this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2023
860 points (96.9% liked)

Work Reform

10036 readers
495 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Paywall-free link: https://archive.is/eV7A5

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bouh@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (5 children)

This is a conspiracy theory. For this hypothesis to be true, it would take all companies and and real estate companies to cooperate. This is something people are likely to believe because it is an us vs them theory. But in practice they are incapable of doing it.

The problem is that real estate companies and lending companies have competing interests. Real estate companies want people to go back to office, obviously. But other companies would save loads of money by going full remote. The current lease is irrelevant, because the money is already lost, and it won't be recovered if people go back to office. The sunk cost fallacy is not a fallacy any decent company will fall for. People though will easily believe they do, especially when they are not protecting themselves from it.

My hypothesis is that management and direction are controle freaks who cannot trust their employees. They are also aroogant. This leads to a situation where they will attribute any productivity benefit during remote work to their skills and decisions, and they will attribute any decrease to employee lazyness when they're not closely monitored. They want to correct this by bringing people back to office to appease their mind. There is reaction to change too, obviously, but I suppose it simply takes the shape I described, the shape of distrust of employees.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 4 points 11 months ago (4 children)

For this hypothesis to be true, it would take all companies and and real estate companies to cooperate.

Not all, just a lot of them. That is not hard to imagine, since the same companies who are the biggest investors in real estate (commercial or residential for that matter) are also the biggest institutional owners of the stock of public companies. The point is, the ownership of all this converges at Wall Street, and that's where this goes one way or another.

[–] bouh@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (3 children)

No, because then one company would exploit this. And it would still be a big loss for the companies not owning the real estate.

[–] kunsfwra@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 11 months ago

They all collaborated on coordinated layoffs, which was blamed on blind by potential insiders in vanguard pressuring CEOs and I don't think any tech company skipped the order.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)