You must log in or register to comment.

KardTrick t1_je10ze5 wrote

The original NYT article pissed me off so much. I actually yelled out loud when he went giddy over China's 996 policy. (9 to 9, 6 days a week.)

I keep seeing article after article talking about how awful remote work is, but almost every study shows it increases productivity and life satisfaction. These assholes really can't handle their "lessers" gaining even a tiny bit more autonomy.


Living-blech t1_je131rq wrote

To contrast the 996 policy, 4-day workweeks have shown quite the positive result so far. The majority of companies that participated say they don't plan to go back.



The assholes trying to force everyone back to office are usually business executives that thrive on micro-managing everyone.


SheriffComey t1_je13ily wrote

Our CEO was called out recently for forcing everyone back for a minimum of 3 days a week but hasn't been in the office three days a week this year.

He said his role required him to be out more which didn't land like he thought when several people said "you told us that wasn't a valid excuse"


Turdmonkey2 t1_je2du00 wrote

Let me guess... he didn't care.


SheriffComey t1_je2g5gc wrote

Another exec swooped in and changed the subject because "they were running low on time".


Turdmonkey2 t1_je2ghzi wrote

Well, yeah they were low on time, the yacht was gassed up and the jacuzzi was warm.... what.. are they supposed to let the champaign come to room temperature or something?!


morbious37 t1_je511tw wrote

CEO travel a lot (including on weekends)...


[deleted] t1_je15hym wrote

Fuck 996! I'd sooner starve.

At least they can use my organs for some rich dude, I guess?


Myrianda t1_je1q920 wrote

I wish the US Govt would adopt that policy. I can usually finish all of my work in 2-3 days and I'm just browsing Reddit/Youtube for the rest while I wait to go home. What I wouldn't give to have an extra day of rest or time to take care of stuff at home. The older people here think it's stupid when they spend most of their day wasting time like taking 2-3 hour lunches and/or coffee breaks to stretch out what little work they actually do.


jean__meslier t1_je2bzyt wrote

Dear God I would kill for your job. The stress and competition in my job is degrading my health and sucking the joy out of everything in life.

What department are you in? What qualifications would someone need?


Myrianda t1_je4u3jw wrote

I work in a TS facility, so you'd have to have a clearance plus have Sec+ to start. Other than that, I do Windows AD work, database stuff, and whatever they decide to throw on my plate. I kind of lucked out though, since I was working on my Sec+ and BS while I was doing a low-pay GG3 job, but during Covid the govt barely worked so I took the time to power through my college courses to finish fast.

For security reasons, I can't say where or what I do beyond that, unfortunately. I can't have my phone on me, which really sucks for day-to-day stuff too.


Shmageggi t1_je136sl wrote

Same here. The audacity of being patronized by a person whose net worth is in the hundreds of millions and whose interests lie directly in extracting as much value and productivity out of us serfs as the law will allow is staggering. It's further proof of the sneering disdain the aristocratic class holds for the rest of us.


SlientlySmiling t1_je2oiqb wrote

We don't have an aristocracy in the US. Never had, never will.


MooseHeckler t1_je30ut0 wrote

We absolutely have a neo feudal aristocracy.


SlientlySmiling t1_je3bv4e wrote

Then burn them to the ground. We fought a fucking revolution over this.


MooseHeckler t1_je3ckju wrote

I think there should be a soft revolution of sorts to be honest. It seems like the super wealthy are untouchable at times.


davebowmanandhal t1_je3atox wrote

This sounds deliberately obtuse. Although the US doesn’t have a formal aristocratic class, it certainly has a class strata.


esmith000 t1_je5sau1 wrote

Is that what you really want? Everyone to be exact equal? What do you want?


davebowmanandhal t1_je5t9aj wrote

No, my post doesn’t imply that so you can relax with the knee jerk response nonsense.


esmith000 t1_je5tf9n wrote

I literally asked what do you want? And I'm the knee jerking? Lol. No.

Can you answer?


m0le t1_je4crro wrote

Do you have a group of people who are incredibly powerful, don't have to work any more yet often do, gravitating to getting involved in politics, and can pass that power to their family? Does that family power wax and wane over time as they fight with the other families in similar exulted positions?

You have an aristocracy.


TeaKingMac t1_je3824d wrote

We don't have a bunch of people who own things and collect rent off them instead of working?

