Business The Work From Home Free-for-All Is Coming to an End - The laptop class discovers that, actually, they have no baginning power over the C-suite; in fact, they may even have less power than the blue collar chuds.

Lifestyle Workplace

The Work From Home Free-for-All Is Coming to an End
Amazon’s CEO just called everyone back to the office full time. If you thought your two days a week at home were safe, think again.

By Vanessa Fuhrmans, Katherine Bindley and Chip Cutter
Sept. 20, 2024 9:00 pm ET

Amazon Chief Executive Andy Jassy set CEOs abuzz with envy—and white-collar workers with fear—this week with a surprise memo calling corporate staffers back to the office full time.

Now, long after hybrid work seemed a settled matter at many companies, suddenly both sides are wondering: Who’s next?

At a party in Seattle Tuesday evening, shortly after Jassy went public with his plan, his return-to-office rally cry was a hot topic among executives in attendance.

“It was the talk of the town,” says Glenn Kelman, CEO of Seattle-based real-estate brokerage Redfin, who was there.

Until Jassy’s memo, 4½ years after the Covid-19 pandemic sent everyone home, bosses and employees had largely reached a truce on part-time remote work. Many company leaders looked out at their substantially empty offices in quiet exasperation. But they feared that forcing their employees to come to the office more often could send top performers fleeing for more flexible work setups elsewhere. The handful of companies that have returned to full-time, in-person work, including United Parcel Service and Goldman Sachs, have been outliers. The number of firms requiring five days in the office has actually fallen by 15% from a year ago, according to data from Flex Index, which tracks the work policies of more than 6,300 companies.

But a tougher labor market, especially for white-collar professionals, is now changing the calculus. With jobs harder to find and more companies willing to cut them, the balance of power is shifting from workers to bosses. Many of those bosses still worry that productivity and innovation suffer when people aren’t together in an office. With Jassy laying down the law at Amazon, some executives predict more full-time office mandates will now follow.

In a KPMG survey of 400 U.S. CEOs released this week, nearly 80% said that they expected corporate employees to be in offices full time within the next three years. That’s more than double the 34% who said so in April.

Kelman said other CEOs will be watching Amazon for two things: Will Amazon bleed workers? Or will this give it a competitive edge?

“There’s one world in which Amazon loses talent—it doesn’t become an employer of choice,” says Kelman. “And there’s another world where Amazon is able to innovate faster, is able to resolve snafus more quickly.”

Redfin employees—currently expected to be in the office two days a week—have already queried Kelman about whether he’ll follow suit, he says. Though he has no plans to require more days, he says, hybrid work is harder than everyone thought it would be.

“It’s working,” he says. “But it’s hard just as a physical fact to pay for an office that is mostly empty.”
A layoff without layoffs

In his note to Amazon workers announcing the change, Jassy said that the new policy will help both the company and its employees.

“We’ve observed that it’s easier for our teammates to learn, model, practice, and strengthen our culture,” he wrote about office work. “[C]ollaborating, brainstorming, and inventing are simpler and more effective; teaching and learning from one another are more seamless; and, teams tend to be better connected to one another.”

Some current and former Amazon employees suspect that Jassy isn’t just interested in more collaboration and connection. They blasted Jassy’s memo as being tantamount to a layoff announcement for workers who will be alienated by the new policy.

“The fact he didn’t use the word ‘layoffs’ doesn’t change the meaning of the lengthy email he sent to company employees explaining a fresh round of flagrantly unpopular and alienating policy changes,” wrote Tony Carr, a former Amazon general manager who left the company late last year, on LinkedIn.

An Amazon spokesman said any inferences about motive beyond what Jassy laid out in his memo are inaccurate. Amazon doesn’t plan to reduce overall headcount as part of its new policy, he added.

Jassy said in his memo that the company understands that some workers will need to make adjustments to their personal lives to accommodate working in the office five days a week, which was why the new policy wouldn’t go into effect until Jan. 2.

Other return-to-office orders have sparked worker exoduses. Nearly half the staffers at Grindr resigned last fall after the dating app shifted from a “remote-first” policy to requiring office attendance twice a week, according to the Communications Workers of America. Some Farmers Group employees quit last year after the insurer said the majority of Farmers employees should be in the office three days a week. A few months later, Farmers cut 2,400 jobs, or 11% of its workforce.

