Anyone else here quit a job over back-to-office mandates?
Howdy!! It was more of a “that’s the last straw” sort of thing, but it was just ludicrous to me that I was being forced back into an office to sit on the same dang Zoom calls I’d been on every day for the previous two years.
When I inquired what was gained doing the exact same work still separated from everyone because we were across multiple states and countries, I was told “we work BeTtEr ToGeThEr!”
The mandate was announced in January, it went into effect in February, and I was gone in March.
Not exactly but close. I was hired on as “remote, but you’ll have to come in as needed to complete project work that needs to be done onsite.” I was then exclusively given projects that had to be done on site while the senior members of the team got remote projects.
Brought up my concerns to management, had them dangle remote work like a carrot I had to earn, quit. Found a fully remote job. Never been happier despite a significant pay cut. Highly recommend.
Yes, I did. It wasn’t the only reason but it was a reason.
deleted by creator
Were I work the thing I noticed was the only people comfortable to voice their opinion were the extroverts who would talk about how much they get from in office.
Not knocking them. I love talkative people who are great to talk to during the day. But they’re at a natural advantage when you’re in a public meeting and the management is asking where the employees land on back to work policies. Its easier to voice the opinion that aligns with higher but also its easier for the friendly guy every one likes to talk about how they can’t do remote work alone a day in their room. Meanwhile the people who don’t have issues could get unspoken negative pressure to not voice their opinion.
This is why you need anonymous surveys and not anecdotes. But when someone asks “what do you think” extroverts are going to answer. If you don’t agree then you have to speak up either there or in private afterwards otherwise no one will know.
It’s not just an extravert/introvert thing. Some people will say whatever they want their bosses to think about them rather than speak their own mind because they think it will be better for their job if they do. So if they think their bosses want to end WFH, they will agree even if they don’t want to come back to the office because they think they could be on the chopping block if they don’t.
I rarely give my bosses my opinions unless I realize they are directly asking me because I know it won’t actually make a difference except that it will look like I’m rocking the boat. It’s not because I’m introverted, it’s because I’m pragmatic.
It’s also likely to have a lot of those people reconsidering after they’ve thought about it more.
When it dawns on them that the office is is that hellhole.
deleted by creator
The company where I work did a bunch of surveys and shared the data with everyone throughout 2020 and 2021. They were completely anonymous and done in a browser in about 5 minutes. Opinion shifted back and forth over time, but the general consensus is that some kind of mix was preferred. We now have that mix and most people are still happily employed.
I still end up spending most of my in-office days on Zoom, but that’s OK. I am also part of a small team in a 200 person company and really appreciate being around other people outside my team occasionally.
Pretending there is universal agreement in either direction is silly.
Even the success they tout is an absolute fucking failure:
In response, EY announced a fund in February 2022 to reimburse up to $800 per year for commuting, pet care and dependent care costs for each of its 55,000-plus U.S. employees.
The fund, which is ongoing, had an immediate positive impact on employees’ in-office attendance, Giampietro adds. Since EY first rolled out this benefit in February 2022, EY has seen a 150% uptick in office attendance across the U.S.
“It didn’t take a complete rehaul of our return-to-office policies to make employees happy,” he says. “We just needed to listen to our people and understand what, specifically, was problematic for them, and offer resources to address that.”
They added a potential cost of $44 million a YEAR (55k * $800) to keep their employees in the office. So instead of just letting employees work from home, they increased their costs dramatically, didn’t solve the problems around RTO for their employees ($800 for childcare a year? And that’s supposed to cover commute costs as well? Gimme a break), and still have to pay rent or mortage on their office spaces.
And I bet every single one of their RTO “success” employees is looking for a WFH job.
JFC just admit it, CEOs. The workspace has changed, for the better, and it’s simply time to unload your empty commercial property. That’s the only smart business decision for a company trying to retain employees.
God just make WFH a standard already. Compaies get to save on rent. Employees save on commute. This is win-win. What is the hold up here? The biggest loser would be large real estate guys and honestly I cant care less about them.
Yeah but then these self-centered extroverts who rose to the top of the pyramid in an office environment would have to deal with the reality that not everybody shares their preferences and that their work style isn’t objectively better. Can’t have that!
Plus you expand your potential talent pool and decrease emissions.
I like working from home and I would also find it pretty f-ing great to be able to access a pool of interesting jobs without having to move to San Francisco. However let’s admit it, it’s not only real estate that loses with WFH. A lot of businesses, bars, restaurant, transport and travel companies, nurseries, you name it… depend on people commuting every day, sipping overpriced lattes, dry-cleaning their suits and going for a quick pint at the pub with colleagues. All the money I’m saving by working from home is money that someone else’s job currently depends on. And some of the money other people are saving is funding some jobs at the company where I work too. Maybe mine too?
The city I live in is one of those business cities with overpriced rents that would probably lose over 50% of its population almost overnight if WFH became the standard. Including probably me and my family. The mayor, unsurprisingly, has been one of the biggest fans of return to office.
And yes, I do think WFH is the path to a more sustainable and humane future. But arriving there so suddenly could be problematic for more than real estate moguls. I think there has been a cultural shift and we’re hopefully going to get there, but saying “ok, the last one to leave Manhattan please turn off the lights”, going back to our small towns and expecting all our current salaries to still exist is not realistic. Over time (and I don’t think it’s going to take generations, just maybe a decade or two) things will gradually adjust, people will start selling their houses in the city, new, smaller local businesses are going to emerge, the window cleaners at skyscrapers will have found a new job or retired.
People still do all those things. A big part of my friend group is all WFH, but we still go out to bars, restaurants, etc.
“Many companies are realizing they could have been a lot more measured in their approach, rather than making big, bold, very controversial decisions based on executives’ opinions rather than employee data,” Larry Gadea, Envoy’s CEO and founder, tells CNBC Make It.
“And to be clear, we are only talking about this one very very very specific thing, and not the 5000 other mandates that come down from the top each week.”
“Many organizations that attempted to force a return to the office have had to retract or change their plans because of employee pushback, and now, they don’t look strong,” says Kacher, the president of Career/Life Alliance Services. “A lot of executives have egg on their faces and they’re sad about that.”
Well, boo fucking hoo for them.
Padme: so we can go back to working from home now, right?
The sunk cost of unused office space has been a major factor in companies’ decisions to change their RTO approach, says Kacher.
Even six months ago, companies were willing to eat these costs in a tight labor market to recruit and retain talent. But now, “Some companies are getting impatient, and want to recoup these large investments,” Kacher explains.
Are these people that dumb that they’re basing this on a feeling of sunk costs instead of reality
$800 a year?
I wouldn’t go for less than 120 a day (commute cost + my per hour cost multiplied by the time spent travelling)
We just needed to listen to our people and understand what, specifically, was problematic for them, and offer resources to address that.
Wow, someone snacked from the tree of knowledge.
