back to article Amazon CEO wants his staff back in the office full time

The COVID-19 work-from-home era is over, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy has told staff in a Monday memo, signaling his desire for staff to return to working in an office five days a week. The chief exec said the hybrid model of working partially at home and the rest in the office, which has been running for the past 15 months at the …

  1. EricM

    Sure, nothing drives the ability to move fast, clarify and invigorate a sense of ownership or decision-making like a forced relocation follwed by a 3-hour commute each day ...

    Hint: If you really feel the urge to force especially the elder part of your workfore to resign, at least provide them the courtsy of inventing a somewhat intelligent sounding lie.

    1. simonlb Silver badge

      I wonder if the memo contained three two-minute adverts you couldn't skip through?

    2. Andy 73 Silver badge

      The elder part of your workforce can probably remember when people routinely relocated to be closer to their workplace.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Workplace in which they had their own office, or maybe one shared with a couple of other people at most. Offices in which it was perfectly fine to be smoking, too.

    3. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      I know many people who love WFH and would hate to lose it. It lets them look after the kids and the dog, go shopping when they want, get up late and not shave, finish that bit of DIY they never had time to do.

      Actually doing work is way down the list. They seem to think that nobody will notice, but they're wrong...

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        "It lets them look after the kids and the dog, go shopping when they want, get up late and not shave, finish that bit of DIY they never had time to do."

        Given that commuting takes time (at its worst, in my case, the equivalent of 2 full workdays a week) it's no wonder they value having their life back.

        I think the unions have missed a trick here. Having demonstrated the feasibility of remote working for many roles commuting should be paid time for those where remote working was feasible was feasible if they're then forced back to the office.

        Likewise governments with a green agenda should also be looking at this. Commuting long distances into big cities isn't really sustainable and imposing it should be subject to a tax.

      2. A. Coatsworth Silver badge
        Facepalm

        >>They seem to think that nobody will notice, but they're wrong

        So, someone is noticing but nothing is done in those specific cases? That is a problem, alright, and is not just the employees...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          I suspect it's being done, but they won't notice until they get their notice.

      3. ckm5

        Except you're wrong. Every single study has shown that people that WFH work MORE than those in the office. That's because there is zero seperation between work & home, so you wind up working all hours.

        In office, there are a million distractions, most of which managers just ignore as they are just looking at buts in seats. It's a huge red flag that a company is unable to figure out who is productive and who is not and has to rely on the "buts in seats" metric....

        But, as the OP pointed out, this is about workforce reduction without having to layoff people and pay out compensation for doing so.....

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          In my experience, every software org has a few people who much prefer to work in their corner as loner, not talk to anyone, and just get on with what they see as their work. They love WFH because it has no disruptions. They're completely unaware that they are being cursed up and down by the rest of the team for never coming to meetings, not sharing status and generally not being a team player.

          If they really are as good as they think they are (most aren't) a good manager may be able to handle them and use their skills. Poor managers can't cope, so ignore them until either the project dies, the rest of the team look elsewhere, or somebody senior steps in.

          WFH can be great for the right person in the right role, but not in all situations.

  2. Electric Panda

    My guess is there will be a laundry list of special cases and exemptions with many technical teams still being fully remote. The RTO mandate will apply to the likes of marketing etc.

    That's usually how it works.

    1. Woodnag

      My guess is that RTO will be monitored on divisions that Amazon wants to prune anyway with the message "TRO or leave". Cheaper than layoffs. Then, middle of next year, layoffs to clear the remainder.

  3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    IOW he didn't manage to offload a lot of office space and it doesn't look good if it's sitting around empty.

  4. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Devil

    "Hotdesking will be cancelled"

    Get in early or you'll be working in the kitchen. Leave it too late and it'll be the bathroom.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      It'll be the bathroom

      Great way to snooze away a few hours, especially if exe toilets which were single cabins only. if no-one can find the boss he must be doing something important and it might be sacking us, so eyes down.

      and they cant come find me cause you need a pass for the loos

  5. LinuxMaster

    Time to boycott Amaz0n, Aw$ first.

    Greedy ceo & evil company. Boycott everything amaz0n & affiliated companies.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Time to boycott Amaz0n, Aw$ first.

      yep. right after i get this phone case for my friend.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    WFH is a laugh

    You want the company’s dime.

    You do the company’s time.

    At work, working.

    1. desht

      Re: WFH is a laugh

      You know being a corporate kiss-arse is pointless if you post anonymously, right?