The problem for bosses, though, is that it’s often high-performing employees who leave, since they have the best odds of getting hired elsewhere, says Stanford University economist Nicholas Bloom. “Managers are very happy to tell underperformers, ‘You gotta come in or you’re out of here,” he adds. With more coveted employees, “they often just don’t want to enforce it, because it impacts their own bonus from promotions.”

CJ Felli, a 29-year-old systems-development engineer with Amazon, added an “Open to Work” banner to his LinkedIn profile not long after Amazon made its announcement. He’s hunting for a new job and says the company’s new policy was a tipping point.

Felli lives only 15 minutes from his office in Seattle and doesn’t mind going in three days a week as the company has been requiring since last year; lately he’s been going in almost every day. He’s a huge fan of Amazon’s culture and says getting a job there was the proudest moment of his life. But he fears as a result of the new policy that the company will lose a lot of its midlevel talent, especially parents and those who have long commutes.

“We are not going to be able to flourish and survive long term if we’re just an entry-level college shop,” he says.

Pavi Theva, 30, was working as a product manager for Amazon’s customer service technology team in Austin last year when Amazon began cracking down on its three-day-a-week mandate for office attendance. After twice going to the office two days in a week instead of three, Theva’s manager had a conversation with her about how if it continued to happen, it could come up in her performance review.

Theva says she enjoyed going into an office before the pandemic. But afterward, her days in the office often didn’t make sense. “No one else from my team was working from Austin but I was still asked to go into the office and sit by myself,” says Theva, who left Amazon in February to start her own leadership and career coaching business.

Employees are more likely to understand the company’s culture and become a part of it if they’re with other Amazonians in person, even if those people aren’t on their team, according to a company spokesperson.
Reversing remote work

It’s hard to overstate how much remote and hybrid work have reshaped the postpandemic labor market. It has enabled moves to lower-cost areas, let working parents better coordinate child care and brought millions of people into the workforce—including those with disabilities. And it made it easier for mothers of young children to stay on the job, helping drive a sharp increase in the number of women working.

Tech-industry workers especially took advantage of the ability to work remotely, flocking from high-cost coast cities to cheaper locales such as Salt Lake City, Utah, and Boise, Idaho. High in demand, many commanded the same pay they made in San Francisco and Seattle. “Work from anywhere” became a favorite recruiting tactic, with some workers being told they’d never need to come back to the office.

Remote work also fueled a digital commerce boom that let online retail giants like Amazon reap record profits, and hire hundreds of thousands of people, many in far-flung places. Over 2020 and 2021, Amazon’s head count roughly doubled to more than 1.6 million employees. Then the company laid off 27,000 workers starting in late 2022.

The once red-hot demand for tech talent has been cooling as the industry adjusts its labor needs and shifts resources into artificial intelligence. Postings for software development jobs are down more than 30% since February 2020, according to Indeed.com. And industry layoffs that began in late 2022 have continued this year: Tech companies have shed around 137,000 jobs since January, according to Layoffs.fyi.

Returning to the office five days a week may prove too difficult for many companies. All of that remote pandemic hiring means many companies’ workforces are far more scattered than before. Nearly a third of workers at large firms last year didn’t work in the same metro area as their managers, up from about 23% in February 2020, according to data from payroll provider ADP.

“For us, and for many CEOs at this time, bringing everyone back fully would be so disruptive—not just to the company, but to employees’ lives as well,” said David Ko, CEO of Calm, a mental-health app. Calm shifted to remote work at the pandemic’s onset in 2020. Nearby staff now typically come into one of its six office hubs anywhere from one to five days a week, depending on the role, and the company periodically brings some teams together for two- to three-day collaboration sprints on specific projects.

Will companies succeed in coaxing remote workers back into offices? The answer likely hinges on hiring demand. Economists David Autor, Arindrajit Dube and Annie McGrew have found that the share of people working from home was significantly higher in states with tight labor markets during the 2021 to 2023 period than states with looser markets.

For now, bosses are likely to get more questions from their workers wondering if they need to get ready to be in the office more often.

