collar pay went up during the pandemic. WFH is incredibly better for the quality of life of many workers, with few or no downsides. We are realizing we don't have to live and work the way we have been, things can be better for us at no one's expense. We are getting uppity and need to be reminded who is really in control of our lives.

[pjc50]

> a significant amount of the "reward" of the job is prestige, in the form of authority and control over other workers

This is definitely a real phenomenon. "Subordination", the product of having subordinates, is a sort of hidden compensation to some people.

> And then finally my own view on it is exposed in the disgusting euphemism "labor discipline." White collar pay went up during the pandemic. WFH is incredibly better for the quality of life of many workers, with few or no downsides. We are realizing we don't have to live and work the way we have been, things can be better for us at no one's expense. We are getting uppity and need to be reminded who is really in control of our lives.

Amen. There's a certain type of boss who thinks that employee happiness is a sign they're not being whipped enough, and that whipping them will increase productivity; these people also treat it as an axiom, and are immune to evidence about productivity.

[Lutger]

There are also other jobs which truly benefit from in-person interactions, for example sales people basically are basically fueled by it.

And in my experience there is a minority of people, also developers, who really enjoy working at the office, or don't do well at home.

Good managers would be busy figuring out what their people actually need to thrive and know that it is not the same for everybody.

In this case, I really hope forward thinking companies will destroy the competition and scoop up all the displeased talent that is forced to return to the office. Insofar as we have a free market, the problem will then sort itself out anyway, even though the road to get there might be ugly.

[bluefirebrand]

> sales people basically are basically fueled by it.

The best sales people I've ever worked with basically never showed up at the office other than to print off contracts and drop off signed ones. Most of their day was spent meeting with people in person. Rarely they were on phone calls.

I guess if you're trying to land clients in other states or other countries, you're probably at the office but you're not socializing with your coworkers..

[sam0x17]

> A lot of their job is "intangible"

I think for many executives it's so "intangible" as to be worthless bordering on detrimental ;)

[giraffe_lady]

I agree but that's a stronger claim that's more difficult to defend. In terms of "why are they pushing return to office" it's not that relevant.

Assuming they are doing anything by doing this, they need to be in person to do it. I'm with you though I don't think very much of value is taking place up there.

[sam0x17]

Well the fact that they do nothing becomes a lot more obvious when they aren't breathing down people's necks in the office.

[Zhyl]

>and prevents them from intercepting it to take credit.

Ah the old "middle manager man in the middle" attack.