LOL at the people who think the office environment is somehow devoid of distractions. The big craze in the corporate world was to go back to "open offices" where absolutely everything becomes a distraction.
My wife is a nurse. She can't very well change a wound dressing or help a quadriplegic with a shower while working from home. And I fix locomotives. You know, those big things that pull trains full of all the stuff the WFH crowd wants to buy all day long on Amazon, and trains full of the food you eat and the coal for the electricity you use. I can't really change a locomotive water pump or a radiator from home.
But does a return to the office makes sense from a productivity perspective? For most employees, in the office is nothing more than a proxy for are you working -- and a poor one at that.
The ONLY judge of “productivity” is the employer.
No, it’s the markets — both the labor market and the goods market.
I suspect it will take a while for the markers to sort this out, but that when all is said and done Apple’s current policy will be revised to be more flexible.
What they are facing are consequences of their actions. There are office rules, and you either follow the rules or find another job. It’s the same with any employer. If you don’t like the rules, there’s the door. Where I worked up to a year ago required steel toed shoes. If I chose to not wear them, I didn’t have to keep working there. We too, all through the pandemic, had to come in. If I had insisted I had to work from home, I would have lost my job. There’s nothing in this that violates the various health/safety/workplace standards laws so they get to make the rules.
I wish you wouldn’t use inflammatory words like reprisal, in what is just a simple workplace rules story.
Working in an office environment encourages collaboration, facilitates a sense of purpose and belonging and fosters both collaboration and friendship, all of which help to facilitate productivity.
Apple raking in record profits, so it seems work from home works (from home).
Apples, profits mainly come mainly from the people who can’t work at home, manufacturing, chip design SOC/CPU engineering, OS software engineering, in-house web services,, store retail, hardware product service, and any department, dealing with new or future projects, and the last but not least the product prototyping department can’t work at home. I get why the office rats, sales, legal, marketing, advertising, accounting/finance or HR departments, think they should be at home, but Apple has too many important departments with too many people with inside information, what could go wrong transferring that information back-and-forth from home with thousands of employees in some of the critical departments?
Once again, if you are a current Apple employees in some of the non profit office positions and you don’t like it, you can go down the street to Microsoft, Meta, or Google and try your luck getting a new job.
If smart people are telling you they work as or more effectively from home, maybe listen to them?
If people were hired to do a job in a building, maybe, if they were all that smart, they would do their job in the building when the company that is paying them asks them to return to do that. This doesn't seem to be a difficult to understand request.
People say a lot of things that aren't true, even smart people.
My wife is a nurse. She can't very well change a wound dressing or help a quadriplegic with a shower while working from home. And I fix locomotives. You know, those big things that pull trains full of all the stuff the WFH crowd wants to buy all day long on Amazon, and trains full of the food you eat and the coal for the electricity you use. I can't really change a locomotive water pump or a radiator from home.
White collar, sales, legal, marketing, finance, or HR departments will never give up trying to work at home, what they will find, however is that companies will start to replace them with people who will work overseas for cheaper.
What’s funny is that at a tech company like Apple? They are not the people who bring home the bacon/profit.
LOL at the people who think the office environment is somehow devoid of distractions. The big craze in the corporate world was to go back to "open offices" where absolutely everything becomes a distraction.
LOL at anyone who think that distractions are an acceptable excuse for not doing your job. You're an adult, figure it out.
If you want to work from home forever, then take a pay cut. You are saving a lot of money by not commuting back and forth, and the company is still paying for your office space that you don’t use.
My wife is a nurse. She can't very well change a wound dressing or help a quadriplegic with a shower while working from home. And I fix locomotives. You know, those big things that pull trains full of all the stuff the WFH crowd wants to buy all day long on Amazon, and trains full of the food you eat and the coal for the electricity you use. I can't really change a locomotive water pump or a radiator from home.
White collar, sales, legal, marketing, finance, or HR departments will never give up trying to work at home, what they will find, however is that companies will start to replace them with people who will work overseas for cheaper.
What’s funny is that at a tech company like Apple? They are not the people who bring home the bacon/profit.
AI will replace all or most of those jobs soon enough. I don’t need a human to write my vacation days into a spreadsheet after all. Better just head back to the office and make yourself useful awhile longer.
Is it more producing to work remotely or work in the office? ___
There is no one-size-fits-all answer to this question since the answer depends on various factors, including personal preferences, job requirements, and the nature of the work. Some people may find working remotely to be more productive since it allows them to have a flexible schedule, avoid the stress and time-consuming commute, and work in a comfortable environment. On the other hand, others may find working in the office more productive since it provides structure, fosters face-to-face collaboration, and limits distractions.