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: WFH is a laugh

      "You do the company’s time."

      Good idea. Make commuting company's time.

    3. ckm5

      Re: WFH is a laugh

      Yet another cluesless manager.

      Good.

      It just means I can hire your best people to work remotely and you're stuck with the ones that just can't or won't leave.

  7. deadlockvictim

    El Reg» We're sure no one would dream of asking in those little notes how many days a week the chief is in the office on average.

    You're not suggesting that WFH is a perk for senior management only, are you?

    Besides, the golf course *is* work.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Besides, the golf course *is* work.

      preaching to the converted here, but 99.9pc of them of time-wasting loafers. Golf is boring. Well, its alright but too easy. And it's Scottish, so dont want to encourage that too much now, Jimmy.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I'm sure he's in 5 days a week. I'm also sure he isn't paying £7 a gallon (imp) and spending 3hr a day driving through never ending roadworks, then paying £5 a day to park and get some strinking bus into the city centre (or £5k a year to stand on a train for 90min) and then having to pay the best part of £10 for your lunch or deal with a soggy sandwich. Whilst some git politician with an expense account tells us we don't need to spend more than tuppence a day on food.

      I'm sure we'd all be happier to got to work 5days a week if we driven or flown in, got the exec lift to the top floor, mooched about a bit and then went for a full expenses lunch somewhere before being flown home again.

      My own business tried this recently and got told resoundingly to fuck off by the employees. Luckily the business doesn't sell things it sells employee knowledge so we have a bit more leverage than some.

      The business bottled it and the RTO rhetoric has dropped for now.

  8. Dinanziame Silver badge

    I remember I used to be happy that I knew with almost certainty that if I wanted to talk to somebody I could go to their desk and they'd be there. That's something I actually regret from pre-covid.

    And yeah, I get it that people don't like to be disturbed at their desk all the time, but that's kinda part of the job.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Happy

      I remember I used to be happy ...

      should have left it there, Son.

      " if I wanted to talk to somebody I could go to their desk and they'd be there."

      No. Unless that people is a hot lass. I used ICQ at AOL with a lady that sat 8 feet behind me. Glory dyas.

    2. lglethal Silver badge
      Go

      Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

      Now you can check on Teams (other programs are allowed), if the person is actually at their desk, and not stuck in a meeting, before you schlepp your butt across a campus to find out that they're too busy to talk to you.

      You can also save yourself the time of schlepping over there, by asking the question directly over Teams. You can even show them your desktop remotely, if you need them to answer a specific question. Think of all that company time saved.

      There are times when face to face works better, usually when physical equipment is involved. But for those times, you can schedule a Meeting to get everyone together. Walking across a campus to ask someone to join you to look at something, only for them to say they arent available for another hour or so, just wastes everyone's time.

      And I'm not sure what sort of company you worked for where you could almost guarantee someone would be at their desk when you needed them. I dont feel like the number of meetings I or my colleagues attend has increased much from when I started out in this business. Someone being at their desk has always been hit and miss, through meetings, sick days, out of office days, business travel, people being in workshops, in the lab, etc. The only job (before Teams and the like became ubiquitous) where I could tell with certainty if a colleague was at their desk, was one where we all worked in one giant open plan office (200 engineers in a single room, who the f%&k thought that was a good idea, I will never know!), where you could just stand up and see if they were sitting at their desk. Otherwise, you took chances, and probably wasted your time more often than not.

      Doing things remotely is significantly more convenient, most of the time...

      1. TonyJ

        Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

        100% agree.

        My diary is already always 75-80% full of Teams calls. The idea of them being face-to-face meetings would be horrendous. I mean, an awful lot of them are already unnecessary but it would be worse if they were unnecessary and needed me to travel to them.

        And, as I've previously mentioned, my team of 6 are spread across Europe. Myself and one other in England (but 150 miles apart), and another in Scotland so hardly easy to commute, just for the UK guys.

        I get more done because people aren't stood over my shoulder wanting "a quick chat" all the time and I can simply set a status when I need to go undisturbed.

        And the customer is pan-European, soon to also include APAC, so yeah, there's that as well.

        I do occasionally have face to face meetings but not too often and it works.

        Not every job can be done remotely but where they can, it makes a lot of sense to allow it. And that's before commuting, costs of travel/fuel/parking etc etc etc

        1. Andy 73 Silver badge

          Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

          > My diary is already always 75-80% full of Teams calls.

          Stop right there. If anything you're proposing is to deal with that sort of nonsense, then it too will be nonsense. Meetings are good, sure, but if they dominate your day you are not actually being productive. This is the consequence of corporate managerialism run riot - and if the solution is to retreat to a bunker so you can deal with it, then that should be a cause for worry, not a justification for remote working.

          1. TonyJ

            Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

            Some of it is by choice and some of it is necessary and some of it is wasteful bullshit but it's a load I take so my architects are free to get on with their jobs without being called into endless, pointless, meetings. I can protect them by taking that load over for their benefit.

            There's a roughly 60/40 split customer and internal calls.

            And just because they're in my diary doesn't mean I automatically attend - I manage my workload very well and have the freedom to choose what is and isn't important enough to involve me.

            It's our most valuable client (in revenue terms) so that extra bit of loving is fine as far as I am concerned. Oh, and I don't work early or late except by exception and I ensure I take regular breaks, including a full hour for lunch (except again, by exception), away from my desk.

            So no, the way I deal with it is far from nonsense because I don't allow to become such. That only comes about when your autonomy is taken away - like being forced into an office. I have an incredible balance to my work and work/life because I manage my own time.

          2. ckm5

            Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

            Maybe, sometimes, someone's job IS talking to people.....

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

          The territory I'm expected to cover includes Northern and Southern hemisphere countries

          We have about 15 offices covering those locations and according to out RTO commands from the C-suite somehow I am meant to interact with my collegues and have face to face meetings with them all. Oh and no travel expenses.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

            No travel expenses? No travel. Simple.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

          > My diary is already always 75-80% full of Teams calls.

          You need to learn to say No, or find another job.

          1. TonyJ

            Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

            You know some jobs require that person to act as an interface and be on calls. That you can't understand it (or what I've already followed up with), says more about your closed mind than anything else.

            Which is probably why you chose to post anonymously.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

              If you're ok with that fine, otherwise find another job. Where's the problem?

      2. Bebu
        Windows

        Re: Sorry, but I cant agree with you... :)

        save yourself the time of schlepping over there

        I always found leaving my office and ambling over the campus in the fresh air was an excellent way of clearing the cobwebs from the mind. Even having an office was a productivity booster - open plan was likely the least productive innovation* of the last century. I remember from someone's memoir of working at Bell Labs that each staff member had a separate office. How much of our world originated from there?

        Schlepping sounds like something from the Ministry of Silly Walks but I suppose it's a West Coast thing.

        Regarding this Amazon C-suite nong we can soon expect his requiring all staff to bring their own empty coke bottle to the office.

        As for levelling the ranks history demonstrates the efficacy of the machine gun which this edict is.

        Nonsense like this leaves you with only the personnel that have few choices but who are also rather unlikely to be the cream of the crop and certainly would be demoralised and unmotivated.

        * AI is favourite for this century but early days still...

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      What if together with the RTO, they're also implementing some sort of FlexDesk policy as ours are doing?

      Which means that there's no "their desk" anymore, and finding people will have you start digging in an app no matter what to see where they actually are.

    4. Gene Cash Silver badge

      > And yeah, I get it that people don't like to be disturbed at their desk all the time, but that's kinda part of the job.

      No. Fuck you. My job is writing code for our users, and I need concentration for that, so you can piss right off with your whiny insistent little demands for my attention.

      If you need to ask/tell me something, there's email (or teams, which will get ignored until I have time to deal with it, or you personally sign my paycheck)

    5. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      "I used to be happy that I knew with almost certainty that if I wanted to talk to somebody I could go to their desk and they'd be there"

      Yes, and they were completely pissed off with your interruptions.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    'ossers

    get back to the office and waste all that electricity, time and energy when you can work for a home office at hours that fit your creative drives. No come into an office that is air-conned to within a inch of its; life. With carpet that charges u up with static leccy. And people. People everywhere. My god, one just tried to sit at the desk opposite. Told him someone was sitting there. He said it was his desk. Worse than the District Line after Victoria.

    Oh yes, commute too. The joy of all joy where everyone is so happy to be doing that. Sprinkle downpours of rain with an 'brella and a homeless person beggin cause he spent all his benefits (prob £1500 a month ) on crack. And this is West Central Money London.

    Magic.

    The sheer savings and the big corps resistance to that is a paradox.

    1. 0laf Silver badge
      Holmes

      Re: 'ossers

      One suspects that these very rich folk have big investments in commercial properties and big empty offices are worth less than fuck all.

