That's a nice idea but how many of those people will wind up at a job that doesn't require RTO? I was applying quite a bit back in April and many places that previously had decently-hard stances on allowing WFH now stated RTO as a requirement.

▲

johnnyanmac a day ago | parent | next [-]

Depends on the person and their lifestyle and savings. I'm sure some well off single/DINK households can simply weather the recession while making a few concessions, waiting until the market shifts to an employee's market again.

But in the normal case, you are right. Google had extra rounds of layoffs because RTO didn't self-cull enough people. People know this isn't the market to make a stand in without significant leverage.

▲

pjmlp 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Sadly, and we all know that butt on chair while doing Teams calls with the offshoring and nearshore teams, is a large improvement in productivity. /s

▲

locknitpicker 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Sadly, and we all know that butt on chair while doing Teams calls with the offshoring and nearshore teams, is a large improvement in productivity. /s

I personally liked how they claimed employees complained that they spend too much time aligning with other teams, and somehow their response to they complain was... Firing the people responsible for facilitating that alignment?

And then there's the comical justification that they will increase development speed with larger teams managed by managers with far more responsibilities and far less time to deal with issues.

Uber's announcement wouldn't sound so silly if they just stuck with the financial angle. They are firing people because they aren't growing, they have no answer for stalling, but they still need to present nice numbers to investors who want to get paid. That would be a more respectable answer.

▲

FoundTheDouche 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

	▲	pjmlp 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Answering you from there.