- cross-posted to:
- antiwork
- cross-posted to:
- antiwork
You must log in or register to comment.
One person said they’d spoken with colleagues who had chosen to go hybrid, and those colleagues reported doing work in mostly empty offices punctuated with video calls with people who were in other mostly empty offices.
This is the crux of it. All of our meetings now are virtual. Full stop. Companies had to adapt during COVID and to do that they got things like teams and SharePoints going. Now these tools are still in place and the genie is out of the bottle. No going back
I have mixed emotions about it. I manage a software engineering team at an aerospace company. I do see some increased quality and productivity when folks who work together and colocated. But there are tradeoffs, and happier employees for sure needs to be in the trade. Our company has sites in different states, and for years and years we’ve grabbed the skills we need from wherever they are. That is, we’ve recognized that it’s workable to have at least some people not colocated, and are willing to take that hit if it buys us something.
We were nearly 100% remote for the better part of two years, and it was fine. Our productivity was at least adequate. My personal feeling is that a hybrid arrangement, where everyone has some overlapping days, is the sweet spot. But I’ve fought for individuals being fully remote when it made sense.
Yes officer, this guy here. They’re being reasonable on the internet! /s
Thanks for the insightful comment :)
I’m with you here, mate. My workplace went 100% remote during COVID and has only gone back to mandating five days per month back in the office and honestly? I think we’d do better with a mandated two days in the office and three days at home per week, mandating days where our team can all work together. I’m a social worker in an intake/assessment/referral position, and I desperately miss being able to look over my shoulder and debrief my case or gain some peer consultation on how best to manage the case I’m on. The one day I’m in I’m almost alone and gain barely any benefit from being in the office.
We have a fair few physically disabled colleagues, for whom I’d recommend a no-limits flexibility working arrangement that works for them, but for those of us who are physically able I think a 2/3 split would work far better. Our attrition rates have gone right up since COVID despite previously having some of the highest retention rates in our Department, and I can’t help but think that some of that is due to us being isolated while needing to rely on one another from time to time.
That all makes perfect sense, and I think you’re spot on.
There’s another factor I’ve noticed, too. Like I said, I’m a manager. Honestly, when I’m home, I get more done because there’s fewer interruptions. But many of those interruptions are employees popping in to talk to me. Sometimes they just want to say hi or whatever, but not infrequently it starts with “Hey, there’s something I wanted to talk with you about…” and they tell me about some issue or something going on. They could email/message/call me about those things, but often they just don’t.
So I think my job as a manager is more effective when we can talk face to face. I go into the office three days a week.
I’m pretty sure some companies are also using it to encourage people to quit before layoffs and needing to pay out severance. Happened to me earlier this year. In December they announced we’d go from optionally fully remote, to mandatory 3-days in office in February. Then at the end of march they laid off a bunch of people.
So watch the timing at Dell, I wonder if we’ll see some layoffs there in a couple months.
I really dislike using the term “virtual” for online meetings. It implies the meeting isn’t real, or isn’t authentic, or like it’s imaginary. The meeting simply uses video cameras instead of a conference room.
Do you think Virtua Fighter means the fighters aren’t real?
That’s virtua, not virtual.
I have a boss who will remote to a meeting that takes place right outside his office, then come in-person to the next meeting that immediately follows in the same room. People like the flexibility.
In addition to other successes observed in media outlets, I wonder if this helps to further demonstrate the power of unions (despite there not having been such a thing in this case) in a subtle manner:
When people act together, they are likely to get positive results.
A different observation:
Not only are they helping themselves and improving Dell’s culture, but they are also helping the environment and inspiring others. (And preserving needless burning of person hours.)
Way to go!
I like “or else” meant no promotions, as if that ever meant anything in tech. If you want more money you jump to another company. This just gives them even more incentive to do that.
Fun fact, a big reason why innovation happened a lot in tech is because of this-- when a company fails to retain someone, they take their wealth of knowledge and trade secrets with them. It actually hurts companies more than just losing a person since it also gives the competition a leg up!
Alternatively, by classifying themselves as remote, workers agree they can no longer be promoted or hired into new roles within the company.
what starts with ‘il’ and ends with ‘legal’?
I don’t think it’s illegal (at least in the US), but it’s a great way to have your best talent split for greener pastures while the mediocre and lesser talented employees hang around forever.
I work in the same industry as Dell and turned down a job there for a reseller who will let me work remotely in perpetuity.
Ill mannered management shenanigans that are barely legal?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Alternatively, by classifying themselves as remote, workers agree they can no longer be promoted or hired into new roles within the company.
Business Insider claims it has seen internal Dell tracking data that reveals nearly 50 percent of the workforce opted to accept the consequences of staying remote, undermining Dell’s plan to restore its in-office culture.
The publication spoke with a dozen Dell employees to hear their stories as to why they chose to stay remote, and a variety of reasons came up.
Some said they enjoyed more free time and less strain on their finances after going remote, and nothing could convince them to give that up now.
Many interviewed admitted they were looking for work at other companies that aren’t trying to corral employees back into the office.
For example, we’ve reported several times on Apple’s internal struggles and employee revolts over remote work.
The original article contains 389 words, the summary contains 146 words. Saved 62%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Yeah, but where did they go?
No where. Shockingly, the article has more details than the bot summary or even the headline.
I’d love to be fully wfh, but I’d rather be employed.
The point is, enough of them said No that they didn’t have a choice but to let them do it.
Imagine what they could have done with an actual union to organize and coordinate their efforts.They’re on borrowed time at Dell.
So what? Lots of better jobs are out there. And maybe they’re not, because Dell still has to stay in business, by having employees.
They’re definitely not going to layboff half the company.
they remained on dell, but have willingly forgone the oportunity of progressing in their career within the company in order to remain at home. some are even looking for other jobs in organizations that don’t whip them back into offices.
Elsewhere.
There aren’t that many wfh options anymore.
I mean yeah, it was an “or else” joke.
Ahhh. Got it.
Clap. Clap.
The article says the “or else” was that they’d become ineligible for promotion, and half decided to do it anyway. So they didn’t lose their job.
