Dell responds to return-to-office resistance with VPN, badge tracking
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
Of course I don’t have super great visibility, but the 4 above me in my line of report, I don’t see how they could disappear.
Feigning academic interest is nauseating by the way. You bring nothing to the conversation and demand other people do work until you reach some arbitrary level of satisfaction; even after doing the work you'd just disappear from the conversation and not have your opinion changed.
Searching through your comment history you've only offered citations or references a handful of times, despite having over 11,000 comments.
Practice what you preach.
And you're clearly conflating a user's karma with how many comments they have.
Cite your source (did you see it first hand? If so say that) or you're just spewing BS even if there's some truth to it.
No one needs citations to voice a commonly shared perspective or experience on an internet forum, get real.
My bad, he only has 3,300 comments. That definitely makes things so much better!
The only BS here are comments, like yours and his, not even remotely attempting to add anything useful to the conversation and attempting to pretend to have some higher standard while not even being able to adhere to it yourselves.
Hypocritical and uselessness in the same breath.
Thou shalt not disparage the overpaid, and underworked.
That sounds like an echo chamber, not something I usually associate with HN
So no promotions for working remote ? Sounds good to me.
But you know, it is almost impossible for regular people to get to the high exec level unless you were born into the 1%.
Can't believe I almost got suckered into making a 'promotion packet', while being the one person on everyone's speed dial.
I already did the work, someone else just rewards it. Time and time again.
Some places have existing employees interview for the job they want. They do this by making a 'packet'; a collection of documents proving things like business impact.
It's often put in front of a group of people with that job for review and they decide.
Normally, management, your peers, or the company as a whole are aware of your performance. They should be doing a lot of this for you, in my opinion.
It basically demands you do the job you want, before you have it. Some see this as fair, and I could agree, but not after 5+ years. I see it as a way to trick newcomers into overextending themselves.
In company's with forced attrition rates, it becomes a hell of a popularity contest.
When Kevin Turner (former Wal-Mart exec) headed CSS (Customer Services and Support) at M$FT, it was a shit show and a half - creating something like a mandatory 5% attrition rate per year.
Nothing boosts morale better than people vying to NOT be the person let go that year. /s
Even in a business where it's routine to rest/vest, no 'crabs in a bucket' mentality required, these contests seem likely to appear.
One could simply exist/accrue an empire, yet... that's not enough. I suppose it's boredom.
Many reasons why we can't have nice things. Agh.
Is this out of a Dilbert cartoon?
Meanwhile, the only remote people I saw get a "promotion" in the last cycle either got a title bump without a level bump, or were the only person on the ground in the country where they work. The only level jumps I've seen in remote positions is when a remote person leaves and a new office-based person comes in to fill their place, the new person is hired at the level the remote person should have been promoted to.
It's a shitty time to work in the corporate world.
I'm fully remote, aside from about a week per quarter that I fly to the office for a bit
My contract says I'm a hybrid employee and required to be in office at least part time
But they don't have an office in my city so I fall into a loophole where I'm "outside commute distance"
When I first signed this contract a couple of years ago I asked for it to be changed to say remote instead of hybrid but they wouldn't
One possible translation: the company does not care about you.
I am not surprised that behavior is present elsewhere in their employee relations. It does not seem like an environment that sparks joy.
It got so bad that my direct manager had a literal mental breakdown one day over someone resigning that was key to the success of a project. Like sobbing, throwing furniture at walls out of control break down. I got out of their right after that, last I heard my direct manager quit tech entirely and went back to his home country. That org was not setup for anyone to win.
But it was my first non-intern job out of college and it introduced me to the perk of WFH, we all had 2 WFH days a week and I loved it (especially since at home I could stream music, at the office 30+ people shared a T1 line). A couple years after I left, I got laid off, and desperate for a job, came back to Dell, but at that point almost nobody was coming into the office and I didn't have any teammates there so I just worked from home all the time. that was 9 years ago I think, and I've worked remotely since then.
So, you want people in offices for side city-business (human animal intensive farming) but since you know they work equally from remote or in an office you have to check their compliance because your target are urban side business not work productivity, right?
It's perfectly legit, only... You need to find people who agree being farmed like cattle, otherwise you'll get more and more desperate mediocre workers and well, some competitors will eat you a step at a time.
I'm not sure how this is even legal.
That said, it's really dumb corporate policy, it basically telling people to do the minimum or leave.
paradoxically, the cat is out of the bag for Gen Z, and remote is seen as a given for them. it's a way to freeze the pay of the quiet-quitter remote types.
older (as in nearish to retirement) workers will accept what they have while remote until their out.
the mid-level folks in their late 20-40s will be most impacted, and I suspect the qualified ones will split instead of being frozen. that may be the goal, but it's also going to push out a crop of otherwise qualified folks that would be major drivers of future initiatives. like, a future director (currently manager) is going to accept this, sit on it for 3 years, and then jump to another org that will tolerate their remoteness.
there is a "prove your serious" angle by forcing them into the office, but I suspect that's only going to get mediocre talent who can't negotiate elsewhere for better bennies. or else "true believers" which generally mean suckers, in the Ribbonfarm-Clueless-Losers-Psychopaths sense.
The problem is that for many organizations, promotion is the only way your wage keeps up with inflation (without leaving, of course). Having a class of employees who get receive a different wage for the same work, particularly when that class aligns to a different set of demographics than in-office employees, is problematic at best, and I look forward to a court ruling it illegal. Promotion doesn't always mean a different job, sometimes it really just means different pay for the same job.
This is just tech workers being precious and cosplaying as being hard done by. Lmao.
A good lawyer might be able to make it convertible with a protected glass given the makeup - if 90% of remote workers have children, for example.
ADA has some real teeth to it.
Case in point: the Federal Canadian government has recently increased the mandatory number of weekly in-office days from 2/week to 3/week, with no clear explanation. I suspect that it's a way to reduce the workforce with less pushback.
I don't have a day go by without senior leadership treating me like I'm failing the company for putting my employees' needs over the "needs" of management.
Generations don't exist. They're an imaginary and abstract construct.
Too bad I won't be around to hear your grandkids telling you something like that.