1095
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

Return-to-office orders look like a way for rich, work-obsessed CEOs to grab power back from employees::White-collar workers temporarily enjoyed unprecedented power during the pandemic to decide where and how they worked.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Nurgle@lemmy.world 246 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"These elite CEOs probably work 100-plus hours a week and they're much more work-focused."

No they don’t. Full stop. Let’s stop fabricating this bullshit. That’s 16hrs a day M-F with 10hrs Sat/Sun. Elon Musk is not doing those hours period, let alone while also finding time to play Elden Ring.

[-] Moyer1666@lemmy.ml 114 points 1 year ago

Yeah people need to stop acting like they're the most hardworking people out there. They definitely are not. Especially when you can be CEO of multiple companies and no one bats an eye.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago

Even if Elon Musk is putting in 100-hour weeks, he's the CEO of five companies, which means being CEO of one company is a half-time gig at most.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 151 points 1 year ago

CEOs DO NOT WORK HUNDRED HOUR WEEKS.

CEOs DO NOT WORK HUNDRED HOUR WEEKS.

CEOs DO NOT WORK HUNDRED HOUR WEEKS.

CEOs DO NOT WORK HUNDRED HOUR WEEKS.

NOBODY FUCKEN DOES, YOU'D BE A BRAIN DEAD ZOMBIE

[-] Stumblinbear@pawb.social 20 points 1 year ago

Yeah, on average they do around 60

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 116 points 1 year ago

Its important to note what they consider work too. I'm sorry but spending half of your day getting to meetings and the other half in them is not the same as fixing a layer 3 issue on a critical app, or laboring all day in the sun at 60 hours a week. I don't subscribe to the idea that work is work. If that were true nobody would mind being a traffic controller over an office administrator.

[-] Stumblinbear@pawb.social 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But work is work. If you're doing it for the benefit of a business only because they're paying you to do it then that is the literal definition of work. Just because it's not hard work doesn't mean it's not work?

Besides, that number isn't self-reported numbers, it's from a study I read recently, and it was included as a tangentially related point. I could try and track it down if you like.

It's also important to note that not every CEO is a billionaire of a megacorp. There are millions of small business owners who are also CEOs.

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You shouldn't be getting downvoted for your numbers. I would believe, especially in smaller businesses that the CEOs actually work. Hell, the CEO at my company is a great guy. I meet with him every week and he is there all day with us. There is another layer though, which is the managing partners. They fill the traditional role of the boogeyman CEO people imagine. So we aren't necessarily mad at the position. We're mad at the inequality in pay with no tangible or even existent contribution. Especially when these people are taking such a large portion of what could honestly be spread around to make everyone comfortable, at least in my specific situation.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] DreadPirateShawn 53 points 1 year ago

Talking about work during a business dinner does not equal hours. Thinking about work ideas after hours does not equal hours. Fostering a business connection does not equal work hours.

And if they do, then I get to count stressing in the shower, arguments in my head while I go for a walk, ranting to my partner about work problems, and keeping in touch with former coworkers.

[-] Stumblinbear@pawb.social 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A third of their job is "fostering business connections," with the other third being "understanding the company and workforce," followed by "actually making decisions."

I do 40 hour weeks. I certainly do less difficult work than a construction worker, but it's still considered work. Work is work, whether you're being paid to sit on your ass and draw stick figures or actually doing continuous manual labor.

All I'm saying is just because you don't consider it work doesn't mean it isn't being done entirely for business reasons, for the business, during work hours, which they are only doing because it's their job. It is therefore definitely work. Not "hard" work but still work

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AteshgaRubyTeeth@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

I can’t believe you’re getting downvoted for citing a Harvard study….

Here’s the link for the lazy. https://hbr.org/2018/07/how-ceos-manage-time#how-ceos-manage-time

[-] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

I'd also work 60 hours a week if I could count getting chauffeured around and eating lunches with people as "work"

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago

My dad had a family friend that was CEO that claimed he worked 80 hours a week. He pulled out a calendar, and not only was it closer to 50-60, about 6-10 of those hours were golf business meetings it was funny. I doubt he would have laughed if one of his workers were calling him out though...

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 132 points 1 year ago

My main take on the pandemic is that employers involuntarily gave their employees a huge benefit set by having to go remote. They had to give this benefit set not just to their buddies or a select few, but to people they consider undeserving or do not trust.

All of their moves since have reflected that they want to put the cat back in the bag.

It's not about productivity at all and never has been. The studies even called the bluff by comparing productivity and determined that productivity is higher with WFH. The reaction to that has been to ignore the data and lean back into gut feel, because high level management isn't really about productivity.

You can tell this simply by the fact that their natural environment is the office and very few things in an office environment are actually about productivity. The reason they want return to office is the same reason they wanted open offices: control. It's easier for them to hover behind you in an open office plan. It's easier for them to order you around when they don't have to call you first.

It's all about control, and likely always has been.

[-] unscholarly_source@lemmy.ca 47 points 1 year ago

As a manager, I can confirm that productivity drops in the office (even my own). I've got team members that choose to go to the office (moreso than me). I encourage them to work however they prefer, and want. You can work anywhere around the world however you wish, including at some nice beach, as long as it doesn't affect the project.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

A lot of that control is about perceived obedience and perceived productivity.

In many areas you’ll find that ACTUAL productivity matters far less than perceived productivity.

And it’s easier to perceived productivity when you can walk a floor and see people work as you walk by.

