Funniest to me in this kind of debate is having my N+1 manage us from across the country, having two team members in another town, and somehow, my ass being at home 15km from the office makes any difference at all to the daily life of the team? It doesn’t. My actual manager, the dude giving us our marching orders, doesn’t care. Shit, our N+1 doesn’t care either, since he’s almost always remote himself!
Only people I’ve seen actually care seem to be HR, for whatever reason.
I don’t even get how any company with several sites has anything to stand on. Makes no fucking sense.
Never quit in these situations, or they win.
Do the absolute fucking minimum you can, or even less so you piss off management, until they have to fire you, which they can’t outright as after a certain number of years they have to give warnings and trainings first.
There are two ways to quit: How management wants you to or because you’re forming a union.
That only works in places with actual worker protection and labor laws, which disqualifies pretty much all of the USA.
I work with several European tech teams and when staffing issues happen the other devs absolutely have to carry the slack.
Indefinitely? Cause that’s how it usually goes this side of the pond.
There are many at-will states that can fire you on demand (if done carefully) and there’s nothing you can do about it.
which they can’t outright as after a certain number of years they have to give warnings and trainings first.
I mean, says who? There’s currently only one state in the union that requires cause before you can fire someone. The real issue with firing people is that without a documented cause, that person can collect state unemployment, and the number of people who go on state unemployment from a single company has a financial impact on that company.
That’s stupid. Don’t get fired for cause, that only hurts you. Spend your time looking for a new job, then quit and leave ASAP.
It’s not stupid as you put it. If you know the laws of where you live, it makes perfect sense.
Split the difference, spend as much of your time on the clock job hunting and doing the bare minimum. Then quit without notice mid shift for the new job.
I work for a real shitty company with a lot of people who do things just to justify their jobs. This leads to stupid mistakes happening that can cause MASSIVE disruptions for the entire workforce. One such stupid mistake happened this week and caused my team (and several others) a shitload of unnecessary work. Yesterday a guy on my team who works in an already understaffed office had enough and told me that he’s done, and quitting. I can’t blame him, he is in a very shitty situation and I wouldn’t have stayed as long as he has… but if he walked out it would have put that entire location, the rest of our team both locally and extended, in a much worse situation. What it wouldn’t do is hurt the company or the executives.
I’m all for people finding better jobs and leaving toxic environments, but it really does no one any good to pick the absolute worst time to walk out. That’s petty and will burn a lot of bridges, and depending on your situation and industry could come back to haunt you down the road.
damn your tongue must be strong af from all that bootlicking you do
You know what, fuck off. Who the fuck do you think you’re trying to impress? I know my fucking job sucks, I know the company I work for sucks and I know that almost everyone who works for this company is suffering. So what, fuck me for not wanting to make it worse on everyone else who isn’t in a position to just walk off the job? I wish I lived in your dream world where you never have to do things you don’t 100% agree with, it must be nice, but for me I’m living in this shit and I’m trying my best to take care of the people who count on me. So let me say, just to be clear: fuck you.
no, fuck you
if he walked out it would have put that entire location, the rest of our team both locally and extended, in a much worse situation. What it wouldn’t do is hurt the company or the executives.
That’s not your problem, that’s the company’s problem. You still get paid the same. If you have issues, take them to your supervisor, and go on with your life.
Except I don’t still get paid the same. Someone walked out last year and put the whole team in a tailspin and the rest of the team paid for it when review time came around and since we missed so many deadlines due to staffing issues no one got any sort of substantial raise. And missing your once-a-year raise doesn’t just impact your pay for that year, it impacts it for every year going forward.
I’m not sure I’d want to work somewhere that penalizes me for someone else’s faults.
Have you considered finding a union to bring to your workplace?
So… most workplaces? Most companies have department wide goals and metrics that don’t change just because half of a department walks. Even in good workplaces, hiring to “right size” a team takes time, and most of the time the work still needs to be done, and there’s only so far management can stretch until it starts impacting external customers.
It sucks terribly. It’s not fair. Life isn’t.
Trust me, I don’t want to work here either, but having spent 6 months looking for a job and eating through my savings and knowing that I’m in no position to do that again anytime soon, I don’t exactly have many options. And yes, I’ve considered a union, but I also don’t want to end up unemployed again so I’m not going to be the one to champion that.
Unfortunately that’s not how it works.
Boss turns around and says “new responsibilies. Get after them.” You’re especially fucked if the work is the type of tasks you are already responsible for.
Sure, you can say no, or slow play it, but that just means you’ll either get a shitty review or get fired.
I’m not justifying this, I’m recounting what often happens.
Downvotes are hilarious. Doesn’t matter if you line it, it’s how it happens around the world.
