- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- technology@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- technology@beehaw.org
Comments
You must log in or # to comment.
Imagine living 49 miles from that office and having to commute in shit Seattle traffic. You’ve now just lost 3-4 hours out of each day.
They want that person to quit. That way they don’t show up as a layoff.
It’s called constructive dismissal.
The only real reason for these random return-to-office mandates is because they want to get rid of employees without laying them off properly.
I don’t think it is. It’s because the higher up people a) are 100% dedicated to Microsoft, b) spend all their time in meetings, and c) can afford to live close to the office.
They can’t imagine - or don’t care - that many employees aren’t Microsoft zombies, don’t do work that really benefits from being in an office, and have horrible commutes.
That’s why you frequently see these instructions from the top which then get ignored at the bottom of the chain, until they start doing ID checks (or time cards?) to force it.
It wouldn’t make sense as a layoff technique because they’ll lose their best employees. Also they do plenty of layoffs without RTO.
If they have data, that they’ve looked at, then fucking publish the data. It’s such a weasel statement to say “we’ve looked at the data”. Well, if it stands up to inspection, publish it!
I worked for Microsoft for 12 years. Now I’m in a fully remote business and I’ve got better relationships and stronger results being fully remote than we ever did in person.
The amount of connectors I’ve sat on in Microsoft. Ugh.
Why was their policy posted on a publicly accessible blog? This seems like internal information to me.
Because whatever Microsoft does makes the news. It’ll be leaked anyway even if they tried to keep it internal. They might as well get on the front foot and publish it. Besides, it sends a signal that their intentions can withstand the light of inspection.
