As a person with a disability, I started working remotely before the pandemic, after years of stressful in-office experiences.
I’ve had to be hospitalized multiple times for stress-related illnesses after working in person for more than a couple of months.
At that time, Amazon’s internal messaging was that we would be remote indefinitely — there were no whispers that RTO was coming, so I felt confident relocating.
Our work involved sensitive employee data, so we couldn’t have meetings or calls in a cubicle or open-office floor plan.
Paired with the mass layoffs that were happening nearly every quarter, I didn’t feel I had job security.
In response to a request from Insider to comment on Amazon’s return-to-office order, a spokesperson for the company said: "We believe that being in the office at least three days a week is the right long-term approach because it drives culture, team connection, innovation, and learning.
The original article contains 775 words, the summary contains 150 words. Saved 81%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
“We believe that being in the office at least three days a week is the right long-term approach because it drives culture, team connection, innovation, and learning.”
Translation: We paid for a bunch of buildings and need people to come back and use them. We also don’t recognize that you’re adults that can get their work done without us physically seeing you.
Anyone can make browsing the web look like work from a desk. Frankly, I get more work done at home without being distracted. I’m pretty chatty at work and I could engage in long, usually work related, conversations without actually getting any “work” done (software).
Also, if I wfh I can get an extra hour of sleep and take a nap on my lunch break, which makes my work higher quality.
Slightly different translation: We need to lay people off, but announcing layoffs will drop our stock prices, so enacting policies to get people to quit - especially if those policies disproportionately target people with disabilities, health issues, people who don’t conform to our economic or social values (must be willing to be yanked around by corporate, be willing to live paycheck to paycheck in high cost of living area, must not have other priorities such as children) - so that we don’t have to deal stock price drops or lawsuits for laying off vulnerable members of staff.
It’s ‘secret layoff’ with a purity test.
Folks who are less committed to the corporate bullshit fail. Folks who have other priorities fail. Those who really believe, or are desperate for the job are left behind.
I have to be honest: I don’t know if you’re right.
What I know (or at least, think I know), is that layoffs indicate poor company performance and that tanks stock prices.
But the reality is that the world has moved into an openly greedy phase of business. It’s totally plausible that companies and investors don’t bother with the charade and know that layoffs are often just money grabs. I don’t have time right now to actually look it up, but what you said is totally believable, and probably accurate.
Ugh. Can we replace business classes with empathy classes?
Because it’s not about the office space. It’s about corporate greed. The upper management, who don’t actually do anything but manage people, need those people in the office in order to keep their jobs. It’s also a convenient way to do layoffs without needing to pay severance or unemployment and further doesn’t stress investors who would pull money if they heard there were layoffs.
Why do managers need people in the office to maintain their jobs at Amazon? This is a company that has been deeply studied for its slavish dedication to metrics as a way to run the company. It is also a company that has been having issues providing enough office space for its staff, both within a city and in general.
Maybe this is a way for Amazon to get soft layoffs, but I find it hard that a company like Amazon wouldn’t be thrilled to go for full remote so it can skip paying for some assets and allow itself to set pay at a national average instead of High Cost of Living cities.
The point isn’t efficiency, the point is greed. Efficiency doesn’t make money, it’s idealistic. Office managers literally need people and an office in order to do anything. What are they going to do all day when no one needs pens or snacks or in-person administration? Assistants have nothing to schedule (except zoom calls) when people aren’t travelling or going to in-person meetings. Amazon has already spent millions on building huge offices all over the world and has to justify it’s use or else they sit empty and don’t generate any revenue or business. Middle managers and project managers can still be remote since much of what they do is just email, but some of those guys need to see people working in office in order to have their power trips. The real reason these middle managers are demanding RTO so hard is specifically because people are actually MORE productive at home, which means that their jobs are on the line since there’s no whip to crack. Who needs a slave driver when the slaves all hit their metrics?
The point isn’t efficiency, the point is greed. Efficiency doesn’t make money, it’s idealistic.
lol, wut? How is anything not efficiency in Amazon’s system not going to benefit their bottom line? This is a company that decided to out Walmart Walmart and did well. Middle management may not like efficiency, but this is a company that will fire managers for not meeting metrics or company goals. I fail to see “office real estate value” being a corporate goal.
Amazon has already spent millions on building huge offices all over the world and has to justify it’s use or else they sit empty and don’t generate any revenue or business.
And Amazon wouldn’t sell these offices in a heartbeat? A company that creates the conditions where staff are too scared to help a person dying from a heart attack are going to suddenly get a big ol’ softy for their corporate real estate vendor? Seriously?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
As a person with a disability, I started working remotely before the pandemic, after years of stressful in-office experiences.