The downvotes are because you’re the kind of rug your boss cleans his boots on, making it worse for everybody in the company. You’re the problem employee.
Nope, just aware how the real world works.
When this happens my response is to go find another job
No where in my comment did I say I felt it was a good thing, or acceptable. It’s just common. You assumed I am cool with it cause it fits your worldview
Edit Tell me: you think you’re just going to say “no, I’m not gonna take on new or increased tasks” , and come out successfully at the end of the year? (In review, raise, or continued employment?)
The only move is to leave or do the work
what the bootlicking shit is this?
Ok…that’s not bootlicking…that’s a legit plea for some poor fuck in the poorest of situations.
I’ve been in situations where I know I’m about to fuck my coworkers over and I let them know beforehand. Management can eat my dick however.
Bob, you might want to take a sick day on Wednesday…why?..just do it…here’s my linked in info.
Don’t get me wrong, I fully know that it’s bootlicking shit and I hate it… but I have a family to support, bills to pay, etc. It is soul crushing and someone purposefully picking the most painful time to walk out only hurts their coworkers, because even if you choose to take a sick day when they walk out, the next day you still have to go in and deal with the mess left behind.
Shocker.
I’m 47. I’m not a boomer (although I’m probably hella-old compared to most here) and I’d just like to say: What a bloody bunch of boomer-bosses.
“Have you tried disagreeing on a call! It’s hard!”
Grow up man, use the hand up feature and state your case. I work in a fully remote business and we have better meetings here than any office based meeting I’ve ever been in. Calendars are public, confluence is prevalent, slack is the lifeline (thankfully very little email) for everything; with a bunch of “banter”, hobby channels etc. We start every large meeting with a “one personal and one professional highlight” before we commence. I know the people here better than I’ve ever done my office based colleagues.
They are going to regret this. I do not know any developer who would prefer 5 days in the office. None. It’s not like Amazon’s compensation was that high. I really genuinely don’t understand how they expect to recruit.
I do know a few devs who prefer 5 days in the office. But they’re absolutely the minority.
Personally, I try to go once a week, but I usually don’t because I dread having a day with 50% my normal productivity.
It’s just so noisy all the time in there. Open space and really high ceilings for “collaboration”…
It’s tripping me up you had to point out you’re not a boomer instead of just saying you’re from Gen X.
On Lemmy, anything above 30 is a boomer, so I thought I’d start by pointing it out :)
These people aren’t interested in hearing dissenting opinions. I’m sure they’ve already heard arguments for it. They just don’t care. They’d rather cut costs by doing something many people won’t tolerate so that they leave and then figuring it out after the fact.
Ironically I’ve found it’s harder for people to run away in remote, people don’t disappear from their desks and you don’t have to chase them down. If they don’t message back and it’s urgent, you call and if they don’t pick up a call and haven’t marked themselves as such something’s up. People are extremely dilligent about making sure they use status’ due to the knowledge that people will assume that way.
An office is also a great place to hide away as “busy”; shuffling around, a bit of time at desk, join a meeting and say nothing, coffee, lunch, shuffling, another meeting with low contribution and you’re gone. Doing nothing is just as easy, and less assailable, in an office.
Almost as if there’s a reason that C-suite level people are so adamant about returning to office…
They are going to regret this.
I really hope they do. But now is a good time to put the squeeze on devs. Lots of people are having a hard time finding a software job and they’ll be extra reluctant to do a mass exodus.
This line of reasoning is baffling anyway. Amazon is spread out over multiple geographical locations, it’s not like remote meeting will go away
Yup. We recently had a complaint that a collaborative meeting was difficult for people on call, so our solution was to make it 100% remote. The meeting is still collaborative, but now everyone has an equal opportunity to participate.
We do 2x in office, 3x WFH, and it’s the perfect ratio IMO. Value of in-person time:
- questions get answered quickly - easy to tell if someone is available for a quick question, and faster response than Slack
- in-person collaboration - screen sharing works, but actually being able to point and type has a ton of value
- casual discussions - chat about upcoming projects over lunch or a coffee break long before they’re actually important, which can make future meetings smoother
All of that can be done remotely, and we certainly do a fair amount of that, but it’s nice to have a little in-person time. That said, my WFH days are sacred because that’s when I actually get work done.
The worst meetings are the ones with people in a meeting room and people online. All in person or all dialled in (even if from an office desk).
Yep the 2 in 3 out is what we do. We do have one day where we all try to be in (Tuesday) to just get the face to face time. Seems to working for us. Plus since most of the conversations are on slack, I can go back and verify what I thought was said. That’s SO convenient.
We do TW in office, MThF WFH. I don’t see a point in coming in on different days, so if you have to miss Tuesday or Wednesday for some reason, you don’t have to make it up later. We occasionally have a company meeting on one of the other days, in which case we’ll often agree on which other day is optional (or we just come in 3 days that week).
And yeah, it is super nice.
Absolutely right. But the thing is that many so-called leaders will no longer have a raison d’être if there are no more unnecessary meetings and all that fuss. Many of them do nothing all day but sit in meetings, achieve nothing and still feel very important. That’s the misery of the world of work: it’s not usually the best who get into management positions, it’s not the most qualified and certainly not the ones who work the hardest. It’s the most unscrupulous, those who pass off the work of others as their own, people who would never achieve anything on their own or in a small company that can’t afford to waste salaries on froth-mongers. LinkedIn makes it clear how this all works, I think: there, too, it is not the competent people who really understand their work who have the most success, it is the busybodies, the networkers and narcissists. If the competent people set the tone, there would be no discussion about office duties in an IT company. It’s only held on to so that managers can live out their fantasies of omnipotence and post nonsense on LinkedIn.
I think you might be surprised. There’s literally dozens of us gen-x’ers on here. (I’m 53).
Luckily I work for a university and the hybrid thing is still going strong. Honestly I tend to get more done when I’m at home because the social aspect of being at work is very distracting for someone with ADHD like me.
And I hope they do regret it. The only managers I’ve seen that push for the RTO thing are the micromanagers who think they are necessary for productivity. News flash, they aren’t. The best managers set expectations, shield their employees from the bullshit above them, give them the appropriate tools and work environments to be successful, and trust them to do what is necessary.
And yes I’d never work for a Google or an Amazon. You’re a cog, a disposable piece of machinery.
They are going to regret this?
A company doesn’t remember, and the people who are actually responsible don’t have regrets cuz the other option was to hand over control to someone else (hopefully more qualified).
Myeah I know what you mean, but the people that get associated with a bad decision at the highest level will usually end up being told by the board before they’re let go. It’s all in private, but in my experience those discussions are reasonably frank.
The board doesn’t “let go” of people willing to do a hatchet job, they hire them into their other companies to do the same. “Failing upwards” is a term that comes to mind.
Is that an opinion or backed by facts? I’ve never seen someone fired from a C-level role only to be hired into an investor’s other investment.
The point is they don’t get fired for laying off staff.
Engineering is a skilled trade. We need our own union like every other skilled labor group.
I agree. I’m in pre-sales working at an AWS partner and honestly our whole team is treated as dispensable.
At Amazon literally every employee is dispensable. They have a firing quota.
Edit: to be clear I’m talking about the Amazon divisions outside the warehouse. They make managers fire a certain percentage of people on a regular basis.
I have been laid off from every job (5 in total) since the pandemic. We are a subhuman commodity. Companies that are hiring now are exploiting the market by offering lower salaries.
Meta and Amazon are in their hiring season and they’ll start their layoffs again next spring or summer. And somehow, everyone forgets this fucked up cycle keeps happening in perpetuum.
We need to stop being afraid of mentioning the U word. We need better protection and rights as employees.
And they are smart enough to put us at the very bottom of the management ladder, even though we’re not actually management. That way we can’t legally unionize. In the U.S. at least.
That way we can’t legally unionize. In the U.S. at least.
This must vary state-by-state, or have exceptions, because I could name examples of them (but I would rather not dox myself).
It’s not every company, but that is what mine did. We’re “management” but we don’t manage anyone.
Classifying employees as management without having actual management duties is a violation of federal labor law. You might be owed back wages/overtime. Could be worth looking into. A class action lawsuit against a previous employer I had led to hundreds of employees getting checks for thousands of dollars, even after lawyers took their fee.
Some technical jobs can be legally classified exempt from overtime. That is different than being classified as management.
Given how “business-friendly” the US has become, I imagine there are all sorts of loopholes that only work in favor of the corporation.
There doesn’t need to be loopholes anymore. The SC will just blatantly rule in favor of companies.
In case anyone has missed it, they’re done with loopholes, done with being sly and coy. They are saying the quiet parts, they are marching proudly, they are confident and unafraid. We need to make them afraid again.
The right wing and its corporate masters are done hiding in shadow. Loopholes and subterfuge are for chumps when you can just change the rules without consequence.
“Skilled labor” is such a bullshit concept
There are jobs that take weeks to learn, jobs that take years to learn, and there are even jobs that take a decade+ to learn. You ain’t putting the three-week old newbie in the latter two roles.