In a meeting with Intuit’s New York office this week, employees pressed CEO Sasan Goodarzi to address Amazon’s move, and to clarify whether the company would change its own policy. The maker of TurboTax software generally asks employees to show up in person at least two days a week.

Goodarzi told them he’d like them to come to the office a bit more—say, three days a week—but didn’t call for a full in-office return. He has told employees before that he believes the current ways of working could still evolve, based on what Intuit needs.

In an interview afterward, he said that employee surveys and badge-tracking data show Intuit’s most engaged staffers typically come in three to four days. Those who are there one day, or less, tend to be weaker performers.

“There’s a massive experiment going on,” said Goodarzi of corporate work arrangements. “I think it’s important that we remain curious as to what’s the optimal answer.”

Justin Lahart contributed to this article.

Write to Vanessa Fuhrmans at Vanessa.Fuhrmans@wsj.com, Katherine Bindley at katie.bindley@wsj.com and Chip Cutter at chip.cutter@wsj.com

SOURCE
 
People who say all of this, yet insist - with incredible vigour - that there is absolutely no value to them being in a place where anyone else who works for their company could actually check in and make sure they're not watching My Little Pony porn on the company's dime.
Is that a regular problem at your company?
Bonus points if they complain about either lazy activists/coomers, or state that all COVID policies were a disaster - but don't make the leap that maybe the slapdash policies to keep most businesses somewhat functional during covid are also a disaster, or that the activists/coomers don't exploit these policies to their absolute fullest. To say nothing of those whose industries are actively contracting, and yet dig their heels in the sand about something they would have been perfectly agreeable doing a handful of years ago like that isn't going to be the perfect excuse for their boss to kick their ass out the door.
I hope your industry collapses.
 
Implementing a office only mandate is equivalent to a silent layoff
This is spot on. They’re hoping a decent sized percentage just quit on their own, so that way they don’t have to pay out severances, unemployment, etc.
I can always tell I'm going to hear a dogshit opinion when I see the phrase "the laptop class".

You need high IQ White people for your business to function. You are compelled by your semitic instincts to afflict everyone around you with swarthoids, unfuckable dykes, and troons. The White people who you need to survive do not like being afflicted by these, so they demand work from home.

Tormented, you pay a striver media whore (journalist) to write your fantasy as if it were reality.

Nothing changes.
The average c-suite believes everyone working under them is a retard. They don’t believe that they need those high IQ Whites, they believe that the true measure of success is how obedient they are to their demands. Thats why they love pajeets so much. They don’t have any ideas, they just do their work (poorly).

These RTO measures truly are just c-suite flexes to reassert their authority. I’ve been saying here for a while that they will get their revenge on the workers that asserted their leverage 2020-2022 and they’ll never forget it. They will treat those couple years like it was hell on earth. They’ll mostly get away with it because most of the workers who asserted their leverage never bothered to stash away that money in savings, preferring to buy cool toys with it instead.
 
They’ll mostly get away with it because most of the workers who asserted their leverage never bothered to stash away that money in savings, preferring to buy cool toys with it instead.
Well even if you stashed away the money you saved during Covid towards your savings, they are being eaten away anyway by sky high rent, gas prices and groceries.

Personally I didn't take any of the Covid Benefits because I knew it they would come back looking for their pound of flesh. Although I did manage to get a decent chunk of savings which are slowly being whittled down by a large downpayment on my vehicle, rent, gas and groceries.
 
If I understand some folks in this thread.

Rather than using analytics and what should be the managers job to track workloads.

Workers should be returned to the office so that people can pretend to work.

Good lord, corporate America will always get unexpected help.

Fuck NEETS, grow up and get out of your house and talk to people.

Aren't you living in a war zone.
 
…aren’t journalists basically part of “the laptop class”
The wages are so poor that only delusional faggot striver poors, wealthy heiressses, or libtard fanatics do it.

They're basically jannies. Also very few of them are allowed to work from home lmao.

The average c-suite believes everyone working under them is a retard. They don’t believe that they need those high IQ Whites, they believe that the true measure of success is how obedient they are to their demands. Thats why they love pajeets so much. They don’t have any ideas, they just do their work (poorly).

