48
top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 6 points 1 month ago

Time to repeat my topical story.

I worked for a startup that prided itself on being "data driven". They'd talk about how other startups were doing stupid things because they followed their feelings instead of data.

One day in one of those all hands meetings, the CEO was taking questions. Someone said, "Studies are showing that four day work weeks are more effective on like every metric. Can we look into that?"

The CEO said "No, we're not doing that ". Didn't read the linked studies. Didn't entertain it at all. His mind was made up, and the data was irrelevant.

Because he doesn't really care about data. He cares about feeling smart and irreverent. He cares about being seen as a cool disruptive startup guy who's going to grind his way to success.

The dishonesty makes me want to puke.

But you know what also makes me sick? All the sycophantic boot lickers that would gather round and tell him his every idea was great. The people who would work unpaid long hours to "get shit done". Bunch of fucking wormtongues who would sell out their coworkers for crumbs.

Maybe he was a real person once who really did care about data. But by the time I met him, he was an empty suit

[-] quetzaldilla@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Lol, did we work at the same place?

"Empty suits" it's the realest statement.

I resigned my position because I couldn't take it anymore. I told leadership that I refuse to use my skills and talents for those who I do not respect, and they responded by saying that there was a lot of money on the line.

They can fucking keep it. Fucking ghouls.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

maybe we all met. i worked at the same place.

except there wasn't a lot of money on the table, just money shaped carrots they dangled in front of us to have us overworked to death.

[-] quetzaldilla@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

That's exactly it.

When they said that there's a lot of money on the line they meant for themselves since they were partners.

They offered to share some of it with me in the shape of a very generous 3% contingent salary increase, which would come with strings attached like everything they ever offered me.

I've been learning to grow veggies, cook dry beans, and bake bread since money is tight after I resigned, and my partner and I are way happier because I'm not as stressed out from dealing with sociopaths and morons at work all day long.

[-] Hasherm0n@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

You just reminded me of a similar incident at a company I worked at. Larger than a startup, but still not huge. Same situation where it was a question at an all hands, the response from the CTO was simply that he had not seen that data and immediately moved on.

Funny thing was, the guy that asked the question wasn't even adding about a 32 hour work week, he just wanted to option to do 4 10s over 5 8s but they moved on from his question so fast they never gave him a chance to clarify.

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 4 points 1 month ago

They know this. A schismed individual is a compliant employee.

[-] ceenote@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I've been studying managers for much longer, and I've reached a very clear conclusion: they don't care.

[-] hperrin@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

This has been correct for all of human history. I’m not sure why anyone would have assumed the invention of the cubicle would have changed this.

[-] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

I find it really weird that companies would want to pay the enormous cost of maintaining huge buildings full of people, that don't actually need to be there, in person. That just seems like a huge waste of money.

[-] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Partly because people that control large companies that lease large office buildings have a lot of money to lose if office space were devalued as much as it should be.

Large commercial office spaces are one of the more historically stable investments that banks have money tied up in. The WFH shift of covid was a massive threat to those portfolios and freaked people out

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 month ago

The money isn't the whole point. It's also about control and emotions. Management wants to feel a way and they'll pay for it. And/or make you pay for it

[-] FunctionallyLiterate@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

Control freaks are afraid of not getting the full attention of their employees - especially the "overemployed" crowd holding down multiple jobs simultaneously while working from home.

[-] 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

If I was working again I'd rather work at the office. I wouldn't be productive working at home. I need accountability. Not everyone likes working from home

[-] FunctionallyLiterate@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

That's fine if it's your choice, but there are a number of various reasons working from home may be better for other people.

[-] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago

AI article and website

[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[-] AngularViscosity@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

But then how will they make money renting out the office space?

[-] marine_mustang@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Could’ve just asked.

[-] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

The only advantage to me being in the office is that I get free access to the gym.

[-] danielquinn@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

Working from home sucks. Yeah I said it.

I'm a software engineer, and yes, there are days that working from home really does help with concentration and focus on a particular project, but unless you're a contractor, tasked with "build this and come back when it's finished", building anything is typically a collaborative process. You know what sucks for collaboration? Working from home.

