Amazon exec says it’s time for workers to ‘disagree and commit’ to office return — “I don’t have data to back it up, but I know it’s better.”::“We’re here, we’re back. It’s working,” an Amazon Studios head said in a meeting, before acknowledging a lack of evidence.

  • EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can’t come up with a care where making their employees less productivity is better for the shareholders simply because they are paying for space somewhere. you’ll have to explain this.

    • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Okay I can do that.

      Pre-pandemic- Amazon says offices are important. Signs 25 year leases for lots of office space.
      Pandemic hits. Everyone goes WFH. Data shows people work just as well from home. Company publicly announces that they are running at full productivity. Shareholders love it.
      Now we’re here. Employees are WFH and loving it. Middle management is chafing because they like being able to manage their employees by walking to desks. Upper management is unhappy because they like having a big corner office at the top of the building humming with workers. Workers are happier than ever.
      Upper management says ‘if we embrace WFH, we’ll have way too much office space and leases that will cost a fortune to break. If we do that and take the hit, the shareholders will ask why we didn’t have the vision to do that in the first place, before we signed for this expensive office. The managers we listen to all hate WFH too. So we’ll push RTO.’ And in the grand scheme of things, a few % employee productivity doesn’t mean that much…

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thats plausible, but pretty complicated. I would absolutely invoke Occam’s razor here tho