News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Return to office is 'dead,' Stanford economist says by cheschire on Friday December 01, 2023 @10:47AM (#38488106)
There's also the struggle of remote workers in a hybrid team unable to move up the ladder as easily as on-site workers for the same trust-based collaborative reasons you mentioned. It is possible that remote workers would look elsewhere for upward mobility, leading to more turnover.

Additionally, because the social fabric is weaker around remote workers in a hybrid environment, there may be a perception of them being less likely to remain out of any sense of loyalty or obligation. This seems like a potential stigma that remote workers would need to overcome in the absence of explicit inclusivity efforts by leadership.

Re:Return to office is 'dead,' Stanford economist says by no_wizard on Friday December 01, 2023 @11:08AM (#38488310)
Loyalty is a funny thing, because companies are not loyal, yet they want their employees to be loyal, without reciprocating in any manner.

I don't recommend holding loyalty to any company. Maybe to co-workers(s) or a direct boss (IE, if they leave, maybe you leave too. I've seen this happen) but certainly not to the employer, since it will never be reciprocated

Re:Return to office is 'dead,' Stanford economist says by twelve40 on Friday December 01, 2023 @11:27AM (#38488567)
I think maybe instead of loyalty just some appreciation for the things that were good. Otherwise easy to turn to this toxic Blind-style cynicism, that never sat right with ne.
Re:Return to office is 'dead,' Stanford economist says by no_wizard on Friday December 01, 2023 @11:33AM (#38488657)
I'm all about appreciation, and I don't sit well with the culture on Blind either.

However, there is a difference in appreciating a situation and being professional vs being ignorant of the ultimate fact: at any time, the business can just let you go, either via layoff or other means. Its best to be aware that unless you're in the C-suite, you're a cog in the machine.

That however, is not an excuse to do bad work or act unprofessionally

Re:Return to office is 'dead,' Stanford economist says by helen___keller on Friday December 01, 2023 @11:25AM (#38488518)
Agreed but the image of loyalty is valuable even if loyalty is never worth giving
Re:Return to office is 'dead,' Stanford economist says by seadan83 on Friday December 01, 2023 @01:17PM (#38490170)
A person is rarely so f'ed as when their manager _no_ longer believes that person would always act in their (the managers) best interest.
Re:Return to office is 'dead,' Stanford economist says by bluGill on Friday December 01, 2023 @02:26PM (#38491042)
Nobody is perfectly loyal. However some companies are more loyal than others. Some places you regularly see 10% let go. Others go decades between laying people off. Of course things can change at any time, but both extremes exist and generally come with enough other culture factors that they won't change very fast without obvious warning (that is getting bought out)
Re:Return to office is 'dead,' Stanford economist says by alienicecream on Friday December 01, 2023 @11:06AM (#38488298)
> there may be a perception of them being less likely to remain out of any sense of loyalty or obligation.

Well, technically that would be a market inefficiency, so we should be encouraging employees to view their employers as fungible and switch jobs as soon as it's advantageous to them. If your employer is trying to keep you around through social ties instead of competitive compensation you're being taken advantage of.