Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by 40yearoldman 1015 days ago
> Having such options is likely correlated with good performance.

That is a fairly big assumption without actual data.

If we are going to play that game.

In general people who want remote work care less about work and often are average or below average workers and are no stranger to looking for new jobs.

7 comments

> In general people who want remote work care less about work and often are average or below average workers and are no stranger to looking for new jobs.

That is a fairly big assumption without actual data.

It's funny how many of the RTO companies (like Amazon) boast their data-driven approach, but when it comes to backing up their RTO mandate with actual data they're completely silent and even shun/mute employees that ask for this data.

Contrast this with their 'data-driven' claims of increased productivity due to remote work during covid.

That's their point.
There were many studies during covid that concluded remote employees are more effective [1]

I don't really put much trust in these studies, nor the studies that claim the opposite, but it's pretty obvious to me that both the WFH and RTO mandates have nothing to do with worker productivity. We've witnessed record levels of hiring at tech companies during the most remote working conditions ever. I've been in calls with higher level leadership where they essentially admit they have no objective data to track worker productivity. And I've witnessed great engineers, who've received nothing but great performance reviews and promotions during their WFH stints being fired for low productivity because their manager wants to have good RTO stats.

[1] https://www.vox.com/recode/23129752/work-from-home-productiv...

Yep, if there was compelling, rigorous data to show a major productivity boost from RTO - evidence strong enough to shut up the opposition, at least some companies would've revealed it by now. We've seen zip, nada, zilch.

The RTO mandates are a pure labor/capital power play. It's really not much more complicated than "we want to remind you we're in charge, and to show you just how we're in charge, we're gonna make you do something you don't want to do"

Where I work, I have access to the data. There is a clear drop in PRs, lines of code committed, and new documents created.

To further that we have moved to 3 days RTO, and have Monday and Friday as WFH. Guess what? Github activity and slack message counts are nearly non existence on Friday, and just a blip on Monday.

Companies have the data, they don't need external studies to tell them what they already know. This is why they can move forward with RTO without worrying about any of the nonsense the WFH crowd drone on about. WFH folks know they are wrong, and companies know the WFH peoples are wrong, and that is why every comment suggesting otherwise is a knee jerk reaction to mob anybody who suggest differently.

Good luck WFH folks, while I am at the office making impact, you won't even have a chance when it comes for review or promotion time, because you can't list "answered the door for a package delivery" as anything useful.

Many studies also said a handkerchief over your face prevented Covid.
> In general people who want remote work care less about work and often are average or below average workers and are no stranger to looking for new jobs.

There is over $120B of enterprise value in remote first or remote only companies. People who want remote want agency and control over their work arrangement, not the ability to slack off. Perhaps reconsider your mental model, assumptions, and the data.

(I own private equity in full remote enterprises, and am a supporter of the operating model based on the results, both financial and worker quality of life)

Let me make another assumption, having options to work somewhere else is likely correlated with having made a good impression on a significant number of other people in your past professional career.
Is it a big assumption? "Ease of getting a new job" hopefully does correlate with competence (which I equate with 'good performance' here). It's not saying "people who stay at a job with mandatory RTO must necessarily be bad at their jobs", so I don't see why you decided to insult those of us who enjoy remote work.
> In general people who want remote work care less about work

It's pretty weird to frame someone's care for their family and personal life as an insult.

Agree we would need data. I've seen both sides of this. Some people like WFH because they can totally slack off. Some like it because they can get more done. Some people have options because they have great social skills and know people from their fraternity or other social groups. Some people have options because they are good.
What do you mean by "care less about work"?

Do you mean they care less about the business? The two things overlap, but not perfectly. One can care about the business 100%, and be apathetic about the "work".

It might even be true that managers care about the "work" to the detriment of the business.