Many Apple fans responded to this article by saying that the employees should quit ... and totally missed the point of the article. The employees are threatening to quit. Some have already quit. More will quit. So if you want the disloyal employees to quit then congrats! The problem is that many of the employees at Apple became employees through company purchases. Apple bought companies for hundreds of millions (sometimes billions) of dollars in order to staff up quickly with a lot of experts in a particular area of technology. If they quit because they don't like the working conditions, the money that Apple invested in those companies goes up in smoke. If Apple wants to protect its investments, perhaps it should come to grips with it's serious internal and management problems ASAP.
Many Apple fans responded to this article by saying that the employees should quit ... and totally missed the point of the article. The employees are threatening to quit. Some have already quit. More will quit. So if you want the disloyal employees to quit then congrats! The problem is that many of the employees at Apple became employees through company purchases. Apple bought companies for hundreds of millions (sometimes billions) of dollars in order to staff up quickly with a lot of experts in a particular area of technology. If they quit because they don't like the working conditions, the money that Apple invested in those companies goes up in smoke. If Apple wants to protect its investments, perhaps it should come to grips with it's serious internal and management problems ASAP.
Yeah, right. Guys like you have been predicting the failure of Apple for literally decades. This is just the latest thing for you to latch onto to predict failure. Ho Hum.
I'd gladly take a job at Apple. Was a physics professor/startup company person. Know a few that work at Apple and I'd gladly join. But have a lot of Apple stock so don't really need to.
Sorry, haven't read all the (many) comments, but I think in general, what the future of work looks like (for jobs that *could* be remote) will be determined by how many companies ban together. Ultimately, people will need the jobs. But, if too many companies 'wake up' and realized remote work isn't just a pandemic compromise, we'll move into a new future and companies like Apple will eventually break. (And, a lot of companies that just can't think of a management style besides 'staring over their employee shoulders').
Imagine all the problems shifting to remote work would accomplish. In many cities, the gov't and planners are trying to fight cars and commuting by just making life more miserable for drivers. But, what if we just gave up this 'work downtown, live in the suburb' model? That doesn't necessarily mean work from home, but maybe more localized work-spaces, or some combination. It would solve a lot of problems, and a lot of workers now consider it enough of a benefit, they'll go work for the modern company over the ones that fall behind.
Apple probably has other reasons, but how much of their staff does that *really* apply to? Seems more like they are just being corporate hard-nosed.
Good gosh what a bunch of whiners. I drive a transit bus for a living. Did I get to take time off? No. Did I.threaten to quit? Of course not. Why would I. I still have a family to support. If you can’t hand the fire get out of the kitchen. Go ahead and quit! Apple will have you replaced before you can clear your desk out.
Didn't all of these folks work from home this whole time? Isn't the fight to continue working from home and not go to a hybrid schedule? They aren't fighting and threatening to quit because they are being forced back to work, they are being forced to go back to working in the office and they don't want to.
I personally have worked throughout this pandemic having left the office for good March 23rd of last year. I do not want to go back into the office full time in the least. I would seriously consider looking elsewhere if I was forced to go back full time at this point. I also have bills to pay and people to support so not having a job isn't an option, but looking for a new job is always an option. That is what these folks here at Apple are really saying. Please give us more flexibility after we have proven the work can be done remotely or we will look for something else, or continue to fight. How can you fault that?
Not to mention that Apple is a company where fighting to get what you want/need to get your job done is part of the culture. Steve used to talk about the rock-polishing machine a neighbour showed him when he was a child - he thought being abrasive was the best way to get the most polished versions of ourselves.
The corporate thinking is "If you're not willing to fight for what you want, do you really want it?" so in some ways these people are really reflections of Apple as a company. But running to the media... that's not Apple, and it's not a good look.
Many Apple fans responded to this article by saying that the employees should quit ... and totally missed the point of the article. The employees are threatening to quit. Some have already quit. More will quit. So if you want the disloyal employees to quit then congrats! The problem is that many of the employees at Apple became employees through company purchases. Apple bought companies for hundreds of millions (sometimes billions) of dollars in order to staff up quickly with a lot of experts in a particular area of technology. If they quit because they don't like the working conditions, the money that Apple invested in those companies goes up in smoke. If Apple wants to protect its investments, perhaps it should come to grips with it's serious internal and management problems ASAP.
People quit their jobs for a variety of reasons. This is no different.
Many Apple fans responded to this article by saying that the employees should quit ... and totally missed the point of the article. The employees are threatening to quit. Some have already quit. More will quit. So if you want the disloyal employees to quit then congrats! The problem is that many of the employees at Apple became employees through company purchases. Apple bought companies for hundreds of millions (sometimes billions) of dollars in order to staff up quickly with a lot of experts in a particular area of technology. If they quit because they don't like the working conditions, the money that Apple invested in those companies goes up in smoke. If Apple wants to protect its investments, perhaps it should come to grips with it's serious internal and management problems ASAP.
