[ZunarJ5]

You know what caring looks like. You experience it in your personal relationships every day. The disconnect isn't knowledge, it's incentives. The practical answer is straightforward: predictable schedules that people can plan around, living wages that are indexed to the COL, transparent paths for advancement, respect for work-life boundaries, investment in employee development beyond immediate productivity needs (i.e. good healthcare for the worker and their dependents), genuine sick leave without retaliation, respect for physical and cognitive limitations, and protection from arbitrary termination.

But you're asking the wrong question. The real question is why, despite decades of evidence showing these practices improve retention and performance, they remain exceptional rather than standard. The system isn't broken; it's working exactly as designed. It is optimized for wealth extraction, not value creation.

Public companies are legally obligated to maximize shareholder value. Every dollar spent on employee wellbeing that doesn't directly boost quarterly metrics is arguably a breach of fiduciary duty. Middle managers who genuinely care get promoted out or pushed out. The few companies that do care either have unusual ownership structures (co-ops, private ownership with values-driven founders) or are temporarily buying talent in hot markets. Once conditions change, watch how quickly that 'caring' evaporates.

So yes, we all know what caring looks like. The question is why we keep pretending the current system has any mechanism to deliver it at scale.

[tome]

> The system isn't broken; it's working exactly as designed.

I don't follow this bit. It's worse for employees, it's worse for employers, and it's exactly as designed?

[awesome_dude]

One of the weirdest things I am seeing is the pushback from employers on "Remote"

We have actual studies showing that remote workers are more productive, have higher morale, and save themselves and their company money (no commute, no office rent)

And yet employers are still doggedly determined that employees sit in their toxic offices being miserable.

Employers are worse off (lower productivity), employees are worse off (lower morale).

[aaronbaugher]

I'd bet that when employers that want to bring employees back to the office commission studies of the pros and cons of remote work, those studies unsurprisingly determine that remote work is worse in most ways. Things like productivity and morale are hard to measure accurately anyway, so it would be easy to slant them to fit what people want to hear.

[awesome_dude]

There's that piece of news that comes up semi regularly that claims that some unnamed individual in some in unnamed country is holding three remote jobs down simultaneously.

[ZunarJ5]

I have expanded on this above.

[Paracompact]

> Once conditions change, watch how quickly that 'caring' evaporates.

I work in a tech field, but not quite the "pamper you with massages and ice cream sundaes" part of it. I am profoundly uncomfortable with the cultural deception at those types of places.