for both parties. ATT the company that could benefit incredibly from a massive shift to work from home remains in the dark ages mainly due to Senior Managements development of a Toxic Bo-b Debt Ridden Balance Sheet. Thus they ignore the opportunity that has been bestowed upon them and focus on cutting massive costs through layoffs. ATT is in no position to take advantage of anything other than incompetence.
15 replies (most recent on top)
It's about propping up the failing corporate real estate market and getting the tax breaks that come with forcing the sheep into their pens. Yes you are cattle and this goes beyond at&t...they are just being directed and manipulated into making sure the cattle is acting right. Sc--w corporate America....quit. Walk out! Let their cr-p crash.
Successful company let me WFH as I do personal business. Saying it whether it is true or not. Ha.
Feels Like, “Make Work From The Office Great Again”… only from legacy offices with the new strategy of talent by zip code.
The people complaining about having to show up in an office less than 30 miles away. Get the f over it. Most are losing thier jobs 6 months to a year from retirement (75).
“ Most other companies are also wanting their employees in office at least part of the time. Check out any job board. With wfh, very easy for employees to take advantage. I do think you are less engaged and connected to your job if you don't have any face to face interaction with other employees.”
Anyone who down votes this comment are the same ones shopping and watching Maury during the day.
Again, it’s not about RTO vs. WFH benefits people. It’s about passive aggressive surplus and headcount reduction, plain and simple. It wouldn’t matter it WFH were 200% more productive it’s simply not the motivation here.
"𝘔𝘦𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘢𝘣𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨."
What metrics? Certainly not mine or my coworkers (two of whom I saw yesterday on line).
In my case, I was working yesterday on a time-sensitive project that just wouldn't fit into Monday's 8 hours. Not endorsing working on a holiday, but three of us were doing just that to make sure your company gets the revenue it needs.
Were you working yesterday, or just citing "metrics" you've heard about but never seen?
Let's be real: this is about cutting headcount, and expensive senior headcount at that, without running afoul of EEO rules. John Stankey and Jeremy Legg work remotely from each other. They 𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗮 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝘇𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁. Is that in the spirit of "additional opportunities for collaboration?"
I agree that AT&T is wasting a huge opportunity to participate in a change to the way people work today. With mobile technology, working from home becomes a reality, and there are studies that show it can be more productive than the "traditional" work model. While in person collaboration is very valuable, it doesn't need to be the only way that people interact. Why does AT&T want to waste this unique opportunity, only to follow what other companies are doing? A chance to be leaders and not followers? (We know the answer to this; this isn't even really about WFH.) From a business perspective, AT&T could be figuring out how to use its technology to unleash productivity no matter where people are located, and to showcase that by creating effective WFH models itself.
Not all mobile technology companies are as backward in their thinking as AT&T. Take a look at Cisco. It supports remote work (and has for some time), and uses its technology to make remote work a reality.
WFH isn't the answer for everybody, or every situation. But it does and should have a place. The concerns about all of the commercial real estate that would go to waste remind me of the horse and buggy days. I am certain that people were worried about the future of livery stables and horses, but things worked out, didn't they? Change happens, and trying to force people back to the "good old days" never really works in the long run. Corporations need to adapt or die.
Which successful company are you planning to work for moving forward to be able to telecommute?
WFH does take discipline on the employees part. Quite a few were taking advantage; however, it’s also not hard to slack off at the office either. Many of us though are more productive at home and not all jobs require collaboration and face to face due to nature of the job. Heck I go back to the office next week, guess what, no one I work with is even in my same building, so much for collaboration, they are all over the country. And no, you couldn’t outsource my job or send it overseas due to the nature of the job.
WFH creates a fat introverted work force with health issues.
Yes WFH causes enterprise quality circuit disconnects. These circuits have a much higher margin and price tag than residential internet circuits. Look at “business wireline on the Q1 report vs 2021.
Most other companies are also wanting their employees in office at least part of the time. Check out any job board. With wfh, very easy for employees to take advantage. I do think you are less engaged and connected to your job if you don't have any face to face interaction with other employees.
Wouldn't AT&T profit the most from a hybrid work style? It forces businesses to keep buying circuits, and it forces employees to buy top of the line home internet for their 2 days home each week. Since the employees have to be within a reasonable distance of the office, AT&T knows where to focus it's fiber infrasteucture.
Metrics show widespread abuse of telecommuting.