Yeah, we don't have dukes or counts with hereditary titles, but we absolutely have people who fulfill the other characteristics of an aristocracy


Conscious_Figure_554 t1_je30vzp wrote

996 policy is my selling point of what NOT to expect when I hire people in Beijing. I’ve hired five people so far that came from this type of org and they are so happy that I have kept my promise. These assholes (CEOs) have not worked a forty hour week in a long time. I’m not taking anything away from them with their success but we can’t all be billionaires and CEOs. Most of us just want to live a happy balanced life.


UglyInThMorning t1_je4iv2n wrote

>These assholes have not worked a forty hour week in a long time

I had to read that twice before I realized you were talking about the CEOs and not the people you hired.


cartsucks t1_je1bgh6 wrote

No wonder they let Steve write the garbage opinion piece at the New York Times. He got his start there in his career and was their Chief Washington Economic correspondent.

I could go on and on about why I think the NYT author Steven Rattner is wrong but I will boil it all down to this. He's an ass.


Transition-1744 t1_je3pa64 wrote

9 to 6, 6 days a week is ridiculous. We have enough technology that we should be working three hours a day for four days a week. Famous economist John Keynes predicted something like this almost 100 years ago. It’s ridiculous for us to work this hard with all the technology we have now. Take a look at this video


AccidentalDM t1_je3dh0j wrote

If nothing else, less time lost to illness.

Granted I’m very salty about being sick right now, since last week was a week I had to be in office. That was the only place I went so whatever I got I had to have picked up from a coworker.

So far they’ve lost 3 days of work from me, and I lost my weekend and 3 evenings that I had counted on to get caught up on all the household tasks that have been piling up from a freaking YEAR of mandatory overtime, extra 5-6 hours a week.


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je1js0i wrote

"but almost every study shows it increases productivity and life satisfaction."

They don't. Those studies were crap!

None of them are long term and all take place during COVID or after which means the results are basically meaningless.

Edit: it's amazing how I'm downvoted but yet no one can prove me wrong when it should be easy just link a good study but so far the best I got is studies from companies that sell work from home products....


pixelfishes t1_je26l9u wrote

This is just factually incorrect; they've done studies over multiple countries and work environments. I hate linking Forbes articles, but there's direct links to the studies. Sorry, but business didn't stop during COVID.


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je3dpw5 wrote

Words cannot describe the level of anger I feel reading and finding those links nothing you did but for FUCK SAKE WHY IS IT SO FUCKING HARD TO MAKE A NOT SHIT WEBSITE!

So anyways correct me of I'm wrong(I could easily miss the links due to the site being shit!) but that article doesn't link to the studies other then one which was unbelievable impossible to read on mobile.

That's the first link and it's just their companies site no study but more importantly it's from a company that sells monitoring solutions you know stuff companies would use for remote work....and I'm sorry but I'm not trying to find a study from people who directly benefit from the results since it's pretty clear they have a bais in the matter.

That's the 2nd link(also site note Forbes says 3 studies but that company did 2 so it would be 4 studies) and the site is close to unusable on mobile for me but anyways ONCE AGAIN from a company that benefits from work from yeah I'm not going to read those either.

The last link is a another sales company.....and the study found hybrid work the best and they just coincidentally happen sell both office and home stuff.....and also I just went off of what Forbes said as well since I couldn't even find a study on their site.

I don't mean to be rude but did you look a the links yourself? Why would you believe a study from a companies who benefits from the results? What do you think of the results didn't favor them they would publish it? Especially when finding said study on their sites is extremely difficult(for me at least) for I would definitely say not trustworthy.


HoboBaggins008 t1_je2502b wrote

Have there ever been studies pre-covid that investigate WFH and shorter work weeks?

Show your work (hint: yes, yes there are).


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je2i09h wrote

And yet no links to said studies....and idk why you are bringing up shorter work weeks when I never talked about that...


Methelod t1_je2rfch wrote


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je3f19r wrote

And the studies are from companies who sell work from home products.....I don't waste my time finding or reading studies from companies who put out a study saying their products are great!

I don't need to find a study from tide about how their pods are WAY better then others to say their claim is BS because study itself is made to make them win!


happybarfday t1_je38bgl wrote

Oh well isn't that convenient... but we won't be able to ever get that data because we all need to get back to the office in the meantime right?

If that data is meaningless then so is the data about working at the office, because we have nothing to compare it to. Working in the office could be the worst way to conduct business, but I guess we'll never know.


