Just bought a suburban 5.8 litre gas guzzler yea baby, thanks Al for the supply
9 replies (most recent on top)
A band-aid solution is the right answer for a superficial problem.
That is nothing but a band-aid solution.
How do you hire 50% of your workforce? You don't. I guarantee you that you do not need to replace the jobs one-for-one. Even in the current "reduced" organizational form, there are redundancies and slack.
And you offer the job at an attractive enough rate with the understanding that WFH is limited or off the table completely, and you'll still fill the roles. Plenty of people aren't hung up on that.
Was thinking the same thing. This isn't 1983.
How do you hire 50% of your workforce when today's applicants are demanding increased pay and WFH?
I'm sure it would be a fun experiment. It would be their opportunity to divest a lot of people who didn't accept the voluntary option, and possibly "for cause". So they would fire many, and renegotiation terms with the folks that actually matter.
What would happen if a significant portion of office workers just kept working from home? Say.. 50% of a dept just kept working from home. Would they fire them all?
The work is getting done.. It would be a fun experiment.
Nah. It is all about power and control. Having everyone back under their roofs shows who is in charge and that we are at their whim. I get that WFH isn't for everyone, but this plays into the cards of insecure management/sycophant types who need to have eyes on people to justify their existence... also staff who lack talent and need to BS and play politics which is easier done in person.