Yeah, right. Guys like you have been predicting the failure of Apple for literally decades. This is just the latest thing for you to latch onto to predict failure. Ho Hum.
And of course, he’s completely clueless about Apple’s history or how it operates.
Many of the employees at Apple became employees through company purchases
Rubbish. Most of Apple employees work in retail, so “many” already meaningless. Secondly, Apple doesn’t acquire huge headcount with the relatively few and relatively small companies it buys out.
Thirdly, Apple survived and thrived after the death of Steve Jobs; no one at that company is irreplaceable, and that’s how it should be for every company.
Apple has already adapted to this new way of working: they allow 3 days a week working from home, and two whole weeks working from home during the year. If these good folk want more then all they have to do is quit and find a job that fits in with however they want to work.
Worth bearing in mind that for every person who will go along with whatever Apple does because they’re fans, there’s a person who will automatically rail against Apple’s every decision because they want Apple to fail.
The anti-worker hostility shown here is callous, presumptuous, and generally appalling. None of you have any idea what any of these employees’ lives are like.
The reason Apple wants to force every worker into being on site for a certain percentage of time probably has a lot more to do with making sure their insanely expensive building/campus isn’t sitting empty, because that would be embarrassing for a company that cares a lot about their image.
It’s been noted that people don’t like working there. Open floor plans and glass walls/doors suck for actual humans and productivity. The main building is like the Powermac G4 cube and the trashcan Mac Pro: all form; poorly-considered function.
Then there’s the basic fact that the 40-hour workweek and officespace culture is just plain unhealthy.
Instead of being bitter about what you see as “entitled” employees who should get shit on just the same as you do, maybe think about trying to raise the bar for EVERYONE (which includes yourselves). Stop licking the corporate boot and acting like you’re living vicariously through the boot wearers.
The building was full before the pandemic. So… what’s your excuse?
I work at a shi**y job that sometimes doesn’t pay me and I’m reading about corporate APPLE EMPLOYEES complaining that they can’t work from bed!!!
I would give up my job in a second to work inside Apple Park!! Imagine how much more a miner, a landscaper or slave in Africa would want to work in that “terrible” air-conditioned place called Apple Park!!
Why do you work somewhere that doesn’t always pay you?
The majority of employees are not in top secret design work. They do not need to work at the office to get their jobs done. This idea that you need to be at work all the time and not balance life and family is very American. Steve Jobs worked all the time and had to get a book written while dying of cancer so his kids could understand why he wasn’t around. Great culture to instill. The pandemic has shown that work can happen remotely. You are either in the group who likes being at home with your family and friends and still be productive at work or the group who hates being around family and friends and need to be in an office.
Lots of woke Snowflakes at Apple and all these tech companies. They need to see what other people have to endure to make a living.
The entitled of today don't seem to be able to look beyond their own little selves, and for that I pity them.
I suppose this is what you get when a generation or two have been deprived of exposure to world history, not to mention the concept of gratitude.
It’s what we get when we try to manage/govern by asking… …a population that won’t be told.
That sounds quite authoritarian. That’s not what the USA was founded for.
And therein lays the systemic problem; defiance of all authority is anarchy. Mature civilisations find their balance but can a new society born of authoritarian rebellion find it quickly enough before it spreads the disease around the world.
Or does it believe it’s found the solution to never have to strike that balance? A ‘win-win’ where, by tricking the population with empowerment & choice of superficial, cognisant options it elicits fundamental, incognisant concessions.
Regardless, the replacement of direction with false consultation has created the entitled, ‘woke’ conceit this article addresses.
Lots of woke Snowflakes at Apple and all these tech companies. They need to see what other people have to endure to make a living.
The entitled of today don't seem to be able to look beyond their own little selves, and for that I pity them.
I suppose this is what you get when a generation or two have been deprived of exposure to world history, not to mention the concept of gratitude.
It’s what we get when we try to manage/govern by asking… …a population that won’t be told.
That sounds quite authoritarian. That’s not what the USA was founded for.
And therein lays the systemic problem; defiance of all authority is anarchy. Mature civilisations find their balance but can a new society born of authoritarian rebellion find it quickly enough before it spreads the disease around the world.
Or does it believe it’s found the solution to never have to strike that balance? A ‘win-win’ where, by tricking the population with empowerment & choice of superficial, cognisant options it elicits fundamental, incognisant concessions.
Regardless, the replacement of direction with false consultation has created the entitled, ‘woke’ conceit this article addresses.
Hmmm...so are founding fathers were all snowflakes or whatever political marketing nonsense you seem to regurgitate?
Rayz2016 said: If these good folk want more then all they have to do is quit and find a job that fits in with however they want to work.
They might actually do that and be successful. It may well be this is the new set of perks for the high(er) end employee, replacing cafeterias, ping-pong tables, and endless snack machines.
Plus, as I pointed out above, it seems to solve some global-problem aspects, as well as infrastructure issues. Apple could add it to their Green policy points if they played it right.
Lots of woke Snowflakes at Apple and all these tech companies. They need to see what other people have to endure to make a living.
FFS, stop throwing around the word “woke” when it has absolutely no contextual relevance (or meaning) to the subject matter.
It goes with the territory. ‘Woke’ people live in a bubble of deluded self-entitlement believing they can see beyond their contemporaries whilst actually being obviously manipulated by their desperation for self-determination and their defiance of pre-determination. The wolves control the sheep by tricking them into believing they are the wolves.
There are none so asleep as those who believe they are ‘Woke’.
That’s a lot of colorful expression and philosophizing. What does it actually say? Without specifics, all I can get from this is that you’re just as mindlessly taken in by some kind of “wolf” wanting you to see yourself as one of the wolves.
In fact, that could even be projection: people who want to see themselves as part of the power structure tend to help those in power punch downward at those suing for equity.
Just as the people who you’re judging, perhaps you are living in a bubble... what you want to see as your place in society.
Your monolithic characterizations of other people whose existence you do not understand and with whom you cannot empathize... it’s just a form of dehumanizing the enemy; turning opponents or undesirables into an “other”.
Throwing around words like “woke”, “self-entitled”, and “snowflake”... this is usually the language of those trying to justify a culture or systems from which they themselves benefit (or believe they benefit), because of personal self interest and fear of change.
So your response is “No, you’re the sheep who thinks it’s a wolf” - too funny.
Whilst I’m with you that the accusers are often guilty of that which they accuse others, my behaviour is probably better characterised by another bizarre behaviour - vicarious defiance. Where we empathise with the ‘oppressed’ & rally to support the underdog. Oddly, in my case, the ‘oppressed’ are incognisant of the fact.
Whether it’s a customer being had by a salesman touting irrelevant specs, an old couple being relieved of their life-savings by a financial shark, a voter surrendering their freedom at the instant they believe they are expressing it or a young girl surrendering worse to an older predator. Each are deceived by empowerment to decide of their own volition and tolerate nothing which doesn’t empower them. Hooked on the heroin of false-Liberty and the woke generation exemplifies this issue.
Lots of woke Snowflakes at Apple and all these tech companies. They need to see what other people have to endure to make a living.
The entitled of today don't seem to be able to look beyond their own little selves, and for that I pity them.
I suppose this is what you get when a generation or two have been deprived of exposure to world history, not to mention the concept of gratitude.
It’s what we get when we try to manage/govern by asking… …a population that won’t be told.
That sounds quite authoritarian. That’s not what the USA was founded for.
And therein lays the systemic problem; defiance of all authority is anarchy. Mature civilisations find their balance but can a new society born of authoritarian rebellion find it quickly enough before it spreads the disease around the world.
Or does it believe it’s found the solution to never have to strike that balance? A ‘win-win’ where, by tricking the population with empowerment & choice of superficial, cognisant options it elicits fundamental, incognisant concessions.
Regardless, the replacement of direction with false consultation has created the entitled, ‘woke’ conceit this article addresses.
Hmmm...so are founding fathers were all snowflakes or whatever political marketing nonsense you seem to regurgitate?
No, they knew exactly what they were doing. The public didn’t.
The majority of employees are not in top secret design work. They do not need to work at the office to get their jobs done. This idea that you need to be at work all the time and not balance life and family is very American. Steve Jobs worked all the time and had to get a book written while dying of cancer so his kids could understand why he wasn’t around. Great culture to instill. The pandemic has shown that work can happen remotely. You are either in the group who likes being at home with your family and friends and still be productive at work or the group who hates being around family and friends and need to be in an office.
3 out of 5 days in the office isn’t “all the time.” If that doesn’t fit your schedule, feel free to look for other employment.
mcdave said: Whilst I’m with you that the accusers are often guilty of that which they accuse others, my behaviour is probably better characterised by another bizarre behaviour - vicarious defiance. Where we empathise with the ‘oppressed’ & rally to support the underdog. Oddly, in my case, the ‘oppressed’ are incognisant of the fact.
Whether it’s a customer being had by a salesman touting irrelevant specs, an old couple being relieved of their life-savings by a financial shark, a voter surrendering their freedom at the instant they believe they are expressing it or a young girl surrendering worse to an older predator. Each are deceived by empowerment to decide of their own volition and tolerate nothing which doesn’t empower them. Hooked on the heroin of false-Liberty and the woke generation exemplifies this issue.
This change, I do fear.