Wild-Sand-5877 t1_je1y371 wrote

Okay, so how do you propose we get this pre-Covid remote work data? Because I’m out of ideas, and I’d rather have a study to test out rather than nothing to test out. The study having a result you don’t like doesn’t make it untrue, but testing it and getting different results might.


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je2285s wrote

Wait until COVID is out of everyone's minds....have studies lasting more then a year, use companies that didn't use remote work....

There's so many're out of ideas because you didn't think once!

If they can't test correctly they shouldn't test at all, COVID hurts a lot of the control testing since people might just like working from home due to fear of COVID.


Wild-Sand-5877 t1_je2dh8b wrote

We’re talking about the huge number of jobs that went remote due to a global pandemic, and you want to wait for the pandemic to be “out of everybody’s minds” before we figure out how the remote work should be handled going forward? Ignoring the possibility of another one coming up, this isn’t going to be gone for a long time, and sending everybody back when preliminary studies imply benefits is catering to the people that don’t like it more than bringing back any supposed benefits of office work


FieldSton-ie_Filler t1_je2nbnm wrote

Out of ideas cause you didnt think once... Lmao.

Yeah, gimme what this guy's smoking, so i can actually go into the office with his disconnected shit attude...


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je2y747 wrote

So basically you're mad you can't prove me wrong got it. Because that's THE ONLY reason to give a response like that.


FieldSton-ie_Filler t1_je32deu wrote

Nah because it's been a busy day and you're delusional.

I'll take some of that and plop my ass on the couch...


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je3f42w wrote

Nope you have nothing that's why.


Specialist_Honey_629 t1_je4q4lc wrote

except Australia has a few studies on this. That completely contradict your statement. Centre for Transformative Work Design has a few. Have a good day daddy


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je55nkl wrote

And yet no links to said studies...

If you can't back up your claims don't make them.


Specialist_Honey_629 t1_je5oohe wrote

>Centre for Transformative Work Design

Also pointing out there is another study out of china that I have posted a link to. Again making your comments meritless


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je5rw23 wrote

Also you mean your link that doesn't work...


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je66o0e wrote

Yeah you 100% didn't click the says error 404, the site it's on works meaning what you linked isn't right....


Specialist_Honey_629 t1_je6775e wrote

my man do you not know how to use the internet?
A rising share of employees now regularly engage in working from home (WFH), but there are concerns this can lead to “shirking from home.” We report the results of a WFH experiment at Ctrip, a 16,000-employee, NASDAQ-listed Chinese travel agency. Call center employees who volunteered to WFH were randomly assigned either to work from home or in the office for nine months. Home working led to a 13% performance increase, of which 9% was from working more minutes per shift (fewer breaks and sick days) and 4% from more calls per minute (attributed to a quieter and more convenient working environment). Home workers also reported improved work satisfaction, and their attrition rate halved, but their promotion rate conditional on performance fell. Due to the success of the experiment, Ctrip rolled out the option to WFH to the whole firm and allowed the experimental employees to reselect between the home and office. Interestingly, over half of them switched, which led to the gains from WFH almost doubling to 22%. This highlights the benefits of learning and selection effects when adopting modern management practices like WFH. JEL Codes: D24, L23, L84, M11, M54, O31.


Specialist_Honey_629 t1_je5nqia wrote

my dude I told you right where to go to find it. Do you know how to google? if so google Centre for Transformative work design. Put on those big boy pants and do some work your self.


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je5q9ev wrote

If you can't link you're wrong!

I'm not going to look up your proof that's your job!


Living-blech t1_je38k3j wrote

Still quite convenient that you've yet to respond to those that provided evidence against your claims, yet still say others can't prove you wrong.

Afraid of the evidence, or think your belief is far above it?


JadeitePenguin1 t1_je3ef79 wrote

I just replied to them,I wanted to give them the best chance they could and sit down and read the studies which is why I didn't respond, and the studies I can't find easily and all of the links are to companies who sell products for remote work and I shouldn't have to explain why those studies shouldn't be trusted.

If those companies found the opposite they wouldn't say and it's not hard to create a misleading study especially when they don't make them easily accessible.


happybarfday t1_je38ts0 wrote

You can't be proved right either because we have nothing to compare the full-week-at-the-office to, so it's just as meaningless. The economy is in the toilet, productively is abysmal, and people are miserable, there's your evidence.