I’ve had to be hospitalized multiple times for stress-related illnesses after working in person for more than a couple of months.
At that time, Amazon’s internal messaging was that we would be remote indefinitely — there were no whispers that RTO was coming, so I felt confident relocating.
Our work involved sensitive employee data, so we couldn’t have meetings or calls in a cubicle or open-office floor plan.
Paired with the mass layoffs that were happening nearly every quarter, I didn’t feel I had job security.
In response to a request from Insider to comment on Amazon’s return-to-office order, a spokesperson for the company said: "We believe that being in the office at least three days a week is the right long-term approach because it drives culture, team connection, innovation, and learning.
The original article contains 775 words, the summary contains 150 words. Saved 81%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
“We believe that being in the office at least three days a week is the right long-term approach because it drives culture, team connection, innovation, and learning.”
Translation: We paid for a bunch of buildings and need people to come back and use them. We also don’t recognize that you’re adults that can get their work done without us physically seeing you.
Anyone can make browsing the web look like work from a desk. Frankly, I get more work done at home without being distracted. I’m pretty chatty at work and I could engage in long, usually work related, conversations without actually getting any “work” done (software).
Also, if I wfh I can get an extra hour of sleep and take a nap on my lunch break, which makes my work higher quality.
It’s all about control.
Slightly different translation: We need to lay people off, but announcing layoffs will drop our stock prices, so enacting policies to get people to quit - especially if those policies disproportionately target people with disabilities, health issues, people who don’t conform to our economic or social values (must be willing to be yanked around by corporate, be willing to live paycheck to paycheck in high cost of living area, must not have other priorities such as children) - so that we don’t have to deal stock price drops or lawsuits for laying off vulnerable members of staff.
It’s ‘secret layoff’ with a purity test.
Folks who are less committed to the corporate bullshit fail. Folks who have other priorities fail. Those who really believe, or are desperate for the job are left behind.
For sure. This essentially axes all of your remote employees.
Announcing layoffs usually improves stock price 🤣
I have to be honest: I don’t know if you’re right.
What I know (or at least, think I know), is that layoffs indicate poor company performance and that tanks stock prices.
But the reality is that the world has moved into an openly greedy phase of business. It’s totally plausible that companies and investors don’t bother with the charade and know that layoffs are often just money grabs. I don’t have time right now to actually look it up, but what you said is totally believable, and probably accurate.
Ugh. Can we replace business classes with empathy classes?
Why would Amazon, the company hyperfocused on efficiency, make office space the one thing they won’t budge on?
Because it’s not about the office space. It’s about corporate greed. The upper management, who don’t actually do anything but manage people, need those people in the office in order to keep their jobs. It’s also a convenient way to do layoffs without needing to pay severance or unemployment and further doesn’t stress investors who would pull money if they heard there were layoffs.
Why do managers need people in the office to maintain their jobs at Amazon? This is a company that has been deeply studied for its slavish dedication to metrics as a way to run the company. It is also a company that has been having issues providing enough office space for its staff, both within a city and in general.
Maybe this is a way for Amazon to get soft layoffs, but I find it hard that a company like Amazon wouldn’t be thrilled to go for full remote so it can skip paying for some assets and allow itself to set pay at a national average instead of High Cost of Living cities.
The point isn’t efficiency, the point is greed. Efficiency doesn’t make money, it’s idealistic. Office managers literally need people and an office in order to do anything. What are they going to do all day when no one needs pens or snacks or in-person administration? Assistants have nothing to schedule (except zoom calls) when people aren’t travelling or going to in-person meetings. Amazon has already spent millions on building huge offices all over the world and has to justify it’s use or else they sit empty and don’t generate any revenue or business. Middle managers and project managers can still be remote since much of what they do is just email, but some of those guys need to see people working in office in order to have their power trips. The real reason these middle managers are demanding RTO so hard is specifically because people are actually MORE productive at home, which means that their jobs are on the line since there’s no whip to crack. Who needs a slave driver when the slaves all hit their metrics?
lol, wut? How is anything not efficiency in Amazon’s system not going to benefit their bottom line? This is a company that decided to out Walmart Walmart and did well. Middle management may not like efficiency, but this is a company that will fire managers for not meeting metrics or company goals. I fail to see “office real estate value” being a corporate goal.
And Amazon wouldn’t sell these offices in a heartbeat? A company that creates the conditions where staff are too scared to help a person dying from a heart attack are going to suddenly get a big ol’ softy for their corporate real estate vendor? Seriously?
Because Andy Jassy is an idiot on an ego trip.