These RTO measures truly are just c-suite flexes to reassert their authority. I’ve been saying here for a while that they will get their revenge on the workers that asserted their leverage 2020-2022 and they’ll never forget it. They will treat those couple years like it was hell on earth. They’ll mostly get away with it because most of the workers who asserted their leverage never bothered to stash away that money in savings, preferring to buy cool toys with it instead.
That's debatable, but WFH depending on where you live, where you work, your commute, crime, etc., a 25% to 300% raise.

Making Manhattan money in Iowa puts you in the top 0.01% of Iowans in your field.

The real issue here, as you said, is that:
  1. Managers are completely worthless, contribute nothing, actively deter real work from being done, and are not needed.
  2. Managers are aware of themselves as a class, or maybe a better word is clique or faction.
Anyone with an MBA is completely fucking worthless and will drive your company into the ground.

The other issue is that if you have more than 14 employees, you are subject to federal and often state diversity hiring mandates, which includes having a HR department. These are intentionally designed to cripple a company, waste money, and staff it with regime loyalists as a sort of jobs program for the factions (muslim nigger faggot tranny dyke whores) that the US government considers most loyal to itself.

I helped start a small company during the lockdowns that did great and made a shitload of money, until we hired 6 more people and were at an 18 person headcount. After that the state and feds stuck their noses in as we were doing contracting/fabrication/production work for the usual suspects, and we were saddled with an extra fucking 7 do-nothing employees and an MBA. It all went downhill from there. I was totally unaware of this bullshit until it happened to us.

If you can do something with 14 people or less, you are basically golden. You can easily do WFH with <15 peopleon something like gamedev, it's not that different from a game modding project.
 
Last edited:
i can't help but notice the majority of anti-WFH people in the threads scattered around A&N seem to be from europe. this must be where some of the confusion stems from. europeans already have a track record of doing such slow and substandard work that WFH must wreak havoc on their already fragile economies

in america, where we don't take multiple days to respond to a simple email and don't disappear for two and a half weeks on "holiday", an average worker's work ethic more than makes up for any losses that WFH incurs
 
i can't help but notice the majority of anti-WFH people in the threads scattered around A&N seem to be from europe. this must be where some of the confusion stems from. europeans already have a track record of doing such slow and substandard work that WFH must wreak havoc on their already fragile economies

in america, where we don't take multiple days to respond to a simple email and don't disappear for two and a half weeks on "holiday", an average worker's work ethic more than makes up for any losses that WFH incurs
"Local American lauds taste of corporate boot" - News at 10.
 
Since my office tracks productivity numbers, I can see with hard numbers that I'm about 40% more productive per hour working from home than I was at the office. I'm also willing to work overtime now, something I never willingly did when working in the office.

I kind of hope the work from home thing does end. There's a trend I've been noticing, I'm not sure of other small towns are like this but, I go to people's houses for my work and I've noticed a huge increase in the number of people who now live here but don't participate in the community in any way. They work from home, they have all their stuff delivered from Amazon and shit like that, they don't even use local grocery stores they'll even have their food delivered and they all moved here within the last 4 years.

It's created this weird effect where there's both a lack of affordable real estate or even rentals but also a fairly bad labour shortage even for skilled well paying positions and so the pajeets have been rolling in and bring their families to fill up all the jobs.

Every time I go to one of those houses.with people like that it just bothers me. Like why the fuck did you move to a place where there's already a lack of resources and too many fucking people if you could live anywhere and it wouldn't matter? And they'll sit and brag to you about how they give zero fucks about the community and don't need to bother with anything in town because they live online. The work from home laptop faggots should fuck off back to their offices and their bughives.
Because small towns have low costs of living, obviously. Why would they pay massive prices to live in a bug hive city if they don't have to and based on their lack of interaction with the community, don't care about the social aspects of urban life?
Yeah sure you are such a hero sticking it to the man, but all those blue collar workers and others who have to be on site to work, sometimes far away from home for weeks or months, can get fucked. They deserve to be slaves and not be happy and eat slop and work like little slave cucks because they didnt learn to code lawl, privileges for meeee but not for theeee you resentful faggot leech.
Less people going into the office means those jobs who have to go in due to the nature of their work have to deal with less traffice and so have a quicker ccommute. Why would you want more people clogging up the road during your commute?
 