CommodoreKrusty t1_je0s69v wrote

I don't owe these guys a god damn thing. I wish they'd stop acting like I do.


WoolyLawnsChi t1_je31ytz wrote

Steven Rattner doesn’t “go to an office”

he HAS an office he goes to when he’s not making studio appearances and speaking on stage

Rattner, and his ilk, issue is that when they do bother to show up to the office there isn’t a bunch of “minions” running around all impressed they decided to ”drop by” and “grace” the workers with their presence


thebug50 t1_je50uu1 wrote

Nobody owes anyone anything. Labor. Paycheck. Food. Shelter.


[deleted] t1_je16bga wrote



GAKBAG t1_je1hija wrote

I don't owe them my labor, they are paying for my labor. There's a huge difference.


[deleted] t1_je1iweo wrote



_catkin_ t1_je1jfn3 wrote

Yeah and if the plumber doesn’t want the job for any reason, or your house turns out to be hazardous, he or she can walk away. They don’t owe you anything.


[deleted] t1_je1jrmn wrote



9-11GaveMe5G t1_je1n9zn wrote

>Not if they signed a contract. Which, is the same as an employment contract. You can’t break a contract without cause

"Dangerous work environment" is cause. You can't sign away your safety. Even if it's "in the contract" it's illegal and unenforceable


[deleted] t1_je1nxki wrote



LocoTacosSupreme t1_je280aa wrote

You do know you're allowed to quit a job right?


gk99 t1_je28gf0 wrote

I agree, much better idea to focus on accident statistics regarding the commute that we now know is completely unnecessary.

The thing about a world-changing global pandemic is that everyone has a little more context about what is actually important.


Cannabrius_Rex t1_je3ejbv wrote

Please stop posting wildly ignorant stuff. You don’t HAVE to comment


AlericandAmadeus t1_je2hch3 wrote

What’s funny is that the vast majority of jobs in America very specifically state multiple times in the hiring process that your employment terms are not a contract lol.

That leaves the employers a lot more flexibility and outs when it comes to termination/how they treat you.

You’re so off base it’s amazing. Workers in America would benefit immensely from actual employment contracts. Those are usually what unions push for, actually.


GAKBAG t1_je1ln2w wrote

And if the contract changes without being able to make adjustments or you are unable to come to an agreement, that plumber can leave the contract. The person who created the contract does not get to make changes to the contract without the approval of the person they are contracting with. That is basic contract law.

Being allowed to do remote work but now being forced back into the office is changing the contract and now it needs to be approved again.


[deleted] t1_je1npj6 wrote



GAKBAG t1_je1og3r wrote

I don't owe them my labor. I give them my labor under the assumption that I am being paid for it. It's a transaction. I don't say the cashier at the grocery store owes me my beer after I pay for it.

The minute my check bounces, I'm out and I'm burning the fucking company to the ground. The minute they don't allow me to expense some training I'm going through, I'm out the door. If the situation changes and I don't like it, I am allowed to leave. How do I owe them labor if I'm allowed to leave or they can fire me at any moment?


[deleted] t1_je1pvwp wrote



GAKBAG t1_je1q7i7 wrote

I purchased the beer from the store not from the cashier. The cashier rings up my beer and tells me how much it costs and then puts my money in the register. Nowhere in there do they owe me the beer nor does the beer come into their possession at any point.

... are you a libertarian? Because you sound like a libertarian jerking off over contract law.


[deleted] t1_je1qt3t wrote



GAKBAG t1_je1rky6 wrote

No I'm saying LIBERTARIANS think contract law is end-all be-all and you sound like one of them with how you are practically pleasuring yourself about contract law.


ImminentZero t1_je26kph wrote

My employer pays me for labor already done, not for labor yet to come. Anybody making an hourly wage has it the same.

Nobody this article or the other commenter is taking about is paid up front, they're paid according to the labor they've delivered. If they were paid first then you could argue something is owed.


cseckshun t1_je3kpqg wrote

You also typically can’t be punished for not completing work unless it is proven to have caused damages. If a plumber decides not to complete plumbing work and it causes your project to be delayed or your home to be damaged because you couldn’t hire a different plumber then yes, but if you just don’t pay them and hire a different plumber it’s not a big deal and courts treat it as such.