However, research has shown that remote work can be just as productive as in-person work, and sometimes even more so, particularly when it comes to creative and individual work. A study by Harvard Business Review found that remote workers are often more productive than in-office workers because they experience fewer interruptions and have more control over their work environment.
Ultimately, the decision on whether to work remotely or in the office should be made based on the individual's job requirements, personal preferences, and the organization's policies. In some cases, a hybrid approach may also be beneficial, allowing for a combination of remote and in-person work depending on the task at hand.
__
As I expected the above response from ChatGPT is significantly more "intelligent" than the drivel from the above commenters. You all just rightfully put yourself out of a job.
So reading through the comments I'm getting a firm understanding of that no one has a clue how these tech companies work. I broke what issues yall have into two categories.
1 I can't do my job from home so WHY should you be able too.
These tech companies are international brands they're co workers are world wide . So I come in and my Devs are in HU, QC is in the UK , the hardware engineers are in Spain the manufacturers are in Taiwan so yeah it makes no sense for someone who has no one in the office to go to the office. If you're a nurse, construction worker , etc yeah makes sense your in the office your coworkers are there the tools you need to do your job are there like right makes sense.
2. COMPANY SAID RETURN AND HOW DARE YOU NOT LIKE THAT/ THIS IS FAILURE TO COMPLY YOU DESERVE TO BE FIRED.
So setting aside the fact, that the days of "you should feel privileged to work here" are so far and beyond over. People have set up their lives spent money bought houses around working from home, their kids lives are built around. As well as a myriad of other reasons that make sense for people to WFH. They are a military spouse, they have a handicap, They just had a child or their child has special needs and the list goes on for miles.
For those who say that these job postings were for in office so get over it and take your firing. I mean hopefully can see the nuisance here and will soften that stance. It has also been in my observation when managers drink the kool-aid this hard and are this inflexible about policy, they are first on the chopping block because they are not liked by other department heads or tend to make enemies with people that do get promoted and it ends up stifling their careers.
SUMMARY
Tim Cook should care about one thing and that is making money for Apple. So why would he care about a facility that Apple owns and can easily ( rent out if needed) all of sudden being full. I know the author down plaied it but this is an obvious hey we need to cut labor here is an easy way to do that.
But does a return to the office makes sense from a productivity perspective? For most employees, in the office is nothing more than a proxy for are you working -- and a poor one at that.
The ONLY judge of “productivity” is the employer.
That is so wrong holy moly lol wow . No productivity should only be judged by metrics, otherwise you immediately are just using bias which is not only bad for the company but bad policy in general. WOW yikes that's like saying the only one who can tell if a company is doing well is the CEO of the company.
So, it's my understanding that the vast majority of offices are less productive, less creative, less collaborative, less spontaneous, less proprietary-knowledge secure, and overall: are stagnating. Our Directors said that public knowledge of declining/ plateauing revenue and increasing remote costs would benefit competitors and demoralize, so most companies will not blatantly call remote work as a failure. Many companies were hoping that employees might work for less due to reduced commute, that they might save money due to re-organizing/reducing office space and leases, and they might realize greater moral from reducing distracting workspaces and inter-office conflicts. Nope. Structure and communal-work presence matter. The stick as well as -or more- than the carrot. Besides, if one's work is so easy that they simply stare at a screen all day without research, delegation, collaboration - basically like a telemarketer, they can be easily outsourced - like say, a telemarketer.
I mean, not to be rude but AR , both hardware and software dev, QC and QA as well as network admin, All just stare at a screen all day in fact when we were in office I would know when someone wasn't doing what they were supposed to be doing when I heard them talking to someone else.
I get the want to belive this but it's just not true .
It sounds like a company that likes to micromanage its employees.
It sounds like a company that pays it's employees to do the job they were hired to do. The employees don't make the rules.
If that was the case then having them coming into the office so that they can stand around and talk to their friends all day probably isn't the best solution.
But does a return to the office makes sense from a productivity perspective? For most employees, in the office is nothing more than a proxy for are you working -- and a poor one at that.
The ONLY judge of “productivity” is the employer.
That is so wrong holy moly lol wow . No productivity should only be judged by metrics, otherwise you immediately are just using bias which is not only bad for the company but bad policy in general. WOW yikes that's like saying the only one who can tell if a company is doing well is the CEO of the company.
You really have no idea how functioning markets work. If I hire a maid, I get to decide if s/he's productive enough to keep his/her job. If I go to a pizza shop, I get to decide if the food is good enough to come back. And yes, if the staff at my company are working from home, I get to decide if they are producing as much value as the ones who are in the office.
To suggest it should be any other way is to invite the kind of inefficiency and dysfunction typical of centrally planned socialist economies.
Working in an office environment encourages collaboration, facilitates a sense of purpose and belonging and fosters both collaboration and friendship, all of which help to facilitate productivity.