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

This is 100% true and I had to learn it the hard way; perception matters just as much, if not more than getting the job done.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

high level management isn't really about productivity

High level management is about preserving your position as a high level manager and securing the maximum compensation for it.

[-] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 93 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Good, they'll be left with second rate wage slaves while other companies who trust their employees will be more productive and competitive as a result.

[-] GregoryTheGreat@programming.dev 45 points 1 year ago

They don’t care. They need to lead/rule over/command people. Second rate or not.

[-] FunderPants@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago

How are the MBAs going to pull all their power poses if we work at home?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] outdated_belated@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So many don’t understand just how wildly inefficient bureaucratic hierarchies are; what happens isn’t the most profitable thing, it’s the whim of whoever managed to claw their way highest up.

Basically, the decisions are the manifestation of the artificial stupidity of brute force.

[-] donut4ever@lemm.ee 29 points 1 year ago

That's why I'm sticking with my company. They even sold about 90% of their buildings and we are never going back to office. They have saved billions, why would they send us back? They make sure to tell us that we will never be sent back to office, unless someone chooses to. There is one office left for those who want to work there.

[-] BertramDitore@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Trust. You’re right, it completely comes down to trust. If you can’t trust the people you hire to work without someone looming over them or watching everything they do, then you shouldn’t have hired that person.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 84 points 1 year ago

Managers are managers because they're good at playing power games, not because they're good at their jobs. These games are harder to play if people aren't there. That's why they're so scared.

[-] lustrum@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 year ago

When I got my newest job the boss was bragging about I can work as much overtime as I want at 1.5x. like bitch I want undertime, let me work less!

[-] unscholarly_source@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago

As a manager, I empower my team to work remotely as much as possible 🤷

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] FlaxPicker@lemmy.world 74 points 1 year ago

Seems like the commercial real estate collapse has a lot to do with it too.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] MaxPower@feddit.de 61 points 1 year ago

These elite CEOs probably work 100-plus hours a week and they're much more work-focused.

Oh ffs. I have nothing against Nick Bloom but this statement is so BS. Even if "elite CEOs" could work 24 hours per day, 7 days per week their salaries could not be justified by any means. There are just not enough hours in a day to actually do it.

The mandates symbolize the sharp disconnect right now between the way CEOs and employees think about work.

He's right about that though.

[-] krakenx@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

When I was an intern at a large company, the CIO talked to our small group of interns. He said he worked around that much, and I don't think he was lying. He told us about his typical day.

The company was located in a big city and he lived in the suburbs with a long commute by taxi and train. He would get up at 5AM to start the commute. He worked on the train and taxi. Then he would leave the office at 5PM, work on the commute home, have dinner and family time for 2 hours, then work until bed at around midnight. He said he was lucky he only needed 4 hours of sleep and how much he treasured the 2 hours he spent with his family every day. It was the only time he refused to take calls.

I think part of the problem why executives mistreate their workers so much is that they themselves are overworked and exhausted. Despite having a ton of money, they don't get to enjoy it, so it becomes meaningless.

[-] Elivey@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

And there's people out there who work just as much but will never make the same amount of money. When you have the privilege to never worry about cleaning, laundry, taking care of your kids, grocery shopping, cooking, and all the numerous bullshit things that just add up to consume your time that you can wave away when you were born rich allow you to do that. They don't consume your day and energy.

Not that everyone if suddenly given that kind of time would do what he does, but I don't think they should. I think he's the type of person who looking back on his deathbed will regret only spending 2 hours a day with his family. That's really sad.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Papergeist@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

I've worked as cook and sous chef for about 13 years now. Most I ever made was 55k a year and at that time I was working ~75 hours a week. If we extrapolate to 100 hours... Carry the one.... Yup! Still a far cry from the paycheck of a CEO.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 26 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


"Because the labor market is looser and there's more talent to be hired, I think the employers think they'll be able to get their way," Dr Grace Lordan, associate professor in behavioral science at the London School of Economics told Insider.

A certain kind of CEO — noticeably skewing male and older, she said — is drawing from this "command and control" playbook as a way to rebuild an employee base that fits their idea of being productive and diligent.

"This belief of a certain cohort of people, and they are represented across all sectors, that presentee-ism is productivity, for them it's perfectly rational that if somebody doesn't want to come into the office then that basically means they're not somebody who wants to add value to the firm," Lordan added.

Elon Musk is consistently adamant about workers at his companies from X to Tesla being present in office, going as far as calling remote work "morally wrong."

A number of firms that benefited from a pandemic bump in business, particularly in tech, went on a hiring spree — triggering the "Great Resignation" as workers quit for ever-higher salaries and perks.

That attitude means certain types of employees will lose out — and return-to-office mandates will likely hurt diversity too if they are strictly enforced.


The original article contains 512 words, the summary contains 215 words. Saved 58%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] amenotef@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

For a lot of positions. Remote work is not just the past and the present. It is also the future.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] DrMango@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

It was never about productivity. It was always about control.

[-] stefenauris@pawb.social 18 points 1 year ago

And by "look like" we mean "totally are"

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

These dingles are gonna flex like this just before another Covid surge, I guess?

[-] InfiniteFlow@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Oh my god, so much this! The only apparent reason I see for many of the “return to office” cases I know about is for middle managers to be able to hold court and lord over their subordinates. As for the actual work that needs to be done, I see little advantage (in fact, constant interruptions for management and colleagues make it quite worse).

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
1095 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59138 readers
2008 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS