The author points out on several occasions why it makes more sense for employers to have people return to the office. Then, he delivers the punchline for WFH: "many employees simply don't want to return." That's it - no more, no less. Hidden in there somewhere is the assumption that no more justification is needed - if an employee doesn't fancy going to work, the employer should let them do whatever they want.
For the record, I don't think that this article accurately portrays the arguments on either side of the fence, and in my company we've accommodated both approaches, depending on the specific needs of the employees. But regardless of what your views are on this topic, I hope we can collectively agree that returning to the office is a more complex topic than just a matter of surveying what the (vast?) majority of employees would love to see happen. If that were to be the case, why not also survey how many hours people would like to work, how much PTO time they should have, etc.
The problem with fast-journalism articles like this one is that they make employees look like spoiled children, without properly discerning the many aspects of this pandemic which all have to be addressed for everyone's mutual benefit, including employees as well as the people who are signing their checks. Saying "many employees simply don't want to return" is not helping anyone.
The choice being made to force people back in the office seems deranged when you calmly consider the facts in a logical manner.
Everybody, including those who have been vaccinated, is being told they must wear a mask and stay six feet apart at all times.
At the same time as employees are being forced back, everybody is agreeing that contagion could be a life and death matter, particularly for parents who have kids too young to be vaccinated yet.
And what's the benefit? It's agreed that people can't chat together, can't huddle in conference rooms, so everybody who is in the office will be videoconferencing just like at home. Except that there will be more noise and distraction from others doing the same.
Piling too many contradictions on people leads to stress and peculiar behavior even if they aren't consciously aware.
Turning anger outward, even if it doesn't make sense, is a common pattern. You have to go back to the office. This could be devastating for your family. But it's inconvenient (and maybe futile) to make demands to the organization's leaders, or to find a WFH job. So you lash out at coworkers or whoever's convenient.
The risks and (lack of) benefits are not my personal opinion; it's what other people seem to think.
I would go along with any coherent view of things that is internally consistent and believed by a majority.
Eh. It gives _some_ people "flexibility and choice".
As a junior team member, one might feel compelled to be in the office when your senior is, even if that isn't when you wanted to go in given your "flexible choice".
This whole dog-and-pony-show about return to work continues to amaze me. At some point, the bill will come due, and there is no credit without an equal debit at some point. So will the debit be in the form of increased worldwide competition? A reduction in head count? More costs bore on the employees (electricity, internet, heating, space)...
This is just more feel good click bait. Google will do whatever market forces determine is best, the CEO coming out with statements like this just mean someone solved a formula and this will earn them more money (by attracting talent) than it will cost them (the complications with remote staff)
Deeply polarizing topic but I maintain that being in person is far superior to being remote. I think hybrid is the worst thing you can do, though. Pick one or the other; hybrid messes up everything. The whole point of being in person is to have access to people you’d never see or talk to otherwise. It’s much more organic to run into somebody at the water cooler and warm intro yourself and learn more about the company and the various teams. I’ve talked to C level execs, managers, jr guys, you name it. Now it’s all contrived bullshit staring at your screen some more
aerosmile|4 years ago
For the record, I don't think that this article accurately portrays the arguments on either side of the fence, and in my company we've accommodated both approaches, depending on the specific needs of the employees. But regardless of what your views are on this topic, I hope we can collectively agree that returning to the office is a more complex topic than just a matter of surveying what the (vast?) majority of employees would love to see happen. If that were to be the case, why not also survey how many hours people would like to work, how much PTO time they should have, etc.
The problem with fast-journalism articles like this one is that they make employees look like spoiled children, without properly discerning the many aspects of this pandemic which all have to be addressed for everyone's mutual benefit, including employees as well as the people who are signing their checks. Saying "many employees simply don't want to return" is not helping anyone.
perl4ever|4 years ago
The choice being made to force people back in the office seems deranged when you calmly consider the facts in a logical manner.
Everybody, including those who have been vaccinated, is being told they must wear a mask and stay six feet apart at all times.
At the same time as employees are being forced back, everybody is agreeing that contagion could be a life and death matter, particularly for parents who have kids too young to be vaccinated yet.
And what's the benefit? It's agreed that people can't chat together, can't huddle in conference rooms, so everybody who is in the office will be videoconferencing just like at home. Except that there will be more noise and distraction from others doing the same.
Piling too many contradictions on people leads to stress and peculiar behavior even if they aren't consciously aware.
Turning anger outward, even if it doesn't make sense, is a common pattern. You have to go back to the office. This could be devastating for your family. But it's inconvenient (and maybe futile) to make demands to the organization's leaders, or to find a WFH job. So you lash out at coworkers or whoever's convenient.
The risks and (lack of) benefits are not my personal opinion; it's what other people seem to think.
I would go along with any coherent view of things that is internally consistent and believed by a majority.
But people are turning off their brains.
PraetorianGourd|4 years ago
As a junior team member, one might feel compelled to be in the office when your senior is, even if that isn't when you wanted to go in given your "flexible choice".
This whole dog-and-pony-show about return to work continues to amaze me. At some point, the bill will come due, and there is no credit without an equal debit at some point. So will the debit be in the form of increased worldwide competition? A reduction in head count? More costs bore on the employees (electricity, internet, heating, space)...
NotAnOtter|4 years ago
dhanna|4 years ago
cratermoon|4 years ago
alisonkisk|4 years ago
[deleted]
unknownus3r|4 years ago
alisonkisk|4 years ago
[deleted]
rogermeier|4 years ago