this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
468 points (99.2% liked)

Work Reform

10126 readers
1019 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 30 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I work in commercial real estate. Two years before the start of the pandemic, my company considered downsizing our office to have most employees work from home and just come in when needed. We also discussed how we expected the office building market to struggle in the future. (Thinking in 10 years, not two).

Anyways, we got a deal from the property owners to sign another lease, so we stayed put. And now, big surprise, they forced RTO. Someone asked our president about it in a quarterly call. He basically said “we’re never ever going back to WFH and you can quit if you don’t like it”.

So, naturally, we’re struggling with turn over and our headcount is down about around 10% so far.

For many of us, our teams are split up amongst multiple offices so there is no difference from working in the office and working from home. It’s all about that empty lease.

[–] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 4 points 9 hours ago

Also! I should add that for many property owners in commercial real estate, they can be “punished” for tenants that go dark, or stop operating at the location, even if they are still paying rent.

For example, say you own a strip mall with a grocery store and a few restaurants. If the grocery store stops operating in that location, there are less customers at the restaurants, making it more likely that they will stop paying rent also.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

At least one in three bosses are shitty bosses. If their responsibility is to the company and the shareholders, telecommuting saves a ton of time and money.

[–] kat_angstrom@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago

Also, for those companies that love to position themselves as "green", commuting is a horrendous waste of resources and a cause of pollution. My company preaches about how important it is to lower your carbon footprint, then institutes policies that increase carbon footprints by the tens of thousands and don't even blink.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 36 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

You would think that of all people, rich CEOs would understand the concept of the sunk cost fallacy.

The money on desks, rent, insurance, etc. is already spent. You're not getting it back. Asking people to come back to the office "so that it doesn't go to waste" assumes that you aren't taking on additional costs for people coming to the office.

You now have worn carpet, doors, pens, paper, etc...money you could have saved if you weren't such a knob.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 25 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

You would think that of all people, rich CEOs would understand the concept of the sunk cost fallacy.

I'd expect that of someone who has to make hard decisions and work hard to get where they are.

A Nepo-Baby is neither of these things.

[–] Solumbran@lemmy.world 26 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Are you really suggesting that you expect CEOs to be competent? Scamming people and exploiting workers doesn't require skills, except if immorality is one.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 11 points 11 hours ago

Immorality is sadly a skill, ignoring that voice in your head that says "This doesn't feel right, we can't go othrough with this" and the one that says "Look what we're doing to them!?! We have to make this right!"

Is very hard to do for people like you and I.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 15 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Convert to apartments

Make profit

Tada!

[–] w3dd1e@lemm.ee 10 points 9 hours ago

I agree this is what should be done! Though it is surprising challenging to convert an office building to an apartment.

One issue, for example, is that the plumbing and electricity lines tend to be located on one end of the building. If you want to convert it to apartments, you have to reroute all the plumbing.

In the US, there are also rules about the number of stair cases. That’s why many apartments here are long and flat buildings of 3-4 floors rather than taller, taking up less space.

[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 37 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Early in the pandemic, our CEO asked why we paid so much for real estate if everyone could work from home. They've been trimming leases as quickly as they can.

We've been hiring people who live out of state. They only come onsite very rarely, maybe only once a year.

[–] bilb@lem.monster 16 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

My company did that too, then they replaced us with cheaper labor from overseas.

[–] HeyJoe@lemmy.world 15 points 12 hours ago

Ours did that before the pandemic and not my area. Within a year, it went back to what it was because of how terrible the quality was. Now they are dumping all the buildings that aren't needed and sent a lot of us home. Of course, the main product that my job deals with needs buildings for machines to work so they didn't get rid of everything. No more corporate, and for now, we are all home for the foreseeable future. I also wonder when they will get the bright idea to start outsourcing again now that it's been like 7 years...

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 130 points 16 hours ago (6 children)

Anyone who does not understand the sunk cost fallacy should not be in management.

You've spent $x on office space. You can:

A. Use it, and make your employees hate working for you or

B. Let it go unused, and your employees are happier to continue working for you.

The money is spent either way. The only difference is morale, which does in fact directly contribute to your bottom line.

C. Sublet out the property and make back the cost of the lease or even a bit of profit.

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 52 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

C. Get rid of what you don't need so that everyone is happy

[–] Sabin10@lemmy.world 26 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

When you are locked in to a 3/5/10 year lease for the space, that's not actually an option. Most leases signed pre covid should be up by now but clueless management probably renewed anyways.

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

And the really big corporations own their buildings. You think the company locked into leases are mad? The companies who own the building are pissed! Some have a multi million dollar building that's losing value faster than the speed of light.

[–] whostosay@lemmy.world 7 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Good. Turn that shit into housing.

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

No shit. But this is America... You already know that proposition is dead on arrival.

[–] makyo@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

Are sublets not an option?

[–] blazeknave@lemmy.world 5 points 13 hours ago

You mean sell it for money and actually make more profit while everyone is happy? Preposterous!

[–] grey_maniac@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 hours ago

They can't depreciate the assets and use them as a deduction if it doesn't count as an office expense. That only qualifies if a threshhold minimum number of workers spend a threshhold minimum amount of time in the office.

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 13 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Or c, keep just enough office space to create rolling “layoffs” as people are asked to return to the office.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 17 points 16 hours ago

Step 1: Hire staff

Step 2: Train staff to do job

Step 3: COVID! Oh no! Everyone work from home.

Step 4: ???

Step 5: Fire staff to save money.

Step 6: Profit.

[–] SpikesOtherDog@ani.social 9 points 16 hours ago

It's nice to find the rant in your head written out. A previous employer of mine dropped two properties in favor of a store front.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 72 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

We had some slight pushing into going into the office more, but instead of firing people, it was decided to switch to a smaller office space, so the people who like to work in an office can do so, and less money is wasted on a mostly empty office

Understandable that this is not an option for all companies, but insane that people are happier losing talent than at least trying to work something out

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 43 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

When the CEO personally owns the building and leases the office space to the company, that's not an option.

[–] SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 20 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (5 children)

Then he should act like any other office building owner and rent some space to other companies.

Bonus points if he gets with the future and works to convert some of the building to living space so people don't have to travel to get to work. Not everybody will want that, but it will appeal to enough to make it worth doing. Shopping malls across the country are being converted to such hybrid spaces so most everything one needs is within a convenient distance.

[–] underisk@lemmy.ml 5 points 13 hours ago

i think you fundamentally misunderstand the motivations involved that would lead to the CEO owning the office real estate. commercial real estate is a means for them to siphon profits from the business, not a genuine attempt to provide a valuable service to anyone.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 9 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

Bold of you to assume he already doesn't. But WFH across many industries drives down urban office space value overall.

[–] legion02@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

Won't someone please think of the poor rent-seekers!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 5 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

Then he should act like any other office building owner and rent some space to other companies.

There are more buildings/office spaces to rent than people wanting office space these days. There are LOTS of empty unrented buildings. He would have difficulty even finding a tenant.

Bonus points if he gets with the future and works to convert some of the building to living space so people don’t have to travel to get to work.

An exceptionally small number (we're talking single digits in the world) of Class A office buildings are good candidates for this, and these are typically done with grants/subsidies from state or local governments. These are only in the most lucrative geographic locations where housing is at an absolute premium regardless of the cost.

For good value of converting office space look at Class C buildings. These are typically older and smaller office buildings (think built in 1910s-1950s). In these, there are ways to make cost effective residential conversions and these are happening by the dozen now.

Here's a guide to the different class of office buildings

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] metaStatic@kbin.earth 5 points 16 hours ago

then it's not wasted money is it

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 20 points 16 hours ago

Ours tried full RTO, and then they compromised with hybrid WFH when they lost many skilled people who had been there for 10+ years to remote positions at other companies. Sometimes with little to no warning.

Some execs gotta learn the hard way.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 16 points 16 hours ago

I guess they should enjoy the consequences of their actions like... regular people do?

Or maybe these bosses just aren't good at what they do. After all, they wasted millions on real estate and empty desks. Shouldn't the shareholders be demanding new leadership?

[–] hubobes@sh.itjust.works 16 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

We don't even have the office space anymore for full RTO. If at some day too many people would go into the office some wouldn't have desks to work on...

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 15 points 16 hours ago

Same here. A smart CEO wouldn't force RTO, they would lease out that unused space or expand using those unused desks.

[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 5 points 13 hours ago

How was this not obvious when the panic set in with the pandemic.

It's never about productivity, it's always about increasing value.

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world 10 points 16 hours ago

I thought it was because they couldn't make friends & wanted to force people to be around them.

[–] morgan_423@lemmy.world 9 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I think some of them are also doing it for the tax breaks they get if they pump a bunch of employees into the local area's economy.

And we all know how difficult is is to get companies to voluntarily give up free tax money from the government. It's like trying to take drugs away from an addict.

[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Corporate "Welfare Queens"

load more comments
view more: next ›