Google and JPMorgan have each told staff that office attendance will be factored into performance evaluations. The US law firm Davis Polk informed employees that fewer days in the office would result in lower bonuses. And Meta and Amazon both told employees they’re now monitoring badge swipes, with potential consequences for workers who don’t comply with attendance policies – including job loss. Increasingly, workers across many jobs and sectors appear to be barrelling towards the same fate.

In some ways, it’s unsurprising bosses are turning back to attendance as a standard. After all, we’ve long been conditioned to believe showing up is vital to success, from some of our earliest days. In school, perfect attendance is often still seen a badge of honour. The obsession with attendance has also been a mainstay of workplace culture for decades; pre-pandemic, remote work was largely unheard of, and employees were expected to be physically present at their desks throughout the workday.

Yet after the success of flexible arrangements during the pandemic, attendance is still entrenched as a core metric. What’s the point?

  • pgp@lemmy.pt
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s a game that has nothing to do with workers, but real estate instead. If workers don’t go to the office, there will be no need for the company to rent an office the size it does, making it “lose” money. If they cut on their offices, real estate starts losing value (as we can see in some articles that start popping up), and that’s something that bothers a lot of big players.

    • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think the real estate thing is big, but also they’ll be god-damned if we get a benefit for free.

      Once it’s a benefit they have control over, they can use it as leverage for those that want it back. They can cut our pay, increase our hours, both.

    • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      And then people will start clamoring about retrofitting the empty skyscrapers into housing and then all the NIMBYs houses lose value, and that’s make tax revenue decrease.

      THAT is why.

      • Tigbitties@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        retrofitting the empty skyscrapers into housing

        “Too expensive. Too difficult” they say… it’s fucking bullshit. Those are stalling words. They’re waiting on a plan to maximize the investment. My guess, money and/or tax credit from the government.

        • Sodis@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          To be honest, that’s most likely a valid concern. Office buildings don’t meet the criteria for normal housing. If you look at the distribution of bathrooms and kitchens in these skyscrapers, you need to do quite some construction work to meet the requirements of apartments for housing.

            • Sodis@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Yes, they are starting with buildings, that are more suited to refurbish them as residential area. Smaller buildings are better suited, because you can actually get light into them. The center rooms in one of these giant skyscrapers would be without windows. Just to name another reason, why it is not that simple.

                • Sodis@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  How does this in any way counter my points? They even get subsidized to do it, meaning, that it is too expensive else. And I already stated, that there are buildings, that are more suitable than others. Just look at the absolute numbers, they are talking about 20k units in the next decade. That’s literally nothing.

          • Tigbitties@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            It’s a consern buy it’s not impossible. Take greed out if the picture and it wouldn’t be an issue. We’ve got to stop encouraging this maximi return on investment shit.

            • Sodis@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              If the developers, that attempt this, all go bankrupt, it does not help at all. If you want to push private companies into doing something unprofitable, you need to subsidize it or the government to do it on its own. For some of these buildings its cheaper to just build a new apartment complex instead of retrofitting them.

              • girlfreddy@sh.itjust.worksOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                A while back someone in the know said how it could be done at a reasonable cost: each floor has small apartments built on the outside walls (one bedroom, two bedroom and family units … possibly different floors for each) with the interior centre section as a common space with a large kitchen, rec room, small kids area, etc. Bathrooms should already be on each floor, just need to tie in showers (and add more stalls if required).

                There are towers doing this in a few areas, but the naysayers yell loudly when riled.

                • Sodis@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Would still be nicer to have sunlight for the communal areas, but that sounds like a working solution. Probably profit goes into the drain though, because you get less units you can rent out and people will pay less for apartments with only a shared bathroom and kitchen.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Some of my coworkers love going into the office. They’re also really bad at responding to slack. I wonder if these are related.

    Anyway, we should all unionize and push back against this kind of nonsense

    • Zoidberg@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 months ago

      During the pandemic, when we were all forced to work from home, one of my coworkers would incessantly bitch and moan about how he missed being back at the office.

      He is the kind of person who pulls all sorts of bullshit out of his ass and starts treating it as if it’s true. At some point he started going around saying that “productivity when WFH is ok but everybody is complaining that they can’t make plans for future projects without face to face time”. When our director got curious and asked him where he had heard about this, he changed the topic.

      Basically this is a person who doesn’t want to do anything and makes a career out of going around and pretending to be working and calling meetings when they’re not needed. For this kind of person, WFH is deadly as it clearly shows that their “skills” are not needed for the company’s success.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        I dunno man, if those people played it right, WFH would be the best. Still getting nothing done, but now you get to stay home every day.

        • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Yeah, for people like me that finish the asigned tasks in very little time, Office culture is torture since yeah, we shouldn’t show how fast we work since it will only end up with our workload increasing, but having to pretend to work or working slower than would like is the worst. At home I just prepare partial commits or simply commit once at the end of the day, or do whatever whenever and people don’t monitor when were those lambda functions edited, when was the pipeline launched… etc. They only care if it’s done for the next day. And it is, and they are happy. They don’t need to know I spent 6 out of 8 work hours playing Baldurs Gate 3, do they?

