▲ 1013 ▼ Remote workers report the highest well-being in study of 7,700 employees: while those who worked entirely onsite reported the lowest. (www.colorado.edu) submitted 2 months ago by eicker@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 126 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] Ghostwurm@lemmy.ca 46 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (1 child) Yes, and... those in upper management need us to see them there, in front of us, IN CHARGE. That's all it's about. They need you to kneel and scrape and fucking bow, and for that, you gotta sit in a car ten hours a week and work in an uncomfortable open-space cubicle where you can hear everything, including Betty from finance chewing. All day, every day, so that Brent the VP can feed off your collective energy admiring him like he's a big shot. That's why he's the only asshole who wears a tie to an office of business casual colleagues. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 months ago Can confirm. How Money Works talks about it (Here on YouTube) regarding the recent mass layoffs by big tech, first, by pressure through RTO mandates, then blaming layoffs on AI, only they got rid of too many people and their businesses couldn't run. So why did they do it? Vindictiveness. Because of the great resignation during which workers had some negotiating power, and the C-suite resented that and wanted to show everyone who's boss. I've been following the trend since the early 2010s when we realized that crunching development teams is useless for meeting deadlines, but dev companies crunch anyway, traumatizing the team. I'm pretty sure billionaires aren't especially bright, rather started with generational wealth and then got richer through luck and ruthlessness, to the point that they only failed upwards. (There are a few exceptions who understand the social contract, but they really are exceptions.) And they surround themselves with sycophants so that their psyches are completely comfortable. They stop actually considering data or news that might hurt their feelings, which means they make bad decisions that cost their companies money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (1 child) Yes, and... those in upper management need us to see them there, in front of us, IN CHARGE. That's all it's about. They need you to kneel and scrape and fucking bow, and for that, you gotta sit in a car ten hours a week and work in an uncomfortable open-space cubicle where you can hear everything, including Betty from finance chewing. All day, every day, so that Brent the VP can feed off your collective energy admiring him like he's a big shot. That's why he's the only asshole who wears a tie to an office of business casual colleagues. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 months ago Can confirm. How Money Works talks about it (Here on YouTube) regarding the recent mass layoffs by big tech, first, by pressure through RTO mandates, then blaming layoffs on AI, only they got rid of too many people and their businesses couldn't run. So why did they do it? Vindictiveness. Because of the great resignation during which workers had some negotiating power, and the C-suite resented that and wanted to show everyone who's boss. I've been following the trend since the early 2010s when we realized that crunching development teams is useless for meeting deadlines, but dev companies crunch anyway, traumatizing the team. I'm pretty sure billionaires aren't especially bright, rather started with generational wealth and then got richer through luck and ruthlessness, to the point that they only failed upwards. (There are a few exceptions who understand the social contract, but they really are exceptions.) And they surround themselves with sycophants so that their psyches are completely comfortable. They stop actually considering data or news that might hurt their feelings, which means they make bad decisions that cost their companies money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 months ago Can confirm. How Money Works talks about it (Here on YouTube) regarding the recent mass layoffs by big tech, first, by pressure through RTO mandates, then blaming layoffs on AI, only they got rid of too many people and their businesses couldn't run. So why did they do it? Vindictiveness. Because of the great resignation during which workers had some negotiating power, and the C-suite resented that and wanted to show everyone who's boss. I've been following the trend since the early 2010s when we realized that crunching development teams is useless for meeting deadlines, but dev companies crunch anyway, traumatizing the team. I'm pretty sure billionaires aren't especially bright, rather started with generational wealth and then got richer through luck and ruthlessness, to the point that they only failed upwards. (There are a few exceptions who understand the social contract, but they really are exceptions.) And they surround themselves with sycophants so that their psyches are completely comfortable. They stop actually considering data or news that might hurt their feelings, which means they make bad decisions that cost their companies money. permalink fedilink source parent