Dell: Return to office or give up promotions
newsnationnow.com
newsnationnow.com
The problem with most office mandates is that they just require a person be in an office, any office. In my experience, this means it is very possible to be in an office with a bunch of people that do completely different jobs, so all day is spent on the phone. If I need to be on the phone all day anyway, I might as well be at home where it’s quiet, so I can hear people, they can hear me, and there aren’t any distractions.
Forcing people to relocate just to sit alone in a cubicle on a phone all day doesn’t improve productivity, it just makes people upset.
I do think meeting people in person has a lot of value, but office mandates aren’t the only way to handle that.
It’s all contrived political points; contracts, socialized norms the elders in charge refuse to negotiate.
The stubbornness and selfishness of the gerontocracy, to serve the dying and dead is gross. Some kind of mental illness fueled by their huffing leaded gas and growing up in world war/Cold War paranoia made it so they cannot escape the idea life is 24/7 militarized economic production.
I have worked remote for almost 20 years.
Just because remote is new to the masses doesn’t mean remote or hybrid is new.
Some companies started in person.
They are only so efficient in person let alone remote
The only benefit I got out of the office was lunches and hallway conversations, which do have some value to be fair.
1. I know many people on HN hate the idea of RTO, and for good reasons, but one downside I saw of remote was that junior engineers struggled to get mentorship and guidance as well as an in person setting. A lot of the learning junior engineers get is through water cooler talk, informal suggestions, and off the cuff comments, rather than stuff brought up in stand-ups or asynchronous slack messaging
2. Dell already seems to have a culture of trying to avoid promoting junior engineers quickly/for multiple years, through avenues such as the rotation program which ensure you don't get promoted for at least 2 years.
I understand your first point however. Can’t imagine how interns and early engineers are supposed to learn without having a highly available set of mentors to learn from.
I actually find that mentorship happens best in irregular interactions, as the help is needed.
Secondarily, I find that personal connection/rapport is invaluable in delivering feedback, and is possible but more difficult to do via screens.
You mean like, randomly messaging me on Teams?
Wow, sounds impressive, haven’t seen that before, tell me more.
I'm really awesome at Zoom.
I work in a hybrid mode and it's so obvious to everyone how in person communication is more effective. People will often say "let's discuss this once I get to the office" all the time.
I'm not coming back to an office just to talk to the rest of my team on the computer anyways because they are distributed in different provinces and countries
That's dumb
The six months we were WFH were the worst six months of my career. Nothing got done.
Granted, I am in a specialized field and most of my work requires calibrated equipment in purpose-built labs but so many people just wanted to sit at home and click around on Digikey and complain about SolidWorks being slow on their laptops.
I could never do the kind of engineering that doesn't result in a physical object that exists in the real world. The group photo at the end, standing next to a new thing that nobody else on Earth has ever seen, makes dealing with all of the PMPs worth it.
edit: and software guys need to put on some god damned clothes and come into the office, too. I'm not paid enough to troubleshoot over email or slack the hacked-together nightmare of a virtual environment that "works on my machine" but throws ten thousand errors when set up on a test stand.
My experience is that the infrastructure you need to do effective remote work is also the same infrastructure you need to debug issues in the field, so you may as well build it upfront.
I am unaware of any remotely-controlled temperature probes.
Just last month we had a board come in to I&T with a short on the N1V5 rail and due to me, the designer, actually being there I knew it could only be in a handful of locations so I took the thermal camera and swept the board, found a hot component, and then found a solder ball beneath the pins of the IC and sent it back for rework.
I only found it by realizing that specific component almost never fails and never fails short anyways, then knowing that it has a bottom thermal dissipation pad where any excess solder application can squeeze out, and then rotating the microscope to its maximum deflection and peeking underneath the component at an angle of 55-60 degrees. https://imgur.com/a/1hFBNEL
30 minutes. Compared to days of back and forth and waiting online.
Techs don't know the board and the components, that's not their job. Engineers do-- that's their job.
Or is doing that basic and simple engineering work "for the schmucks to dumb to wfh?"
I can see it now. Me sitting at home squinting at a webcam feed shouting "ok move it over to the left, a little more, a little more" debating in slack like a moron with all of the other prima donnas too important to drive in to work as my techs cuss me out for being such a loser.
My techs don't do anything unless I do it first, document it, do it again to check the documentation, and then observe them doing it to make sure my documentation covers everything. And I mean everything, from short tests to the final cleanup of the workstation.
Honestly, I don't mind if you want to work in the office. Maybe it makes your job easier, but what I've found is that for the tasks I do it just adds a commute for no reason.
In my experience, it takes a special kind of junior engineer and a commitment from the company to have them mentored successfully in a remote environment. Whereas an in-person environment has tons of opportunities to learn not just the explicit skills (how to write a for loop on Python, how do deploy our software) but the implicit skills (how to move around the terminal, how to architect a solution in a consistent way). That's to say nothing of the knowledge osmosis that happens when you can overhear conversations about adjacent parts of the application. (Yes, you can make this all explicit and available online, but that is a culture shift.)
There are other ways to deal with these lacks (on-sites, focused on onboarding docs, regular office hours) but they take more effort. Whether they are worth the trade-off (you certainly have access to a wider pool of labor when you hire remote) depends on the company, industry, and job market.
Draconian workplace rules just lose your best people, haven't companies learnt this yet?
I haven't asked, but they're probably okay with that too.
Choices:
1. Hire desperate people who will come in 2. Accept that high-talent staff are unavailable to your company 3. Pay 30% more than the market for on-site staff
I would go as far as to suggest that any CEO who stubbornly and credulously insists on RTO from an ideological perspective should be treated with a healthy level of distrust by the company’s shareholders.
Why else would you deliberately choose to reduce your talent pool, be forced to pay more for that talent pool than your competitors, and result in a lower employee NPS, which in turn makes it harder to retain them.
RTO only works when WFH rates are low and the talent pool is forced to accept RTO. However we crossed that rubicon.
Now insisting on it as a CEO just makes you look incompetent.
Some more discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39728252
Visibility is different and harder remotely.