7 ms·

Looks like they have until January to change to fully on-site. That isn't much time to make life changes that allow using 2+ hours extra per day that was typica

Looks like they have until January to change to fully on-site. That isn't much time to make life changes that allow using 2+ hours extra per day that was typically remote. > The decision marks a significant shift from Amazon’s earlier return-to-work stance, which required corporate workers to be in the office at least three days a week. Now, the company is giving employees until Jan. 2 to start adhering to the new policy. So on top of all the hustle of end of year, everyone will need to frantically prepare for return to office one day into the new year. Just seems a bit heartless. Remote jobs just allow a team to be more robust and dynamic to life changes. I just don't understand the need to force RTO so drastically.

jogu 2y ago
For what it’s worth the change isn’t from full remote to 5 days a week. It’s from 3 days in office to 5 so it shouldn’t be as drastic of a shift.
insane_dreamer 2y ago
Some companies used this to reduce their headcount without having to fire people. Maybe Amazon is doing the same thing.
- jtriangle 2y ago
  It's a great way to create layoffs without having to spook investors by laying people off.
- squigglydonut 2y ago
  This is what I believe as well. It's an assuming narrative that allows them to say that it wasn't them it was the employee choice.
FuckButtons 2y ago
“Just seems a bit heartless” which, from everything I’ve read about Amazon as an employer, sounds completely on brand.
akira2501 2y ago
> Just seems a bit heartless. The writing has been on the wall for a while. Aside from that, Amazon decided to convert their workforce to work from home rather quickly, and shelled out the money and the effort in order to actually achieve that. > Remote jobs just allow a team to be more robust and dynamic to life changes. If you weren't hired into a remote job then you don't have much a right to expect or demand this.
- makeitdouble 2y ago
  > If you weren't hired into a remote job then you don't have much a right to expect or demand this. To put it another way: "Look for a remote position elsewhere and quit" That has been the return to office dynamic since the COVID emergency stopped.
  - jchanimal 2y ago
    Fireproof (new local first database) is hiring.
- rconti 2y ago
  If you WERE hired into a remote job, then you also don't have any rights to expect or demand to stay remote. At least, in an at-will state.
  - toomuchtodo 2y ago
    This is not necessarily true. I have had a labor attorney successfully argue constructive dismissal when remote was written into the employment agreement in an at will state (employer and employee were both in Illinois, attorney represented them on my dime, I was the one who told the employee to have the remote clause inserted into the offer letter when they were hired). Importantly, speak to a labor attorney, depending on your situation.
    - cortesoft 2y ago
      Well, the only thing that is going to get you is access to unemployment, which isn't life changing.
realmike33 2y ago
Take this with a grain of salt but I read on a similar Reddit post the return to office is mainly due to the tax incentives the city/county/state provided Amazon for having their offices located there. The Reddit user made a claim which Amazon could only receive those tax benefits if their workers actually worked in person at the location. --- I can see this being a valid argument for return to office for a lot of corporations, if its actually true. The tax benefits are too good to pass up and in office has been the status quo forever.
- burnte 2y ago
  > I can see this being a valid argument for return to office for a lot of corporations, if its actually true. The tax benefits are too good to pass up and in office has been the status quo forever. Holding on to what is now an outdated view of worker utilization might help them for a couple years with these tax incentives, but they're going to get a lower quality of worker, and incur a lot of retraining costs as people quit. They're going to have to pivot to having less commercial real estate eventually.
  - supportengineer 2y ago
    The executives must look out and see a bottomless supply of cheap engineers. And I doubt they plan on training anybody at all. It’s just a race to the bottom at this point.
    - burnte 2y ago
      They'll be gone in 3 years. This will juice the stock price as investors will be happy with gaining additional tax benefits. By the time the problems bubble up from a weakened foundation it'll be the next guy's problem.
      - snoman 2y ago
        Amazon already had very high turnover before Covid. Many people don’t stick around (willingly or otherwise) after the year 2 hiring bonus cliff.
wnc3141 2y ago
I think this is a backdoor layoff that doesn't spook investors.
- greenthrow 2y ago
  Investors love layoffs right now. It's actually to avoid paying severance.
  - dymk 2y ago
    Severance wasn't required in the first place, it's just a thing respectable companies do
    - TheCycoONE 2y ago
      It is in many countries, and I'm not American but I understand the WARN act provides defacto severence as few employers are willing to risk keeping an employee after they have been notified.
      - Spoom 2y ago
        As I understand it, WARN requires either two months of notice or two months of severance, to include benefits during that period (based on https://lipskylowe.com/what-is-the-worker-adjustment-and-retraining-notification-act-warn/ https://lipskylowe.com/what-is-the-worker-adjustment-and-ret...). It's not nearly as much as companies tend to provide, but that additional severance usually comes with strings attached (such as a non-disparagement clause).
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Yep. The plan to enforce this in January, after Q4 when people are busy at work (with Amazon’s Q4 peak retail sales period) and with the holidays, makes it clear that Andy Jassy intends to make this an impossible change. He just wants to force people out - maybe to do a layoff without paying severance. Or maybe it is a way to select for young people that live in downtown cores near Amazon offices, and get rid of older people or people with families. You know, people that live away from city centers, have commutes, and cannot deal with an abusive RTO policy. I hope they face lawsuits and also that talent flees. The only reason Andy Jassy and Amazon can get away with this is because they have enough market power that they don’t have to care about consequences. In other words, they are too big to fail, and immune to the negative effects of this that may result from real competition. It’s time for them to also face anti trust regulation. As a customer, I’m going to cancel Prime and stop shopping there entirely. I don’t like rewarding companies that set illogical trends across the entire industry.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
hackernewds 2y ago
Not to mention, employees have bought home and shifted to other cities and neighborhoods
mikro2nd 2y ago
It's a way to get rid of people without looking like you're laying off. Sadly it's the most competent that leave first and fastest.
iLoveOncall 2y ago
I think you got the messaging here wrong. He's not saying that you have 3 months to move houses, he's saying you have 3 months to move jobs. Productivity has cratered since he implemented RTO, so to believe that this is anything but a way to get rid of employees without severance package is extremely naive.
bagels 2y ago
Where do you get 2 hours from?
manvillej 2y ago
just 2 days after they release their Q4 results. there will be a grace period and then they'll start firing. They're expecting subpar Q4 results.

