Small wonder workers don’t want to return to the office when they’re treated like chickens in an industrial henhouse there.
[1] https://freakonomics.com/podcast/yes-the-open-office-is-terr...
Some working conditions are better than others. Some jobs are better than others. Some jobs pay more than others, often a lot more. Should everyone who makes more money than manufacturing workers take a pay cut? Alternatively, should everyone who makes less money than manufacturing workers get a pay raise?
Inequality is a fact of capitalism. I'm not saying whether capitalism is good or bad, but if you have any resentment, it ought to be against the system in which inequality is inherent. Anyway, given this system, I see nothing wrong with workers seeking the best working conditions possible for themselves.
If I’ve got to work a dozen or more weekends a year, and 50 nights a year when I can only deploy during non business hours (until 9pm), then by god I don’t need to suffer a commute in an expensive city to sit through my coworkers sharing YouTube videos and dad jokes nonstop.
The more interesting follow up questions are to what degree is this true, how do we know, and do we think this is a factor in back-to-office mandates.
"I think every successful CEO, including myself, is tired of all the whining"
Reminded me of this quote from Office Space.
“Look, we want you to express yourself, okay? Now if you feel that the bare minimum is enough, then okay. But some people choose to wear more and we encourage that, okay? You do want to express yourself, don't you?”
I mean, employers are free to make whatever policies they want and employees are free to stay or leave. I think things have their own way of normalizing.
Not sure you really understand the Office Space scene, it's entirely different. It's not funny if Jennifer Aniston was wearing only 3 pieces of flair and she was being reprimanded for not meeting the minimum. The humor comes from the fact that she was meeting the minimum of 15 (which she obviously thought was way too much), and the boss was still making her feel guilty about it.
“Free” as in “free to live without health insurance, shelter, food, or water”
I am not sure I would call that “free”
That's an extremely strong claim. How do you think COVID proved it "definitively"?
Yes? That was obviously my point.
You've projected an interpretation onto bluedino's words. I'd like to hear the OP explain why this alleged resentment was mentioned here.
The benefits of the automation is reaped by the business (and ultimately, the shareholders), not you (as an employee).
Therefore, if after having done the automation, and there does not exist any other tasks that you could perform, you will get fired. Hence, it makes some sense to look for some other work to fill up your hour so as to remain employed.
> If so, what would be the motivation to write the script and increase efficiency?
i guess there isn't really any. Unless you're employed specifically to write such an automation, doing it might not get you any rewards.
However, in reality, because there's almost infinite things to automate, a smart business would continue to ask you to automate more and more of the work in the business, and would pay you big bucks to do so.
I think a better test would be, as a tradeoff for work-from-home, would you subject to one week a quarter locked in a hotel (room, restaurant, conference room, that's it) where you do nothing for 10 hours a day except in-person collaboration on the company's most difficult and challenging problems. Whiteboarding, programming sprints, strategy sessions, etc.