Last edited:
Yeah sure you are such a hero sticking it to the man, but all those blue collar workers and others who have to be on site to work, sometimes far away from home for weeks or months, can get fucked. They deserve to be slaves and not be happy and eat slop and work like little slave cucks because they didnt learn to code lawl, privileges for meeee but not for theeee you resentful faggot leech.
How you even came to that conclusion is beyond me. Instead of attacking the companies forcing you to work away from home for weeks/months, you'd rather attack the person trying to force companies to stop controlling every moment of your life. Only resentful person in this thread seems to be you friend.

Again, the wfh policy is mostly related to tech jobs and other online jobs so why you would even bring blue collar shit into the conversation just sounds like some self-loathing shit. No one says blue collar people deserve to get fucked. If nothing else people telling companies to go fuck themselves benefits blue collar jobs regardless so how exactly is that fucking you over? It's not like offices won't exist because some people (normally not white-collar) want to work from home.
 
I kind of hope the work from home thing does end. There's a trend I've been noticing, I'm not sure of other small towns are like this but, I go to people's houses for my work and I've noticed a huge increase in the number of people who now live here but don't participate in the community in any way. They work from home, they have all their stuff delivered from Amazon and shit like that, they don't even use local grocery stores they'll even have their food delivered and they all moved here within the last 4 years.
This is a pretty common consensus with a lot of towns with a few thousand people. The local chamber of commerce set gets excited about all these big opportunities the WFH will bring and instead they completely isolate themselves. They’re basically a town within a town and bring all their blue state baggage with them. I don’t think there’s a single one of these places that are happy they’re there. In fact they can’t wait until they get the fuck out.
 
That's debatable, but WFH depending on where you live, where you work, your commute, crime, etc., a 25% to 300% raise.
Making Manhattan money in Iowa puts you in the top 0.01% of Iowans in your field.
The main reason Manhattan money is bigger than Iowa money is because
  • The cost of living in Manhattan is higher than in Iowa, so to retain talent you need to pay a commensurate salary
  • Manhattan is more dense than Iowa, so there are more competitors who could poach your talent
  • A large white collar corporation with offices in Manhattan is likely looking for higher skilled workers than a local employer in Iowa, so pays more to attract talent
If WFH was the actual norm, then the salaries would shift to compensate for that. If you had access to a pool of applicants from all over America, you could find competent workers at a lower price, and would no longer need to subsidise the high cost of living in big cities (although I understand there's tax and employment law implications for having employees in different states, much like having foreign workers).

The main issues with complete remote work and no office presence is that this really impacts your ability to encourage collaborative working. Having set office days for a team can actually achieve a lot more, although this really depends on the work. I am sure a programmer is able to work as effectively or more effectively if they work from home, but many roles do benefit from getting everyone together for a whole day in a way that Zoom meetings don't. Moreover there's the soft skills and informal upskilling that happens with working in the office for junior staff - this can be replaced to an extent with structured professional learning, but that requires employers to invest time and resources into it and "learning how to be a professional adult" is something that's important for younger people, especially the iPad babies who are filtering into the workforce. And to an extent while KPIs should be able to ensure that you can map productivity, having people physically in the office means they will generally make more of an effort to not goof off in working hours. And there are genuine benefits of building a social and professional network just from being around people.

The problem is so many companies manage to half-arse it and end up with the worst of both worlds. I know friends who get told their entire team is not allowed in the office on the same day due to lack of space, or others where their team is all over the country, or one or two employees have some sort of "Reasonable Adjustment" where they're permanently home working, so they'll go to the office to sit on Zoom all day long. That negates most of the benefits of working in an office. My pet peeve is a "hybrid" meeting because you can't engage in a normal face-to-face conversation, but it also lacks the benefit of a fully remote meeting where everyone is on the meeting chat and can contribute equally; you just end up with a stilted meeting where people on screen will ask someone to repeat themselves because they didn't catch something, or they'll chime in randomly which breaks the flow.

There's another element to WFH that I don't think is factored in enough - if WFH became the norm, it instantly makes the jobs that can't be performed remotely into something less appealing. There's already lots of important jobs that struggle with retention because they're harder work, unsocial hours and don't pay much more than "office administrative grunt" - so if everywhere started going WFH, who's going to put up with being a schoolteacher? But that's less of a zero-sum consideration so I think gets disregarded.
 