There are no tools that can sufficiently replace what the office offers: interaction, chance conversation, camaraderie and socialising with the people with whom you're trying to build The Thing. It's why people still go to actual conferences and no one cares about gigantic Zoom calls masquerading as real interaction. Slack sucks, Jira sucks, Teams suuuuuuucks. They'll do in a pinch, but they'll never offer real collaboration. For that, you still have to be in the same building.

That's not to say that offering remote work isn't great. There are people who work best in isolation, but that's not all of us. I'd argue that it isn't even most of us, and headlines like this "working from home makes us thrive" aren't helping. They're objectively bullshit. Having been in software development for 25 years, I can categorically state that the more remote the team I've been in, the less organised, the more disjointed and disconnected it is.

And don't get me started on the whole "overemployment" trend, where people try to hold down two jobs by doing neither well at all. Yet another "perk" of remote work I guess.

[-] ganryuu@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago

Hard disagree. From my experience you can perfectly collaborate from a distance, it's mostly a matter of organizing around it. Of course it can vary on the type of work, so I would think that the better answer is "it depends".

Yet in your comment you declare that it sucks and mostly does not work as a general rule? I just want to say that your own experience, while relevant, does not necessarily apply to everyone. Maybe it sucks for you, maybe it sucks for most people you work with or talked with about that subject. But one experience, or even a group of experiences, do not make for a universal truth.

[-] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

As somebody that has worked from home everyday since 2009, nothing beats in person collaboration. Not saying you need to be in the office everyday, but to truly collaborate and get input and open discussions an actual meet session is better.

You can see who is not onboard by body language, you can see who isn't paying attention and will miss key details, you get free conversation where a random comment provides a solution to something that wasn't on the agenda. And I say it as somebody that is 150% more productive at home.

Even in our own company employees often work siloed on collaborative projects, in person forces a discussion.

[-] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 1 points 1 month ago

Working in an office for 8 hours a day costs me an additional hour getting ready and commuting to to work, an hour away from home for lunch, an hour commuting back home and unwinding after work, turning 8 hours of paid labor into 11 hours of doing shit for other people.

Working at home claws back 15 hours a week.

[-] FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It’s also how I got into a head on collision when some oblivious guy who pulled out in a left turn with oncoming headlights (me) driving straight in the lane. Close to home like most crashes are statistically, had I not been made to drive down to the office building then the rental car and repairs would never have been needed. There are costs everywhere that can be factored into this.

[-] hark@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Advancing tech was sold as a way to make all our lives better. Here is an instance of tech making our lives better, but instead companies dismiss it because the real purpose of tech for the capital class is control.

[-] IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

It largely depends on if you can afford to have a room dedicated as your home office.

Working/relaxing cannot happen in the same space. Our brains are not wired to do such a dramatic difference in mental activity in the same location. That's also why bedrooms should be used for sleeping and fucking ONLY. Once you start reading/scrolling in bed, your brain makes that connection, "Oh, I'm in bed, I should doomscroll for the next 3 hours" instead of "Oh, I'm in bed. I should sleep."

[-] gusgalarnyk@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

As someone who currently sleeps, works, and relaxes in the same room these absolutes you're throwing out come off as hilarious. I've literally always lived in a room with both my bed and my computer, always worked and gamed from my computer, always slept within a couple of meters of my desk chair and computer.

You absolutely can work, relax, and sleep in the same space.

Does that mean I prefer that? Could I gain some meaningful benefits from having more spaces to dedicate to certain tasks? Absolutely. And the moment we tax the ultra-wealthy out of existence and therefore make housing affordable again, I'll make those rooms.

But working from home is not reliant on a square ft/m metric that the home must pass, nor how those spaces are organized or themed. I think saying it does only hurts my ability to stay at home, which is better for the environment, the economy, my productivity, and most importantly my life and mental health.

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

i will take sleep and work in the same room every single day, in every single occasion over an office.

[-] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

You mean we had a worldwide event that proved to us that an incredible technology that allows us to work remotely could actually be used to work remotely, then our overlords chose to ignore that and now studies are proving what we already knew was true, is true?

Neat.

[-] don@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago
[-] FunctionallyLiterate@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

Like they GAF. They've got the money & politicians in their pockets, so inconvenient truths are easily trodden over.

[-] elderorb@feddit.nl 0 points 1 month ago

Does anyone have a link to the actual study? The article doesn't seem to have it.