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Exactly. Which I think is the reason these executives are so gung ho about RTO. They realize people aren’t spending 100% of their time and attention on their work every day, and that’s what they want and expect. I’m not sure if they realize people will do the same thing in the office, except they’ll drag it out and make it seem like it took longer as you described. They probably don’t care.

            I think part of it is this corporate mindset that they own you if you work there. And you should be grateful for the job they’ve provided, and that means working every minute of every work day. No amount of data showing that’s less productive/efficient will ever get those people to change their minds. Because in this case, for these people, it’s about feeling superior and showing “dominance”.

  • bobman@unilem.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    What’s the point?

    Middle management needs something to do to justify their useless existence.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Idk what podcast or whatever uses “middle management” as a scapegoat, but this is the dumbest fucking meme.

      Like CEOs and middle management are the problem but SVPs and department heads are totally cool? How does that make sense? Whoever initiated this just had one shitty boss and 0 professional corporate experience.

      I absolutely guarantee you that middle management is not making “return to office” decisions.

  • tallwookie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    if workers arent in the office, then potentially billions of dollars in office real estate is no longer a good investment & will directly impact their revenue. any manager or e-level who is responsible for that kind of financial hit will be immediately fired and blacklisted… ergo, employees will return to the office effective immediately.

  • Tigbitties@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    It doesn’t have to be unprofitable. They just don’t need to “maximize their return”. They want tax credits and subsidies for low income housing so they can make the same profit as a bidding war for a luxury condo. It’s greed.

  • FuzzChef@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    10 months ago

    Unpopular opinion: Teams collaborate better in presence. Remote attendance is inferior to being in the same room even with the most expensive Cisco board or meeting owl.

    However if you’re working on your own, processing to-dos, a team around you will be a hindrance. However, creative processes just don’t work that way and require interaction and variability to occur.

    • donuts@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Unpopular opinion: Teams collaborate better in presence. Remote attendance is inferior to being in the same room even with the most expensive Cisco board or meeting owl.

      How do you explain the dominance of free and open source projects like Linux which are developed remotely by people all over the world?

      There are plenty of examples of people collaborating effectively from different towns or time zones. If anything, I think too many organizations are too inflexible or have simply been structured in a way that they can’t be efficient remotely.

      • Aabbcc@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Think of how much better the result would be if the workers had to commute, had less lunch options, couldn’t take a nap, and had to work in a noisier environment

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Then why have they spent the past 40 years outsourcing shit to other countries

      • SaltySalamander@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        My counrerpoint is that it doesn’t matter if it works better for business when…

        You’re working for the business though.

        • girlfreddy@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          No. The business is renting your time and experience … nothing else.

          Problem is they still think you work for them.

        • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I feel like way too many folks forget that employment is a 2-way street. I have a skill that my employer needs, and I give them my skill and time in exchange for my compensation (salary plus both hard and soft benefits). It is not my responsibility to make sure that the company is at its most successful regardless of my own personal comfort and happiness, my only responsibility is to perform the duties stated in my job description.

          When (as is happening all over my industry) a large number of employers decide that something like remote work is now a high priority for them, then it really does stop mattering whether or not it’s best for the company, because all the employees with any bargaining power (which is to say, the good ones) will just leave for companies that do offer remote work.

          Think about it this way, it’s absolutely in every companies best interest to pay minimum wage and/or offer no health insurance, 401k, etc (at least where allowed by the law) . So why do companies that need skilled workers offer those things? Because if they didnt then they would never be able to hire talent.

          Whats best for the business is getting the best talent, and you only do that by being cognizant of what the most talented people in your industry want. And in most industries where remote work is possible, remote work is increasingly becoming something people want. And COVID proved that whether or not there are slight disadvantages to collaboration in remote work (I’m not personally sold, and the research so far is contradictory), it does work, so companies have increasingly fewer excuses to drag everyone back to the office

    • wahming@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Studies have shown that worker preferences are somewhat evenly split between office only, hybrid, and full WFH. However, being on Reddit / lemmy is kind of a self selection towards the WFH crowd, so it’s become a quite an echo chamber on this issue. Whereas management tends to the social crowd who prefer full office. And it doesn’t help that management is pushing the return to office for other undisclosed but obvious reasons.

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Even collaborative teams frequently have individual work that does not require regular in person attendance on a regular basis and many of us can collaborate just as well on a video call as in person.

    • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      If teams collaborate better im presence, why does everyone work in separate spaces? Even cubicles don’t make sense from your statement, get those people at picnic tables!

      If your argument is “teams collaborate better with instant access,” then yes, but technology has bridged that gap.

      • FuzzChef@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        A cubicle is probably the worst of both worlds.

        I strongly disagree that technology has bridged that gap. There always is delay, no spatial information and no equivalent way to switch focus.

    • Poggervania@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I agree with this to a certain extent.

      I do think it’s easier to be creative and brainstorming with other people when I am in the same room as them, but ultimately it should be a mix of both for that kind of stuff to accommodate for everybody - that way, people can start their to-dos in peace either at the office or at home, wherever they’re already at.