It is about a very large number of people being lazy faggots. And you pay them to literally sit at home and play videogames all day instead of working.
Everyone knows this. Everyone has worked in a team where half the people are like that.
And they get the same salary as you do eventhough you have to do both your own work but also cover for the,, because they are too busy doing activism or playing videogames all day.

Forcing these faggots into the office means that they will at least pretend to do some work. Even if they are retarded faggots, just forcing them top come in means they have to do something, anything, other than just play videya all day.
It also means a really quick way to identify the low performers and to get rid of say 25-30% of the workforce that do no meaningful work or benefit to the company.
Elon fired 80% of leaches and twitter still works well. I worked all over google and I can confidently say you can fire ~50% of people and nothing would change. Maybe things would run smoother because all the low performers would no longer hold you back?

When I was at Google, one turbo-faggot in my team came in maybe one a month for an hour or two to have lunch with the rest of the team.
The rest of his month was tranny-advocacy, acab bullshit and just your average faggot leftist bullshit activism and protests.
I had to do all work for the team he did not have time to do due to his activism.
I pray he gets fired and remains unemployed forever.
"NOOOO, YOU CAN'T PLAY VIDYA ON MR. SHEKELBERGS DIME!!!"
The Jews won't fuck you.
 
“It’s working,” he says. “But it’s hard just as a physical fact to pay for an office that is mostly empty.”
So don't, idiot. Save the 10 mil a year and give yourself a raise; build your corner office onto your mansion or something.

People aren't nearly as enthusiastic to spend time in their "open plan office" as you are to get back to your cherrywood desk and expensed "business" lunches...
 
I am not part of the "laptop class", full disclosure. But I really don't see how you couldnt notice someone underpreforms from home vs in office. Personally Id want to do most days WFH but still go into the office occasionally because I really need to step outside of my home to focus sometimes. I don't really get why (aside from greed) they dont just incentivise being in the office rather than forcing it- my job has a 'point system' for various things that you can exchange for extra PTO and giftcards. If someone were to get a point or whatever for showing up to the office that was able to be exchanged for some minor perk. Id bet a lot of people would willingly go into the office more often. That way it isnt as much as a punishment for those who have long ass commutes being forced into office... they could choose to not partake and the 'punishment' is the tade off of wfh vs accumulated rewards or something.

The real issue seems to be the giant office space RE bubble, so I am curious on how that will play out.
 
Of course Amazon faggots are gonna ruin it for everyone.
I left my last job because they pulled this after buying a new office (which from job reviews I'm reading, is in horrible state with leaks going through the ceiling and broken AC).
My current job is pretty good and it's hybrid for office hours, and full remote for irregular shifts. It's a very good deal and it saves so much commute time, seeing these stupid fucks trying to regress everything to the way it was pre-pandemic is just frustrating to watch.
 
The average c-suite believes everyone working under them is a retard. They don’t believe that they need those high IQ Whites, they believe that the true measure of success is how obedient they are to their demands. Thats why they love pajeets so much. They don’t have any ideas, they just do their work (poorly).

These RTO measures truly are just c-suite flexes to reassert their authority. I’ve been saying here for a while that they will get their revenge on the workers that asserted their leverage 2020-2022 and they’ll never forget it. They will treat those couple years like it was hell on earth. They’ll mostly get away with it because most of the workers who asserted their leverage never bothered to stash away that money in savings, preferring to buy cool toys with it instead.

As much as the whole worker/manager relationship is fucked, I've never heard a good defense of WFH other than "but you don't have to deal with traffic/additional DEI bullshit/open offices" especially now since mask mandates are over, and I know the two-tier system it creates between in-office and out of office. It might've been different if I could redirect calls through their cell phone (and there are solutions to that, like routing it through VoIP).

That whole thing with the mouse jiggler software—either the employee is a lazy asshole with no concept of work, or the manager has no goals other than just "busywork".
 
Back to your "open plan office" to take zoom meetings with people at other locations while constantly having to say "can you hear me?" over the din of a busy workplace.

If they wanted people to return to offices they should give them offices, not a giant floor space and maybe half-wall cubicles.
 
Back