That’s true, but it devalues other labor which can be similarly/more difficult or skilled. I skimmed this article, but it seems to convey what I mean:
https://www.shrm.org/executive-network/insights/reshaping-narrative-time-retire-term-unskilled-laborI understand what people mean when they say “skilled labor” and I don’t think it’s intended negatively normally fwiw
Depending on your country, that is the norm. Engineers here have at least 2 national unions to choose from, finance have a couple of unions, same with teachers, admin staff, etc. etc.
As usual, this is probably just US being victim of 'merican exceptionlism.
Another company that lays off it’s talented people first, due to the meddling of a CEO where he has no business to.
I forsee an Amazon brain drain about to happen.
Consequences aside, he has a totally valid point. They own the business, they are the boss, and they can decide. People might not like it, but in the end, it is their problem and people are free to change their job. People got a bit to comfortable lately and every single employee expects the company to be run just as they prefer. Even when you work fully remote, there are still people who find it really hard and stupid as they never get to see their collegues and spend the entire day just staring at the monitor. You will never make everyone happy, so why bother complaining. The decision has been made, take it or leave it.
The capitalist sits and laughs on their piles of gold while enjoying their immense power, one day in a not so distant future they will hold no power and their wealth will not save them from the righteous anger of the workers they once oppressed
What immense power? You can hand in your resignation and all that power, money and piles of gold suddenly mean nothing when you don’t have the basic component that makes the gears turn. Workers are also not oppressed, because workers can quit if it’s not fitting for them. Staying there by free will to take the shit in is not oppression… We already have very mobile workforce that basically does job jumping every 2 years, and people are having less and less issue with simply quitting. So what is exactly the problem for the worker, expect that they want to work in a company, but on THEIR terms, and not the company terms?
Not defending Amazon in any way, but I think the playing field is quite level right now between the employer and employees. Both are free to make decisions, both are free to work together or part ways. So I am not seeing an issue other than the worker wanting to control how the company is run.
Mmm boot. Tell me your opinions on the French or American revolutions next. No one was oppressed under a monarchy were they?
Guess we should all be unemployed not to be oppressed.
You mean Amazon is bad to their workers?
BuT nO OnE WaNtS tO WoRk AnYmOrE1
Yeah, when you’re having fun pissing off people, people are pissed off.
Who would have guessed?
He pointed to Amazon’s principle of “disagree and commit,” which is the idea that employees should debate and push back on each others ideas respectfully
That’s all fine and dandy for ending debate about a stupid roadmap feature, but “disagree and commit” is a different story when you’re asking people to spend 3 hours unpaid in a car everyday.
As a long time Amazon employee, disagree and commit essentially works like this:
Employee: “I’m not convinced this is the best way to do something”
Manager: “Noted, now stfu and do what I say”
This makes zero sense… If you’re a cloud company why can’t employees be in the cloud
Because real-estate is physical money.
But that’s something I don’t actually understand, since real estate would fall under the sunk cost fallacy. Ie, if you’ve invested in real estate, the cost is spent already, right? Whether someone comes in that building is irrelevant. The costs spent to maintain, heat, clean, power the buildings, on the other hand… It’s just not really obvious to me. Seems like fewer people would cost cheaper, no?
If you’re using that real estate as collateral for loans, it needs to maintain its value, or you’ll have to put up more collateral
as a client this this tells me they aren’t all that confident in their product
Them fixating on nerd asses in seats wasn’t creepy enough to sway you yet?
No they purport to sell cloud services, but require their cloud employees to be onsite.
What if 37 000 employes leave amazon same day ?
Hopefully, they would start a rival company. That would be fascinating to see.
Watch Amazon sue them or something lmao
What if 37,000 employees sign union cards same day?
this sounds dangerously like communism, friend. Freedom is where you do what the corporate bosses want.
I asked our CTO at a town hall if there were plans to improve the office my team got moved to because they moved us from the nice office to the city and the back to the previous area but a crappy office. Nope.
Did they take your stapler too?
Friend, you have no idea how nervous I was during that exchange lol. I think I’m reasonably comfortable with public speaking in smaller crowds but this was a huge group of people and a bunch over Zoom too. I’m so conflict adverse. I typically just ignore problems. I’m rarely even passive aggressive. All that to say, I’m worried I sounded like that guy while I was talking lol.
Don’t worry. They will.
That’s the intention behind that back to work decision.
That’s what I don’t get though, these people seem to be delusional in that they think that they’re a hard worker and looooove in person, so therefore every hard worker loves in person and the chaff will quit. Then they act shocked when their high performers largely leave to pursue remote or hybrid options. It’s such a glaring inability to see people different from them as having any value.
Yep. The best people will leave first because they have options. It’s called the dead sea effect
