undefined | Better HN

0 pointstoomuchtodo1y ago0 comments

It’s happening because employers are desperate to get their power back while workers have no rights. It also makes it harder to leave an org, as orgs are also desperate to hold on to and develop existing talent due to forward looking working age population demographics. This is a desperate immune response.

(also why employers are trying to staff up offices offshore in LATAM and India)

Edit: @tbrownaw all of the responses to your inquiry are accurate.

0 comments

11 comments · 1 top-level

tbrownaw1y ago· 10 in thread

> It’s happening because employers are desperate to get their power back while workers have no rights.

What does this mean in concrete terms? What useful power do they gain based on physical presence, and what rights are currently absent but coming (back?) soon?

PantaloonFlames1y ago

The power in the market for labor.

If remote labor is the norm, then every tech company has to compete with every other, across all geographies. If local labor is required, the employers can manage or restrict their competitive environment. There are fewer options for the employee.

The bulk layoffs of the past couple of years have a similar effect - gaining power. It makes every employee a little more conscious that their employment is provisional and conditional.

But I think RTO goes beyond just market power gains. There are many workers who are conscientious, attentive, and dedicated. For each one of those there are plenty who are just punching their time card. I’m no expert but it seems to me that RTO gives the employer and mid-level managers better visibility into all of that dynamic.

But RTO fights against the reality that employers have constructed distributed teams, with people working from all over the globe on the same project. If that’s the case, what is the difference whether I work from my home office, or a hotel desk space in a big building alongside people I don’t know.?

brookst1y ago

> If remote labor is the norm, then every tech company has to compete with every other, across all geographies. If local labor is required, the employers can manage or restrict their competitive environment.

Doesn’t that seem backwards? A company that supports remote work has a worldwide talent pool.l, including lower cost geographies. A company that insists on RTO can only hire locally, so has less talent available and can’t arbitrage labor costs.

I think RTO makes no sense, but I don’t see how it gives employers more power.

4 more replies

d0mine1y ago

It is worth mentioning that companies colluding for forced RTO, so people can’t easily leave

NBJack1y ago

Couple this with regular threats and fear mongering about AI coming for the jobs of tech workers, and the picture gets even more somber. The tech industry wants to cheapen labor.

1 more reply

Jordan-1171y ago

Office work requires living within commute distance of the office, which is much more expensive and keeps the employee tethered to their job. Remote workers are less threatened by layoffs because they can choose to live in a lower COL area and have their pick of other remote-friendly jobs rather than being limited to other companies in their metro or having to uproot their lives to move somewhere else. This is on top of the perceived benefits employers have surveiling and micromanaging office work.

As for workers having fewer protections rn, gestures in the general direction of DC.

gruez1y ago

>Office work requires living within commute distance of the office, which is much more expensive and keeps the employee tethered to their job. Remote workers are less threatened by layoffs because they can choose to live in a lower COL area and have their pick of other remote-friendly jobs rather than being limited to other companies in their metro or having to uproot their lives to move somewhere else.

This doesn't make any sense. Remote jobs are... remote. Moving to mountain view or whatever doesn't make you "limited to other companies in their metro". You can still find remote jobs, but now you have the additional option of in-person jobs in the bay area.

3 more replies

lukevp1y ago

Not OP, but RTO forces geographic centralization and reduces mobility of their employees. If you can work remotely then you have a much larger pool. And I think that opening the door to remote work made employees realize that there was some power and some negotiation to be had on working conditions (basically our generation’s version of the 40 hr work week in response to the Industrial Revolution)

pm901y ago

This is an underrated comment. I like the framing of Remote as Millenial’s 40hr workweek. In the face of declining worker conditions we made the best of a crisis (pandemic) and showed that working remotely was viable for most jobs. But no, the ruling class could not tolerate those gains.

My prediction is that as soon as interest rates fall, employers will be reintroducing “flexibility” to lure workers and attract talent. And at that point it might become more established.

scott_w1y ago

> Being forced to RTO across the country, then immediately laid off after I uprooted my life to do so

Definitely power there if you know your staff have just uprooted their lives and now depend on you for their immediate term existence…

blitzar1y ago

It's not the details of the request, it is the request itself.

Do this, or else.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse