Comment by xyst

Comment by xyst 4 days ago

I don’t care about references from that dog shit place filled with micromanagers and corporate grinders working on projects that have no meaning and add zero value to company and the world. Hence, silent quitting. RTO just gave me the push to move on from the bullshit.

> From my experience though WFH just doesn’t work

Corporate profits tell another story

> People aren’t as invested in the company and they produce worse results

Anecdotal. What backs up this claim? Just your personal experience? What’s your data?

> companies could figure out how to keep productivity and quality up while not paying rent I’m sure they would, it’s just nobody has figured out how to do that on a large scale yet

What do you think happened during COVID-19…

Have seen many companies reduce their corporate building costs due to shift to remote work. In some cases, it was eliminated entirely the following year.

guywithahat 4 days ago

As I mention, this is just from my personal experience. I would expect Amazon doesn't make a decision like this without significant internal data, there is a lot of money to be saved if someone figures out how to do work from home.

Reply View 2 replies

Olreich 4 days ago

Amazon has yet to share any of that internal data with its internal employees or the outside world. The only reasoning shared has been vague talk about energy being higher and culture being easier to spread. There is a lot of money to be saved and a lot of initiatives that would benefit from broad embracing of WFH by Amazon.
They claim to support improving DEI for neuro-divergent and mobility-impaired folks, where WFH would be a massive improvement in their ability to contribute without being required to commute into the office which might present challenges for them.
They claim to support sustainability and achieving carbon neutrality, but forcing employees into the office burns significant fossil fuels and puts wear on vehicles and increases pollution since the majority of the workforce winds up driving a car to work. They will increase this measurable impact by 60%+ by mandating another 2 days of office-work per week.
Much more likely, there are motives to doing this change that are not aligned with data and stated goals. That could either mean nefarious goals or lacking data. But it's more likely nefarious goals, since WFH didn't seem to be hurting anything according to all the data anyone has been able to tell. I'd expect someone to be able to come up with plausible ways that WFO is better than WFH in a data-oriented manner, but it really does seem to be down to personal preference for individuals on how they like to work. Who knows, maybe Andy Jassy really likes to work in-office and thinks that anyone saying they don't is lying and lazy. We have as much evidence for that as everything else that's been conjectured.

Reply View | 1 reply
- guywithahat 4 days ago
  
  Well right, Amazon will never share their internal data with you, and they will use language to avoid insulting anyone. The fact they, along with most other major tech companies, are going back to in person work is what’s telling. If Amazon could find a way to avoid spending money on office space they would.
  What I can say and have been saying is that in my experience, it doesn’t work. It attracts employees who don’t understand the mission and people who want to do as little work as possible. If it works for you that’s great, but to attribute the move back to offices as some nefarious plan to waste money fundamentally misunderstands how businesses work. It also makes me wonder if you’re exactly the kind of employee I don’t want to hire
  
  Reply View | 0 replies