For the vast majority of an employees time at an employer they are actually OWED WAGES from the employer instead of owing the employer work. In North America and anywhere I have worked it is always a pay period ending in a paycheque and not a paycheque followed by me completing the work. On the second day of my pay period my employer owes me for the first day I worked but has not yet paid me for that time yet, I do not owe them work but they do owe me wages if that makes sense. It’s a wild way to look at you owing your employer work when they carefully structure almost all aspects of the job market to never make that true so they never have to go through the awkward process of forcing someone to work against their will or attempting to recoup money they paid for work in advance.


twistedLucidity t1_je24nzv wrote

In general the labour is provided before payment. They owe you/us, not the other way around.


--Nyxed-- t1_je2rdzq wrote

You have it hilariously backwards. You work and then they pay you. They owe you for your labour. Not the other way around.


poopoomergency4 t1_je2gmqt wrote

>if you’re say a plumber

you won't have to deal with these types of bosses in the first place


Crazyperson4145 t1_je1sp0x wrote

Most Americans dont have contracts the employment agreement explicitly states it is not a contract in at will states


happybarfday t1_je382i4 wrote

> Well, you owe them your labour in return for wages…

They pay me after I do the work, not before...


Cozimo64 t1_je2i2qn wrote

You know you can quit a job, right? You don't owe a company labour, it's a joint agreement of labour in exchange for pay - if either party wishes to terminate that agreement, they can at any time.


Okioter t1_je3fzr2 wrote

A business is not required by law to make profit, if it cannot retain enough employees to run it's business then it does not deserve to exist.


achillymoose t1_je4y42n wrote

They pay wages two weeks after I perform the work. At no point in time will I ever be in their debt. Not to mention, the fat cat who employs me takes the vast majority of what I produce, so if anything, my employer owes me those unpaid wages.

And no, I'm hourly, so I'm not under any contract to show up to work ever. My boss can hope every morning that I'll be willing to show back up, and that is entirely dependent on how the previous days went.


guthmund t1_je54xbd wrote

I don't owe them shit. I earn my wages.

I do the job; I get paid.


tcmpreville t1_je1j44d wrote

Every time one of these CEO's opens their mouths on almost any topic, all they do is demonstrate how utterly out of touch they are with at least 90% of the population. So much so, I think they're intentional rallying cries for other corporate pukes to unify against the people they exploit. They're trying to control the narrative and generate talking points for their various bought-and-paid-for media outlets to repeat ad nauseum.


BachthovenIB t1_je1z3u4 wrote

CEO’s are in reality salesmen for the business. There are actors playing a role and are often idiots.


arbutus1440 t1_je2fgot wrote

>CEO’s are in reality salesmen for the business.

IDK why this doesn't get said more often. If a CEO actually gives a fuck about employees, then shareholders want them removed. If a CEO keeps shareholders happy, then either 1) the employees hate them, or 2) the CEO is slick enough in their salesmanship that they've hoodwinked enough employees into buying into their bullshit. In my industry, I can't tell you how often I've heard someone in a leadership position crow about how we employees really love "serving our clients' needs." NO WE DON'T, WE JUST HAVE BILLS TO PAY, YOU FUCKING TOOL. Nobody has ever loved "serving our clients' needs" since the dawn of time. Be a human for chrissakes.


tacknosaddle t1_je2bk7m wrote

Reminds me of when Romney was running for president and said something about his wife being a "stay at home mom" at some point.

Sorry, but if you are in an income bracket where you don't just have paid help to make things a bit easier, but have "household staff" then you are not what the term is at all about.


breals t1_je4zagw wrote

A CEO of a publicly traded company is basically there to raise money and kept getting large amounts of stock bought and held in the market. That is why so many no-founder CEO who rise thru the ranks to becomes CEO often are from marketing or sales backgrounds.


tcmpreville t1_je52lg0 wrote

And CEOs are usually heavy on the dark triad personality traits. So we end up with psychopathic salesmen running the corporations that run the world. What could go wrong? /s


bitfriend6 t1_je16hns wrote

In regards to Silicon Valley/San Francisco specifically it's due to the long commute times. 90 min commutes mean wasting 3 hours per day in traffic. This makes an 8 hour workday into a 11'er, 12 with a lunch break. Most people won't tolerate that unless the money is really good, which it increasingly isn't. This is caused by a supply problem, there's not enough transit and physical mobility in the region, and this problem will persist through the end of the decade.

We can talk about Office-or-not all day but the plain fact is, if the Office is completely divorced from your community and not involved in your personal life in any way then you have no commitment to it. Workers are isolated from their physical workspaces and even the products they create, to the point where they'd rather quit than subject themselves to such a dehumanizing, alien experience. Which follows as it's only human nature to want some amount of control over our daily routines.

To have a serious discussion about Office-ing, the Office and areas around it have to be desirable. If they aren't, it's over. The same problem vexes industrial workers who are just told to eat it, and largely do because they didn't finish college. These are also the people most likely to replace former Office jobs, presuming companies can't find a machine to do it better.


asthmaticblowfish t1_je201gl wrote

I live a 10 minute walk from my office and still go once every three weeks tops.


[deleted] t1_je4fubh wrote



EntertainerOrk t1_je4unug wrote

Cool, go there then.

Also, are you really threatening us with offshoring? Have you observed anything that's been happening in the last 50 years?


phdoofus t1_je1ia4r wrote

90 min? When I was doing it I ran in to people on the Amtrak who were riding in from Sacramento to either the Berkeley station to catch a bus or BART in to the city or taking it all the way to Santa Clara. That's almost 3 hours one way assuming the train isn't late or gets stopped due to someone on the tracks (dead or alive). And, yeah...Amtrak...that never happens.


DiceKnight t1_je3rmsv wrote

You're touching on a point i've been finding myself talking about with family and friends a lot. What's the point of moving to a city that pays you a seemingly high salary but the salary isn't anywhere near enough to actually live in the parts of town close to your office?


Azer1287 t1_je3a8wy wrote

It’s about greed and control. Why don’t they do a piece about why CEOs continue to get richer, the companies make more profits and none of that goes back ti the employees in any meaningful way? Or that Google executive who was against WFH but then decided to move to New Zealand for a year and fly back once in awhile.

No, let’s focus on the working mom who wants to avoid a 1.5 hour commute and be home in time to pickup their kid.



HighOnGoofballs t1_je0xxhy wrote

I live on a tropical island, ain’t no way I’m going back to an office


Shoddy_Bus4679 t1_je33wix wrote

It’s shocking how many of these articles just assume that all these remote workers are for some reason still within commuting distance of the office.

I took the first opportunity I could to move to Hawaii.


bottomknifeprospect t1_je38hzo wrote

Got sucked into a job where they said it was a couple days a week if people were in the office, but my team is overseas so I will essentially be remote.

Now they flipped on us and require everyone do 5 days regardless of where their team is. My guess is they want engineers to quit so they can explain why they missed their garbage targets.

So anyways, I've been interviewing a lot.


NextJuice1622 t1_je3dakc wrote

Or they are hiring overseas. My company realized we can crush targets now they decided they can rapidly expand in Brazil and India without the cost. My team is one of the only engineering teams in the entire company that hasn't been hit with this yet.

With that said, there ARE benefits from this policy - we have more support during on call hours.


SlientlySmiling t1_je2oc82 wrote

Imagine having your entire head as far up your ass as Benioff or Rattner. Geniuses they are not.


boot2skull t1_je2yxy0 wrote

Ironically, the higher their pay scale the less they are in the office, in my experience. So they have their cake and eat it too.


j1mb0 t1_je2wtpv wrote

Honestly even then, what is an extra $50,000 a year even going to do for me? I don’t not want more money, but if I have to go from spending exactly 40 hours a week on working, to nearly 60 working, getting ready and commuting, I’ll never have time to enjoy that money. I don’t even have the time or energy to use the money I’m already making at 40 hours a week from home.

I’ll come into the office 3 days a week for 4 hours a day if you pay me the same and don’t expect me to do any other work at home. That would be a meaningful positive change in my life.


JenniferJuniper6 t1_je3bxef wrote

Why are they so determined that we peons be as miserable as they can possibly make us?


boogrit t1_je0xnhp wrote

Headline reads like a light novel title. (I read the article and have nothing to say about it.)


Lets_Go_Taco t1_je35f23 wrote

I had a gun flashed at me by some maniac who apparently thought i was going to slow and in his way. This is why i like remote work. I dont like getting to the office wishing i had brought my pistol on my commute, and having my entire vibe and mood for the day ruined. I promise im not very productive nor helpful when im in my “everyones an asshole” mode


FlamingTrollz t1_je3ma7j wrote

Psychopaths don’t care.

Stop expecting that shaming them or spotlighting them will work. It will never work.

Government and Representation.


Mods_suck_42069 t1_je3bdlq wrote

Benioff looks like a big fat disgusting lard ass, and I hope a heart attack takes him soon. (but it won't be soon enough)


Kahrg t1_je2btd3 wrote

Gas companies not making as much money

Car sales are down

Restaurants aren't getting as much business


The only thing remote work is bad for... is lining the pockets of rich assholes and making CEO bonuses higher.


Pizzadontdie t1_je30cup wrote

Restaurants are fine. They’ve adapted to delivery services.


VVarder t1_je3yg63 wrote

I would argue the local restaurants around me in the suburbs are doing better because they get a lot more of my business while being home. Its just a change in the distribution of where the money goes as far as restaurants.


Pizzadontdie t1_je3ylm0 wrote

Agree. I have two restaurants and we’ve never been busier. It’s def different now, as we used to be 85% dine in business and now sit around 50/50 dine and take out.


JenniferJuniper6 t1_je3e25i wrote

Car sales are down. And yet, somehow, car prices are still very high. Work from home has absolutely extended the life span of our car so we don’t need to replace it yet, and the unreasonable prices are making us really, really uninterested in replacing it until we absolutely have to.


cr0ft t1_je4663s wrote

It's nice to live in a small town, in a small country, where everything is small. My commute is 10 minutes by car, with zero congestion. Or in the summertime, 6 minutes by motorcycle. Speeding? Me? Why, I never.

But yeah, capitalism is a shithole that has been completely taken over by the rich. They've even taken over the legislative machine openly; Chevron recently successfully prosecuted and jailed a lawyer for annoying them. Yes, Chevron. Not the US. Chevron bought the whole prosecution and paid the lawyers and judge, and the SCOTUS just upheld that.

Clearly, since Rat-tner is familiar with Keynes and his predictions that we'd work way less with the same productivity, he's knowingly screwing everybody. Because 90% of all jobs are bullshit, that exist only to service the consumption machine. We may consume more than ever, but people sure aren't happy, and they're stressed out of their minds. In America, literally; the amount of mass shootings is in the thousands.

So yeah, it's capitalism or us, and capitalism is winning.


utilitycoder t1_je3fvge wrote

Do what I do (assuming you already have a job and get random recruiter calls). Tell them a rate higher than you're currently getting, and that's your remote rate. Your on-site rate is $100k/year more. That will put an end to things if everyone does it.


CammKelly t1_je4p0x0 wrote

OP really hits the nail on the head, CEO's whine whilst wages have been completely outstripped by inflation. So here we are taking multiple jobs or finding ways to reduce our expenses (like not commuting).


SuspiciousCricket654 t1_je4sizv wrote

Says the exec who has a corner office, with a door that closes, with a small army of assistants, who has a limo that picks them up outside, that takes them to a private jet, to one of their many homes, in the Bahamas, managing their multiple businesses, while working 4 hours a day - remotely.


[deleted] t1_je4fm1j wrote



CammKelly t1_je4pa3w wrote

That really isn't the case. The US tech sector is collapsing at the moment because big tech companies are rapidly cutting costs (driven by shareholder demands) amidst poor product value direction & a tightening economy.


Maximum-Carpet2740 t1_je12k9r wrote

My wife is a senior director over contracting for Sams Club. The problem I observed in her dealings with her team during WFH was that people didn’t work consistently, and were constantly having tech issues, or at least were using tech issues as an excuse to get out of work. They’re hybrid now, and are in office 2 1/2 days a week. Tuesday, Thursday, and half a day Friday.

I myself am a licensed master electrician (I own my own company) who works mostly on the residential construction side of things. I’ve never had the pleasure of working from home except to do my payroll every week. My job is hands on, on location. I personally think all you folks who don’t want to go to the office are a bunch of whiny crybabies.


SomethingDumbthing20 t1_je16zyj wrote

And I personally think you can go fuck yourself.


Jokubatis t1_je1jjaf wrote

I like his “I didn’t go to school and took a vocational job route instead that doesn’t let me work from home, so, I’m going to be a whinny bitch about all the people that did and can work from home”


Icy-Ad-9142 t1_je2ux0c wrote

And there's the elitism from this whole work from home argument. I don't give a rats ass about office workers because they look down on everyone else. It's funny that ya'll try to act like the downtrodden when you are part of a privileged class.


happybarfday t1_je39mcq wrote

No one shit on people with vocational jobs have to work on-site because of the nature of their job until they lashed out at us like the guy above.

