Quote:
Originally Posted by muniz_ri
All of that makes complete sense. But I think that the key point in the discussion is having the "option" to work remotely, if the type of work can be performed remotely, as opposed to requiring everyone back in the office for seemingly arbitrary reasons.
Again, I believe that just having the option will be more and more important to the workforce and organizations will have to get on board if they want to attract and retain top talent.
|
100% this, I can’t work from home, but my wife can. She works for a Fortune 500 company and they are trying to get everyone back into the office. Even though they don’t have the space and are laying off people left and right to cut costs. They want her to go to a floor and just find a desk with her laptop, mind you she is a very high level manager and the things she is discussing shouldn’t be “out in the open” etc. None of her team is in the area and are scattered around the country. They have lost a ton of top talent because of this and my wife has updated her Linkedln/resume for the first time in years. It makes no sense for her to sit in traffic for two hours a day going to and from an office that has nobody in it that she works with/plus other problems. The idiocy is off the charts.
Bottom line is as usual with life a one style option doesn’t work for everyone or every company. If it works to do WFH, hybrid or you need to be in the office than do it. This is where good leaders shine and others obviously don’t because they have some bullshit synergy philosophy that doesn’t apply to everyone and they just try to force it.