There's a Dutch saying Adam Curry often says (which I can't remember, and couldn't pronounce even if I did) for that 'accuse others of that which you're guilty'. We're seeing that SO much these days.
But, I totally identify with your proclivity and suffer the same myself. (I think it's often a positive attribute, but we do have to be careful not to get suckered in.) I'd never heard a term for it - vicarious defiance - I'll have to try and remember that.
What's even worse, IMO, is that we so often hear how the millennial (and younger), having grown up in this 'advertising' age, can see through the manipulation attempts. My read on it, is that maybe they are a bit more attuned to blatant manipulation (than maybe older boomers who grew up trusting the media, ads to a point, etc.) But, that protection doesn't go very deep. Anything cloaked in 'authentic' they fall for, hook, line, and sinker.
jungmark said: 3 out of 5 days in the office isn’t “all the time.” If that doesn’t fit your schedule, feel free to look for other employment.
True, but depending on the goals, it still has a big enough impact, it shouldn't be classified as remote work. For example, they would still have to live within a certain fairly limited radius to the office. They'd still have to have transportation. It doesn't help infrastructure/green-goals all that much. And, they still have the downsides on their side of the equation. They have to have a proper workspace at home, proper equipment and infrastructure.
Besides a few commuting hours gained, that's almost worse than just having to be in the office full-time. If you full-time work from home, then you make adjustments but they are balanced by the gains. For example, maybe you buy/rent a home with an extra room and get better Internet, but you can have no or one less vehicle and live in a more remote place, etc.
Comments
Imagine all the problems shifting to remote work would accomplish. In many cities, the gov't and planners are trying to fight cars and commuting by just making life more miserable for drivers. But, what if we just gave up this 'work downtown, live in the suburb' model? That doesn't necessarily mean work from home, but maybe more localized work-spaces, or some combination. It would solve a lot of problems, and a lot of workers now consider it enough of a benefit, they'll go work for the modern company over the ones that fall behind.
Apple probably has other reasons, but how much of their staff does that *really* apply to? Seems more like they are just being corporate hard-nosed.
The corporate thinking is "If you're not willing to fight for what you want, do you really want it?" so in some ways these people are really reflections of Apple as a company. But running to the media... that's not Apple, and it's not a good look.
EDIT - typo.
Rubbish. Most of Apple employees work in retail, so “many” already meaningless. Secondly, Apple doesn’t acquire huge headcount with the relatively few and relatively small companies it buys out.
Or does it believe it’s found the solution to never have to strike that balance? A ‘win-win’ where, by tricking the population with empowerment & choice of superficial, cognisant options it elicits fundamental, incognisant concessions.
Regardless, the replacement of direction with false consultation has created the entitled, ‘woke’ conceit this article addresses.
Plus, as I pointed out above, it seems to solve some global-problem aspects, as well as infrastructure issues. Apple could add it to their Green policy points if they played it right.
Whilst I’m with you that the accusers are often guilty of that which they accuse others, my behaviour is probably better characterised by another bizarre behaviour - vicarious defiance. Where we empathise with the ‘oppressed’ & rally to support the underdog. Oddly, in my case, the ‘oppressed’ are incognisant of the fact.
Whether it’s a customer being had by a salesman touting irrelevant specs, an old couple being relieved of their life-savings by a financial shark, a voter surrendering their freedom at the instant they believe they are expressing it or a young girl surrendering worse to an older predator. Each are deceived by empowerment to decide of their own volition and tolerate nothing which doesn’t empower them. Hooked on the heroin of false-Liberty and the woke generation exemplifies this issue.
This change, I do fear.
But, I totally identify with your proclivity and suffer the same myself. (I think it's often a positive attribute, but we do have to be careful not to get suckered in.) I'd never heard a term for it - vicarious defiance - I'll have to try and remember that.
What's even worse, IMO, is that we so often hear how the millennial (and younger), having grown up in this 'advertising' age, can see through the manipulation attempts. My read on it, is that maybe they are a bit more attuned to blatant manipulation (than maybe older boomers who grew up trusting the media, ads to a point, etc.) But, that protection doesn't go very deep. Anything cloaked in 'authentic' they fall for, hook, line, and sinker.
True, but depending on the goals, it still has a big enough impact, it shouldn't be classified as remote work. For example, they would still have to live within a certain fairly limited radius to the office. They'd still have to have transportation. It doesn't help infrastructure/green-goals all that much. And, they still have the downsides on their side of the equation. They have to have a proper workspace at home, proper equipment and infrastructure.
Besides a few commuting hours gained, that's almost worse than just having to be in the office full-time. If you full-time work from home, then you make adjustments but they are balanced by the gains. For example, maybe you buy/rent a home with an extra room and get better Internet, but you can have no or one less vehicle and live in a more remote place, etc.