[-] FunctionallyLiterate@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

What? You don't automatically trust "The Editorial Team's" assertion at the bottom that "This article is based on verified sources and supported by editorial technologies" is valid? I mean they linked to a few other articles - the fact they're only ones on their own site shouldn't matter...

🙄 "Trust me, bro!"

[-] NycterVyvver@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago
[-] SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

Wearing A Shirt

And nothing else!

[-] NycterVyvver@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I'm having a tough time finding it. I found this citation from an article that appeared to reference the same four year study.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0248008

[-] MrFinnbean@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Every time this comes up i tell my personal and data driven experience as a middle manager in a company, and every time people trash me, but i keep saying it.

IT FUCKING DEPENDS!

From purely data point of view (note: this is from my place of work) workers whose work is purely executing more or less the same duties every day had their productivity have a nose dive when working long stretches from home. Also their works quality got worse. Its easy to reinforce bad habits whitout even noticing it, if the feedback comes from email and and not straight from the supervisor.

BUT with jobs like coders or artists where the job is more open ended instead of monotous labor there was no ill effects.

Then on the other side communication has gotten much slower with the people working from outside office. Where i used to just walk to the other room and ask something from my collegue i now need to message them in our internal and hope they notice it. Getting answers for questions have turned from 5 minute thing to 10-40 minute things.

Also from the point of more inventive things on my work we have lost a lot of changes to brainstorm ideas. No more throwing ideas around during lunch or coffee breaks

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Where i used to just walk to the other room and ask something from my collegue i now need to message them in our internal and hope they notice it. Getting answers for questions have turned from 5 minute thing to 10-40 minute things.

Those rude shoulder-tap interruptions may have only taken you 5 minutes, but they ruined half an hour of productivity to the person you were interrupting. This is the whole reason people can be more productive at home without annoying bosses blathering at them.

[-] sunbytes@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah every programmer I know loves not being exposed to the manager who just "has a question" or just want to "check in".

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Thanks for typing out my thought about this. /a SW dev.

[-] bobaworld@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I liked working from home at first, but after so long it becomes harder and harder to leave your work at "work" when your workplace is also your home. Now I am back in the office and actually prefer it that way. I have the flexibility to work from home on weekends or when I need to be home for some reason, which is good enough for me.

[-] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 0 points 1 month ago

You are just a rare exception. Don't push it on the rest of us

[-] bobaworld@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I'm just pointing out that not everyone thrives in a WFH environment and I think it shouldn't be a controversial take to admit that.

[-] herseycokguzelolacak@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago

Of course. Saving an hour of meaningless commute every day is a huge positive change.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

God I'd love it if my commute were only an hour.

It's 90-minutes each way if traffic cooperates. I put about 30k miles on my car in a given year.

My back was injured so they let me work from home yesterday, and other than the pain it was magical. I also got SOOO much done.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

This is the wild thing, most people work better at home but no no, must be in office and have performance reviews...

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

In my case, I work for a municipality and I legitimately do need to be in the office to meet with citizens, attend public hearings, etc. abut I think they could come up with a schedule where I work remote on Mondays and Fridays or something. It would also make those days "no meeting days" so I could catch up on my actual job.

We get raked over the coals for how long development review takes, but then every developer wants to meet with us for an hour every week, so instead of reviewing plans we're attending meetings 25 hours a week where they're bitching at us for how long it takes us to review their plans.

[-] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Okay, here's some unsolicited advice from an IT manager. Please take with a heap of salt.

25 hours is too many for 1:1 weekly meetings unless that's your whole job description. That leaves 15 hours for overhead, project management, team meetings, leadership meetings, scrum-of-scrums, town halls, mentorship, breaking ties on MRs, performance reviews, etc. At that scale, and assuming you have other responsibilities, 1:1's really should be monthly, optional 3/4 of the time, or cut back to 15 minutes unless there's an ask for more time. Also: ya gotta delegate those plan reviews if you can. With a labor pool that size, you probably have at least a few seniors or principals that can take it on.

Also, with 25 direct reports you're practically a Director without any supporting management under you. It's entirely possible that you're being underpaid, especially if this arrangement pushes you into overtime (more than 40hrs a week) a lot.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

You're managing 25 developers?! That's way too many IMO!

this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2025
48 points (100.0% liked)

Work Reform

14451 readers
13 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS