HR software biz BambooHR surveyed more than 1,500 employees, a third of whom work in HR. The findings suggest the return to office movement has been a poorly-executed failure, but one particular figure stands out - a quarter of executives and a fifth of HR professionals hoped RTO mandates would result in staff leaving.
According to the report, most employees working remotely and in-person both feel the need to demonstrate productivity, which for more than a third of employees means being seen socializing and moving around the office. That intense need to be visible may actually be harming productivity, study author and BambooHR’s own head of HR Anita Grantham concluded in her findings.
A full 42 percent of employees who responded to the Bamboo survey said they show up solely to be seen by bosses and managers. If bosses think their presence in the office is making any difference to the amount of work getting done, the results indicate that’s not the case.
I had a friend who made a point of “needing” to go into the office an average of one day every week during the pandemic. His logic was that, if his job could be done entirely from the comfort of his living room in the suburbs, eventually the bosses would realize that it could also be done entirely from the comfort of someone else’s living room in the Philippines or India.
It’s a valid point.
Most practical examples of out-sourcing has however failed to show any worthwhile savings, while working from home has shown remarkable increases in productivity.
Other time zones and that makes communication difficult, so no quick IM with “by the end of the day” as that means something different over there. Different culture and way of doing things, so have to spend a lot more effort in communication being very clear. Even then they’re far away where it’s a lot easier to hide stuff until the hole is very deep. Travel expenses going up very quickly for a little training for a new guy. It can be so fun to work with teams in a different continent.
Besides that, you also get what you paid for.
Hiring someone in India means that the person is gonna give you as much dedication as their wage will allow. If they produced top of the line stuff they would want close to top of the line compensation.
Having a team of remote employees from different (probably cheaper) areas isn’t really outsourcing.
Is it valid? If they could outsource they already would have. They already have with heavy industry.
deleted by creator
While the work could be outsourced to foreign countries there is still some hurdles to overcome. Language barriers, cultural barriers, time zones, labor laws, the paperwork involved with taxes, worker reliability, the threat of scams (see N. Korea), etc. But hey, let them find out for themselves.
Quality issues alone are a major disincentive to outsourcing.
It was never a barrier to cost savings
His fears happened to me. I worked a fully remote job for 5 years and ended up getting a horrible boss who worked me insane hours and liked to remind me that he could replace me with someone in India for 1/10th my salary.
I left and got a hybrid job that is 2 days in office. It pays 50% more, has a free gym, free EV charging, 30 days of vacation, and better health insurance. And I have a niche specialty so they won’t be able to replace me easily. Feels much more secure.
Fuck your ex boss. What a horrible person!
Ya but work quality from India and Philippines is pretty bad. They aren’t equal.
The recent AI LLM goldrush has shown that things don’t need to be good to be used.
If it makes the line go up, no matter how short term it is, it gets done.
It has also showed when things aren’t good and are used, users notice slowly, but the trust is gone for a long while.
The moment boss man can do this, is the moment it will do it… your friend does not understand what game he is playing. It is rather sad for adult people to think like this but here we are.
Yup - the reason most folks “go in” is to be seen, rarely to get things done. The only genuine reason to go in is if you need to talk to a lot of people.
I go in so I can find people who will eat my baked goods.
I go in to eat said baked goods ❤️
I go in to eat all the pussy and dick I can find.
Where do you work? I’ll start coming in too.
I am wildly unproductive when I WFH. I literally cannot focus on work tasks when I have so many more interesting things available to me to do. I’ve tried everything to make myself focus but the best I can do is maybe 3/4 hours of the day interrupted by doom scrolling or messing around on my personal desktop. My coworkers all WFH as well and seem to have no issues getting their stuff done so I’d never argue that WFH is bad for everyone but for me personally it is. I need the structure of going in the office. Thankfully my job gives us the choice.
Have you tried taking your laptop to a library or coffee shop or something?
Get a different job.
For years I thought I just hated working. After I was injured at work and had some off time, I picked up a book called “Discover What You Are Best At” by Linda Gail. It helped me assess my strengths and pointed me to a job I actually enjoyed doing.
Don’t leave us hanging. what was your job before and after?
Same here. Need a teammate, a working atmosphere. Don’t necessarily have to work on the same thing, but i crave a person i know also working next to me.
The only reason I go in is for the free food. It’s pretty good. But I’d rather have my time commuting back.
So scumbag execs can collect bonus for reduced cost and jump ship with their golden parachutes.
And the people left behind have to deal with the shitstorm
Study shows more than 1/4 of bosses are morons that know nothing about how shit works.
Probably more than 3/4 tbh
The office is the principal-agent problem in spades. Even if your manager is a technical person they don’t necessarily understand all the details of what you’re working on: that’s what they pay you for.
This problem is pervasive throughout society. How many people can hire a dentist, a car mechanic, a plumber, or any of countless other specialists and fully understand what the person is doing so that they don’t get ripped off?
Uh, welcome to society, I guess. That’s not a “problem with society”, that’s just society. It’s what being human is about, developing meaningful relationships with other humans. The actual problem is that we have put in place barriers and obstacles to make us even more isolated and less integrated, thus stripping ourselves off of the social strategies and mechanisms that reduce risks on that principal-agent problem. It is way harder for your car mechanic to rip you off when they are also your neighbor and life long friend. If they defraud you, you can ruin their reputation in the community and thus make them unable to acquire any more jobs in that community. The might also feel an emotional moral compulsion to not hurt you, and vice-versa, for you to fulfill a just payment.
I’m skeptical of the claim that an average person has the power to ruin someone’s reputation as a punishment for wrongdoing. Our society is large and extremely anonymous. People can easily pick up and move to another town, if that’s even necessary at all.
Generally I think the only people whose reputation gets damaged severely enough to follow them around for the rest of their life are public figures or infamous criminals such as murderers and rapists.
I personally have been ripped off quite severely by an unscrupulous HVAC company and I don’t see much recourse. I could try to damage their reputation but then they could sue me for libel. I think their unscrupulous behaviour is likely protected by the enormous contracts they make their customers sign and the government gives them the power to have your natural gas supply shut off if you refuse a costly repair they deem necessary.
The study must be flawed, that number is way too low.
Businesses were over-extended by low-interest rate loans, so this isn’t a surprise.
They want “disloyal” staff to just quit by stealth?
I know this is on the ‘work reform’ community so I understand most of the comments have that ‘bent’ to them. I appreciate that.
And I dont want to legitimize giant corporations doing shitty things to employees, so I hope it doesn’t come across as defending that behavior.
BUuuuuuttttt, I understand why and how this happens. Lets say hypothetically, you are in a big company or even a public sector/gov’t organization. You’ve moved to remote work across the board. That’s awesome!
Now imagine if you had a team that is struggling with competing priorities and limited resources. But you also have 3-4 people on that team that could have retired years ago, but they haven’t. Why? Because they can just fucking mail-it-in at home and do little or nothing. As a manager that’s overworked yourself, starting the “removal” paperwork process, especially on a public sector employee or an employee at a large company, is daunting. That can be a full-time job in and of itself. Now, multiply that x3 or 4 because you don’t just have one employee doing this. That’s going to be brutal.
What’s a much easier option? RTO. Is it a sure-fire way to get those 3 or 4 to retire? No, they might just come in and be lazy in the office, but there is a good chance that commute, parking expense, extra time away from their family is going to push them over the edge.
There are absolutely, without a doubt, people abusing remote work. RTO is a ‘lazy’ but semi-understandable way for managers to drive some of those bad apples away. At least in theory. The article suggests not all do.
From my own anecdotal evidence, when people started returning to office, the retirements went up and people moved around more. This freed up positions and let organizations, who were stagnate, grow and promote people.
The down side is: some of your top talent will leave if they get caught up in the RTO mandates.
I’m sorry but this seems very illogical. You’re saying that, as a company thats fully remote, its easier to get the WHOLE COMPANY back into the office than it is to do the paperwork to remove a handful of bad employees, while risking losing some of your better employees??
Let me get this straight. You want everyone’s working conditions to be worse so some people wil choose to retire? Why stop there then? Dock everyone’s pay, reduce vacation time, force people to work over weekends - that will REALLY drive up the people retiring!