But does a return to the office makes sense from a productivity perspective? For most employees, in the office is nothing more than a proxy for are you working -- and a poor one at that.
So, if working remote has been so productive, how come nobody thought of that many years ago by companies, including Apple ?
But does a return to the office makes sense from a productivity perspective? For most employees, in the office is nothing more than a proxy for are you working -- and a poor one at that.
The ONLY judge of “productivity” is the employer.
That is so wrong holy moly lol wow . No productivity should only be judged by metrics, otherwise you immediately are just using bias which is not only bad for the company but bad policy in general. WOW yikes that's like saying the only one who can tell if a company is doing well is the CEO of the company.
Uh, I think they mean that the employees' productivity is measured by their supervisor/manager/team lead/whatever, just as those people have to report to someone else who judges their productivity, all the way up to the SVPs and C-level. That's, like, how companies function, is it not?
Comments
My wife is a nurse. She can't very well change a wound dressing or help a quadriplegic with a shower while working from home. And I fix locomotives. You know, those big things that pull trains full of all the stuff the WFH crowd wants to buy all day long on Amazon, and trains full of the food you eat and the coal for the electricity you use. I can't really change a locomotive water pump or a radiator from home.
What they are facing are consequences of their actions. There are office rules, and you either follow the rules or find another job. It’s the same with any employer. If you don’t like the rules, there’s the door. Where I worked up to a year ago required steel toed shoes. If I chose to not wear them, I didn’t have to keep working there. We too, all through the pandemic, had to come in. If I had insisted I had to work from home, I would have lost my job. There’s nothing in this that violates the various health/safety/workplace standards laws so they get to make the rules.
I wish you wouldn’t use inflammatory words like reprisal, in what is just a simple workplace rules story.
Whether they SHOULD listen to them is irrelevant. For good or ill, they have set the rules. That’s the way it is in the corporate world.
Once again, if you are a current Apple employees in some of the non profit office positions and you don’t like it, you can go down the street to Microsoft, Meta, or Google and try your luck getting a new job.
People say a lot of things that aren't true, even smart people.
What’s funny is that at a tech company like Apple? They are not the people who bring home the bacon/profit.
___
There is no one-size-fits-all answer to this question since the answer depends on various factors, including personal preferences, job requirements, and the nature of the work. Some people may find working remotely to be more productive since it allows them to have a flexible schedule, avoid the stress and time-consuming commute, and work in a comfortable environment. On the other hand, others may find working in the office more productive since it provides structure, fosters face-to-face collaboration, and limits distractions.
However, research has shown that remote work can be just as productive as in-person work, and sometimes even more so, particularly when it comes to creative and individual work. A study by Harvard Business Review found that remote workers are often more productive than in-office workers because they experience fewer interruptions and have more control over their work environment.
Ultimately, the decision on whether to work remotely or in the office should be made based on the individual's job requirements, personal preferences, and the organization's policies. In some cases, a hybrid approach may also be beneficial, allowing for a combination of remote and in-person work depending on the task at hand.
__
As I expected the above response from ChatGPT is significantly more "intelligent" than the drivel from the above commenters. You all just rightfully put yourself out of a job.
1 I can't do my job from home so WHY should you be able too.
These tech companies are international brands they're co workers are world wide . So I come in and my Devs are in HU, QC is in the UK , the hardware engineers are in Spain the manufacturers are in Taiwan so yeah it makes no sense for someone who has no one in the office to go to the office. If you're a nurse, construction worker , etc yeah makes sense your in the office your coworkers are there the tools you need to do your job are there like right makes sense.
2. COMPANY SAID RETURN AND HOW DARE YOU NOT LIKE THAT/ THIS IS FAILURE TO COMPLY YOU DESERVE TO BE FIRED.
So setting aside the fact, that the days of "you should feel privileged to work here" are so far and beyond over. People have set up their lives spent money bought houses around working from home, their kids lives are built around. As well as a myriad of other reasons that make sense for people to WFH. They are a military spouse, they have a handicap, They just had a child or their child has special needs and the list goes on for miles.
For those who say that these job postings were for in office so get over it and take your firing. I mean hopefully can see the nuisance here and will soften that stance. It has also been in my observation when managers drink the kool-aid this hard and are this inflexible about policy, they are first on the chopping block because they are not liked by other department heads or tend to make enemies with people that do get promoted and it ends up stifling their careers.
SUMMARY
Tim Cook should care about one thing and that is making money for Apple. So why would he care about a facility that Apple owns and can easily ( rent out if needed) all of sudden being full. I know the author down plaied it but this is an obvious hey we need to cut labor here is an easy way to do that.
I get the want to belive this but it's just not true .
To suggest it should be any other way is to invite the kind of inefficiency and dysfunction typical of centrally planned socialist economies.