jogu 2y ago

For what it’s worth the change isn’t from full remote to 5 days a week. It’s from 3 days in office to 5 so it shouldn’t be as drastic of a shift.

insane_dreamer 2y ago

Some companies used this to reduce their headcount without having to fire people. Maybe Amazon is doing the same thing.

jtriangle 2y ago
It's a great way to create layoffs without having to spook investors by laying people off.
squigglydonut 2y ago
This is what I believe as well. It's an assuming narrative that allows them to say that it wasn't them it was the employee choice.

FuckButtons 2y ago

“Just seems a bit heartless” which, from everything I’ve read about Amazon as an employer, sounds completely on brand.

akira2501 2y ago

> Just seems a bit heartless. The writing has been on the wall for a while. Aside from that, Amazon decided to convert their workforce to work from home rather quickly, and shelled out the money and the effort in order to actually achieve that. > Remote jobs just allow a team to be more robust and dynamic to life changes. If you weren't hired into a remote job then you don't have much a right to expect or demand this.

makeitdouble 2y ago
> If you weren't hired into a remote job then you don't have much a right to expect or demand this. To put it another way: "Look for a remote position elsewhere and quit" That has been the return to office dynamic since the COVID emergency stopped.
- jchanimal 2y ago
  Fireproof (new local first database) is hiring.
rconti 2y ago
If you WERE hired into a remote job, then you also don't have any rights to expect or demand to stay remote. At least, in an at-will state.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  This is not necessarily true. I have had a labor attorney successfully argue constructive dismissal when remote was written into the employment agreement in an at will state (employer and employee were both in Illinois, attorney represented them on my dime, I was the one who told the employee to have the remote clause inserted into the offer letter when they were hired). Importantly, speak to a labor attorney, depending on your situation.
  - cortesoft 2y ago
    Well, the only thing that is going to get you is access to unemployment, which isn't life changing.

