Amazon CEO Andy Jassy recently told employees that those who do not want to return to the office at least three days a week should consider finding employment elsewhere. According to a recording obtained by Insider, Jassy stated “It’s past the time to disagree and commit,” adding that if employees cannot commit to the new hybrid work model, “it’s probably not going to work out for you at Amazon.” He characterized the decision to have employees return to the office part-time as a “judgment call.” Notably, Jassy said employees are free to leave if they do not want to comply with the hybrid work requirement. This makes clear that Amazon has not changed its stance on returning to office work despite some employees preferring full remote arrangements.

  • ConstableJelly@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    ·
    1 year ago

    If I were predisposed toward conspiracies I would definitely be convinced by now that every medium-to-large business owner in the country was part of a secret cabal who made a pact to demand return to office for whatever terrible reason sounded good to them.

    My own workplace is mandating a hybrid model for any employees within 30 miles of an office after “much research, discussion, and debate with employees.” They’ve typically been very reasonable and generous to their workforce, and I just don’t understand what they’re thinking, honestly.

      • Jaysyn@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        My company leased their office & remote work has lead to a increase in production so we’re getting a smaller office & staying remote.

    • Skwerls
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hilariously, the data don’t back them up, my wife does research on this very topic for a company. The dollar signs do though, they have to justify the property expenditures.

      • prole@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Hilariously, the data don’t back them up, my wife does research on this very topic for a company. The dollar signs do though, they have to justify the property expenditures.

        No. That’s sunk cost fallacy.

        If they’ve already bought and paid for the buildings, they are not losing more money by not using them.

        In fact, they probably save money on things like maintenance, overhead, security on physical sites when they’re not being used. They could also be renting those spaces out, or straight up selling.

    • dingleberry
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t most companies have Blackrock on their board, who had been buying real estate for the better part of the last 5 years.

    • LoamImprovement@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      whatever terrible reason sounded good to them

      Commercial property values. They want the offices full so their investment retains value. Dassit.

      • _s10e@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t get this argument. Most business don’t own any property. The office buildings are rented.

        • magnetosphere @beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          From my (very limited) understanding, the underlying reason is the health of the national economy.

          A bunch of businesses giving up their office space would destroy the commercial real estate market, and that could trigger another economic recession/depression. It could take the economy years to recover, costing companies billions, and bankrupting some of them. Even fierce competitors will work together in order to prevent that from happening. (I’m not sure how realistic that fear is; I’m just explaining their reasoning.)

          So, while an individual corporation would benefit in the short term by moving to a building that’s only one third as big, the long term risks to the economy scare them off. In fact, the only reason working from home is still being discussed is because there’s a shortage of skilled workers. Companies can’t dictate terms quite as strongly as they could a few years ago. Employees see working from home as a major perk, or even a necessity. Inflexible companies invariably lose some of their best people, so they have to allow at least a few work from home options.

          Personally, I like seeing corporations being forced to compromise.