  10. Roger Kynaston
    Go

    lucky escape

    A couple of years ago I got into a discussion about working at the tat bazarr/bit barn but it didn't go anywhere.

    I'm glad it didn't come to fruition.

    1. MiguelC Silver badge
      Flame

      Re: lucky escape

      A friend relocated to Czechia to work for them and 2 weeks into it they reneged on the contract offer... absolute bastards

    2. TonyJ

      Re: lucky escape

      Funnily enough, me too. Three times different hiring "managers" reached out. Twice they just stopped responding and the third time, I didn't bother replying.

  11. Andy 73 Silver badge

    Here we go

    Lots of people who like to be treated like adults are going to throw temper tantrums because large companies don't think they can be treated like adults.

    It's suited the vocally anti-social to work from home, alongside people who genuinely thrive in quiet, controlled environments without a long and tiresome commute at either end. Yes, working from home is a benefit and you can get lots of work done.

    However... and it's a big however.. I'd be willing to bet Amazon are sitting on a bunch of metrics that show teams that actually work as teams in the same shared physical space perform better overall. This isn't just about the high performers who can go and work miracles in their back bedrooms, it's also about the people who need mentorship, people who value social interaction, those that don't actually have a convenient spare office at home and end up working in an awkward space in the corner of their flat and those who just don't want to work at all.

    I'm sure I'll get plenty of downvotes from the people who regard themselves as special, and those who think the corporates owe them something for being so clever, but the reality of working for a company is that you're working with a bunch of other people - and guess what, a few millennium of social evolution can't be magically replaced by once a day Zoom calls, despite claims to the contrary. Yes, it is truly nice to work from home if you have the right environment, but the people who employ you are going to be looking at the performance of remote teams and making decisions based on what works best for them, not what's nicest for you.

    1. lglethal Silver badge
      Stop

      Re: Here we go

      See if what you're saying was actually true and the reasons this was being done, then people would actually be less up in arms about it. But the truth is that EVERY major study on the topic of remote and hybrid working has found significant efficiency improvements from Hybrid and remote working. In pretty much every metric - employee output, employee engagement, employee success at meeting set goals, remote and hybrid workers are more successful than in office. There are multiple studies covering this, a quick search here on El Reg will get you a half dozen articles covering them.

      Unfortunately, in every other case where this has come up, it comes back to a few specific things:

      - companies paying for unused real estate in long lease conditions, which they cant get out of so, they want to justify by having people in office.

      - Disguised lay-offs, i.e. force people to do something they dont want to (come into the office every day), a number of employees will choose to leave, and boom you've reduced your numbers, so can avoid the bad publicity of forced redundancies (it never seems to matter to upper management that those that leave first, are those with the best and most desirable skills, leaving a less talented and less engaged workforce).

      - Managers being afraid that they'll be for the chopping block, because they cant be SEEN to be managing their subordinates.

      - Managers having no idea how to manage people properly and remotely, and so demand to have the people there for them to micromanage.

      All you will hear from any company doing this is wishy washy statements about people working better together in the office, but they will never show the metrics that might actually show this. Basically, because they dont exist...

      1. Andy 73 Silver badge

        Re: Here we go

        Not every, and not long term.

        Yes, many companies saw short term gains... which fell over time, reverting to the mean and then often falling below. Early rushes to remote working were predicated on those findings, but now that many companies have lost the benefit, things are changing.

        Of course you're right that the economy has changed - but that doesn't mean companies are lying when they say they need tighter control of their workforce. (Or at least any more than they were lying when they said they needed to hire constantly and promise ever larger perks to out-pace their rivals).

        Note specifically that Amazon more than many companies is massively driven by metrics. They're notoriously hard nosed about this, and performance (both individual and in the large) is used to make most decisions. Saying they're not using metrics because you don't like the outcome is really not a very believable stance.

        1. lglethal Silver badge
          Go

          Re: Here we go

          Do you have links to these studies that show a drop in benefits? Because I have to say I've not seen a single report of that. The closest I've found have been studies related to dropping to a 4 day work week (reduced working time of 25 or 30 hour week). And the results of those studies are very mixed, as in 50% say there very happy and keeping it, 50% say it didnt work for them. But that's a completely different topic.

          It's certainly not been reported here on El Reg that the remote working gains drop off. And based on the majority of feedback from El Regians it doesnt sound like most people are experiencing that in their workplaces. So can you back up that statement?

          1. Andy 73 Silver badge

            Re: Here we go

            It's literally a Google away.

            https://www.forbes.com/sites/bryanrobinson/2023/08/12/remote-work-might-not-be-as-productive-as-once-thought-new-studies-show/

            https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2024-01-04/2024-year-employers-clamp-down-on-remote-work-not-so-fast

            https://www.gspublishing.com/content/research/en/reports/2023/08/28/6fd0a8a0-3831-4ace-b577-a93337f01ec8.html

            https://www.economist.com/business/2021/06/10/remote-workers-work-longer-not-more-efficiently

            Chatting to a senior guy in Amazon, they've certainly seen that the initial honeymoon period doesn't last - but it's over a period of a year or so, which is longer than many of the remote working studies run for.

            Note also that most Reg readers are motivated IT types, with far lower senior management representation (as you'd expect). People in the forums will be reporting how they feel about remote working (generally positive), not how well their company is performing (which is an issue in the currently very tight economic circumstances).

            1. Jadith

              Re: Here we go

              Your first two links reference the same Standford paper. It's a good read, and it suggests full remote work may lead to productivity loss, but hybrid work may actually lead to productivity gains. Though, the only studies they elaborated on for the fully remote work were both located in India. One of them a call center and the other an intesting study involving software engineers and the amount of code comments.

              However, what I found most interseting was the disparity between how workers and managers measure these productivity changes.

              The third link is paywalled

              The Goldman Sach's report is more about investment futures. The only conclusion it seems to draw is that a comparison of methodologies used in gathering productivity data in regards to remote work, the metrics driven methods show more negatives than the survey riven methods. Honestly, it is rather vague and never puts forward a specific conclusion. (though it has lots to say about realestate and service consumption in city centers.)

            2. ckm5

              Re: Here we go

              I've worked remotely for 20+ years. IMHE across a dozen companies, it's the absolute best way to recruit top talent and have people who are committed to the business.

              This attitude of "you must be in the office" is, quite frankly, hugely counterproductive. It costs enormous amounts of $$$ to maintain real estate, money which would be better invested in the business.

              And you never get more than maybe 4 hours of work/day from in office people. They are tired from commutes, take time to catch up/recover, take off for coffee/lunch breaks, spend time on the phone trying to coordinate home stuff during business hours because that's when things are open and then signoff completely at the end of the day. Never mind the constant interruptions from people "stopping to chat".

              Unless, that is, you are willing to pay enough money to have them living close to work. In Silicon Valley/SF Bay Area, that's at least $300k/year, so your overall workforce cost just went through the roof. If you add that to real estate overhead, it's just stupid money.

      2. jwatkins

        Re: Here we go

        So... if Amazon (or whoever) said, "We've paid for all of this office space, so we need you to use it" - would that be OK?

        The problem with hybrid working is that hardly anyone is in the office on Mondays/Fridays and the there is not a seat to be had on Wednesdays. The company then has to pay for "unused" desks - from corporate perspective a bad thing.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Here we go

      Oh, I'm sure I'm special, but the downvote is because you didn't provide the amazing metrics-based evidence yourself.

      If they actually have evidence, why don't they show it?

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Here we go

      "I'd be willing to bet Amazon are sitting on a bunch of metrics"

      I''d be willing to bet that such metrics don't show the amount of unpaid time staff spend on commuting. It's very easy to show productivity when you only include part of the time that those doing the producing are actually contributing to your company.

      1. Andy 73 Silver badge

        Re: Here we go

        No they don't. Obviously, and for good reason.

        Besides the fact that Amazon don't care, it is entirely up to the individual where they work in relation to where they live. There is no social contract between a company and it's employees to make a specific individual's commute convenient and short.

    4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Here we go

      "It's suited the vocally anti-social to work from home"

      Does not compute. Working from home might suit those who might be classified as anti-social because they don't want to get involved in group communications. But the vocally anti-social? How would it suit them not to have anybody to shout at?

      1. Andy 73 Silver badge

        Re: Here we go

        The vocally anti-social are the ones who post on forums like this, "I work from home and I'm so much more productive when I don't have to deal with interruptions from my idiot team-mates or go to meetings that I hate and have people wasting my time". See some of the comments replying to this post.

        Is it so hard to grasp?

  12. SlippyBuckfast

    It's in the AWS interview process

    Assuming these employees have passed the Amazon interview process to get in, they are either fun loving incredibly social people who love interacting directly with people and working 60 hour weeks for a billionaire. Or... they lied there way through it like I'd imagine most british folk would - and would much rather not deal with the realities of their sweaty boring coworkers in their face 8 hours a day, microwaving tuna, talking constantly, pulling them into useless meetings. The roost POI is coming into view... I suppose lucky in that my UK company was already really flexible, with only key support folk being in the office and meeting already starting to migrate to Team/Slack/Google when covid hit - The CEO read the room, closed our office and we now all work from home - no office overheads, wasted time in meetings plummeted, and happy people who can actually combine their work with their life - something that US companies never seem to see a distiction between. One of several reasons why I could never work for a US company, The old mantra of 'I work to live, I don't live to work' is an anathama to US companies - to them that just means you are slacking.

  13. Doctor Tarr

    What would you choose

    There’s a fair few on this site that a) don’t like management, and b) don’t want to work 5 days in the office.

    So given that Amazon are going to increase days in but reduce management does that net out better for you?

    I have 90 min each way commute which costs £450 a month, so I’ll deal with management and just come in twice a week.

    1. Steve Button Silver badge

      Re: What would you choose

      When you have a really good manager, you hardly notice them as they will just shield you from all the crap from above and step out of the way to enable you to get on with your job. A really bad manager will try to micromanage people, and even worse will blame other people when things go wrong.

      They can be either the good or the bad sort and the blast radius will be pretty much the same regardless of whether I'm in the office or WFH.

      Given the choice I'd probably pick the bad manager and avoid the 90 minute each way commute, as that would give me an extra 3 hours to manage the bad manager. Although it depends how bad they are I suppose, but I've only worked for a couple of REALLY bad ones in 30+ years. And they usually don't last.

      Unfortunately just by Amazon choosing to "reduce management" that doesn't mean it's going to be better. You might just end up with more stressed managers who can't cope with the workload and miss important things.

  14. Gordon 10
    FAIL

    Uncomfortable facts of life for Tech CEO's

    None of them have ever attempted to properly measure productivity of tech workers.

    Also tech CEO's. "Working from home is affecting our productivity."

    Really?

    Please show your working - you can't can you?

  15. Marty McFly Silver badge
    FAIL

    Seems strange for Amazon....

    They have always focused on hiring the best & the brightest. The reason given for WFO is for better team work via interpersonal interaction.

    Forcing WFO limits the hiring pool for the entire team to just the geographic region near the office.

  16. Valeyard

    flatten the hierarchy

    translated as managers having to give less time to more direct reports

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: flatten the hierarchy

      Alternatively translates as micromangers not having enough time to get on reports' (direct or otherwise) backs.

      1. Valeyard

        Re: flatten the hierarchy

        true but a shit manager's a shit manager whereever they are, and it's pot luck as to which one is going to stay (I'd argue micromanagers are more likely to play the game of office politics and sucking up)

  17. Dan 55 Silver badge

    Expert who coined presenteeism term says employers who force staff back are dinosaurs

    Sir Cary Cooper says ‘micromanagers’ risk driving away talent, damaging wellbeing and harming productivity

    Employers who force staff to return to the office five days a week have been called the “dinosaurs of our age” by one of the world’s leading experts who coined the term “presenteeism”.

    Sir Cary Cooper, a professor of organisational psychology and health at the University of Manchester’s Alliance Manchester Business School, said employers imposing strict requirements on staff to be in the office risked driving away talented workers, damaging the wellbeing of employees and undermining their financial performance.

  18. Gene Cash Silver badge

    Simple solution

    My drive in is on the clock. You want me to spend 30-45min on the road every day? Pay for it.

    And since I'm a nice guy, I won't even charge you for the drive home.

    I've already negotiated that I don't do Daylight "Saving" Time. I'm at work at 8am Eastern STANDARD Time every day all year. It's not my fault you fuck around with the clock.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Simple solution

      Unfortunately half votes don't work. I'd charge for driving home as well. Actually IME the drive home would have been worth paying for. Several times once the inhibition of what was on the screen was removed and the conscious mind was occupied by driving, the subconscious would suddenly pop up the solution to the current problem.

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Simple solution

      Unfortunately half votes don't work. I'd charge for driving home as well. Actually IME the drive home represented actual value added. Several times once the inhibition of what was on the screen was removed and the conscious mind was occupied by driving, the subconscious would suddenly pop up the solution to the current problem.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like