realmike33 2y ago

Take this with a grain of salt but I read on a similar Reddit post the return to office is mainly due to the tax incentives the city/county/state provided Amazon for having their offices located there. The Reddit user made a claim which Amazon could only receive those tax benefits if their workers actually worked in person at the location. --- I can see this being a valid argument for return to office for a lot of corporations, if its actually true. The tax benefits are too good to pass up and in office has been the status quo forever.

burnte 2y ago
> I can see this being a valid argument for return to office for a lot of corporations, if its actually true. The tax benefits are too good to pass up and in office has been the status quo forever. Holding on to what is now an outdated view of worker utilization might help them for a couple years with these tax incentives, but they're going to get a lower quality of worker, and incur a lot of retraining costs as people quit. They're going to have to pivot to having less commercial real estate eventually.
- supportengineer 2y ago
  The executives must look out and see a bottomless supply of cheap engineers. And I doubt they plan on training anybody at all. It’s just a race to the bottom at this point.
  - burnte 2y ago
    They'll be gone in 3 years. This will juice the stock price as investors will be happy with gaining additional tax benefits. By the time the problems bubble up from a weakened foundation it'll be the next guy's problem.
    - snoman 2y ago
      Amazon already had very high turnover before Covid. Many people don’t stick around (willingly or otherwise) after the year 2 hiring bonus cliff.

wnc3141 2y ago

I think this is a backdoor layoff that doesn't spook investors.

greenthrow 2y ago
Investors love layoffs right now. It's actually to avoid paying severance.
- dymk 2y ago
  Severance wasn't required in the first place, it's just a thing respectable companies do
  - TheCycoONE 2y ago
    It is in many countries, and I'm not American but I understand the WARN act provides defacto severence as few employers are willing to risk keeping an employee after they have been notified.
    - Spoom 2y ago
      As I understand it, WARN requires either two months of notice or two months of severance, to include benefits during that period (based on https://lipskylowe.com/what-is-the-worker-adjustment-and-retraining-notification-act-warn/ https://lipskylowe.com/what-is-the-worker-adjustment-and-ret...). It's not nearly as much as companies tend to provide, but that additional severance usually comes with strings attached (such as a non-disparagement clause).

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Yep. The plan to enforce this in January, after Q4 when people are busy at work (with Amazon’s Q4 peak retail sales period) and with the holidays, makes it clear that Andy Jassy intends to make this an impossible change. He just wants to force people out - maybe to do a layoff without paying severance. Or maybe it is a way to select for young people that live in downtown cores near Amazon offices, and get rid of older people or people with families. You know, people that live away from city centers, have commutes, and cannot deal with an abusive RTO policy. I hope they face lawsuits and also that talent flees. The only reason Andy Jassy and Amazon can get away with this is because they have enough market power that they don’t have to care about consequences. In other words, they are too big to fail, and immune to the negative effects of this that may result from real competition. It’s time for them to also face anti trust regulation. As a customer, I’m going to cancel Prime and stop shopping there entirely. I don’t like rewarding companies that set illogical trends across the entire industry.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

hackernewds 2y ago

Not to mention, employees have bought home and shifted to other cities and neighborhoods

mikro2nd 2y ago

It's a way to get rid of people without looking like you're laying off. Sadly it's the most competent that leave first and fastest.

iLoveOncall 2y ago

I think you got the messaging here wrong. He's not saying that you have 3 months to move houses, he's saying you have 3 months to move jobs. Productivity has cratered since he implemented RTO, so to believe that this is anything but a way to get rid of employees without severance package is extremely naive.

bagels 2y ago

Where do you get 2 hours from?

manvillej 2y ago

just 2 days after they release their Q4 results. there will be a grace period and then they'll start firing. They're expecting subpar Q4 results.