Do you see anyone in here shitting on plumbers or auto repair workers? No, we're shitting on rich CEOs and egomaniacal control-freak bosses.


Kriticalmoisture t1_je1fnqe wrote

Lol, as an electrician that owns his own shop, I whole-heartedly agree with you. This guy can go fuck himself


murrrow t1_je1f2bg wrote

Hmm... I've been working remote for 3 years now. There were some tech problems for a few weeks at the start of the pandemic. Haven't really seen any problems in the last couple years. This sounds more like a Sam's Club problem than a whiny crybabies problem to me.


_catkin_ t1_je1kv9a wrote

Is that really a problem with the employees when they’re not provided reliable tech? You wouldn’t jump to blame the workers if the tech issues happened in an office.

If the employees are lazy I’d call it a recruitment and cultural issue. Why are they not motivated? Maybe higher ups who jump to conclusions aren’t helping.

Anyway all us desk jockeys who wfh means less traffic which surely helps people who do have to get around? Additionally when we work just as well from home making us travel to sit at some other desk is all kinds of stupid.


tacknosaddle t1_je2c0w1 wrote

Yeah, let's swap out all of his tools for ones from Harbor Freight and then tell him he's a slacker every time one breaks and he has to go get a replacement one.


Maximum-Carpet2740 t1_je1ui06 wrote

You can spot patterns and it becomes obvious fairly quickly who is legitimately having a one off issue, and someone who is playing the system and just making excuses. The company very quickly at the start of the pandemic provided everyone with hotspots etc because of the constant home internet connection\wifi problems.

Part of the problem is corporate policy itself. I don’t know how much you know about Sam’s Club and Walmart corporate policy but it’s very hard to fire the lazy\problem employees in the corporate\home office space. There’s a whole verbal warning, three written warnings\write ups and coaching etc before you can even be considered for being fired. And the things you have to do to even get a write up have to be ongoing issues, and are pretty egregious from my point of view in the construction industry where people can get fired on the spot for things.


Living-blech t1_je2lz9k wrote

Part of why people are disagreeing with you is exactly because of the last statement. You're looking at a cooperate/service industry (little hands on in the actual service part, and most can be done from a terminal accessed from anywhere) from the eyes of someone in the construction industry (a VERY hands-on industry where you need to be at the site to do the work).

The problem is that the cooperate policy is so lenient, so people have less incentive to do work constantly. If it were less lenient, you'd have the less lazy people doing their jobs and the lazy ones out of a job. That being said, expecting constant results is unfair in an industry where many customers fail to see you as human, making the job even harder.


Maximum-Carpet2740 t1_je2ojr0 wrote

I don’t care that people are downvoting me to oblivion because I don’t care about the karma counter, and my comment was made in jest.

Outside of workers possibly being more easily distracted at home, we have research from the pandemic that WFH is really good for the relationship of your in group, (your individual team) but is bad for the interdependent relationships between different departments and how all the sectors of the organization interact. Essentially individual team cohesion goes way up, but out group connections and collaboration suffer massively because you are no longer interacting with or forging relationships with people who work in different departments and on different teams etc. in your day to day. It also makes your job a lot less secure. I think hybrid is a good compromise personally.


[deleted] t1_je27m9k wrote

So it doesn’t affect you at all but you wrote this huge comment bitching

And who’s the crybaby here?


ender64 t1_je2skl1 wrote

O/U on this guy getting a PPP loan through his business to spend on a luxury car and high end penis pumps?


Maximum-Carpet2740 t1_je2uk1o wrote

No loans. I never even quit working at all through the pandemic. I wired houses through the whole thing.


bahumat42 t1_je2rj9o wrote

>people didn’t work consistently, and were constantly having tech issues, or at least were using tech issues as an excuse to get out of work.

Thats either better technology needed or bad employees, either way thats on the company for making those choices.


Maximum-Carpet2740 t1_je2shj5 wrote

I employ people.

A lot of people are opportunists and some people like to test the edges to see just what and how much they can get away with.

That being said, large corporations usually have some type of protocol to follow where people are given many chances and where everything is documented before they’re terminated. And they have these processes for good reason. So they don’t get sued. It’s not as simple as just cutting the dead weight.


happybarfday t1_je39u14 wrote

And coming into the office stops people from being opportunists and fucking around on the job? That shit happens all the time. Either way you can let them go and hire people who will do the job.