Apple Employees Reportedly Petitioning Against Plan to Return to Office 3x Per Week

[stocklen]

Even if Apple could replace everyone immediately losing a flood of engineers would be a legit crisis for the company. It takes months to bring a new engineer up to speed, and losing institutional knowledge can cripple a project. Losing a key person can literally kill a project, I’ve seen it happen.

I very much doubt its engineering roles that are causing the headaches here.
Engineers would not be working from home ordinarily.

The problems probably stem from clerical staff and sadly by your argument they are far more easily replaced.

I hope they know what they are doing as Apple are being more than generous and are very very likely to call their bluff sometime soon.....

 

[seek3r]

I very much doubt its engineering roles that are causing the headaches here.
Engineers would not be working from home ordinarily.

The problems probably stem from clerical staff and sadly by your argument they are far more easily replaced.

I hope they know what they are doing as Apple are being more than generous and are very very likely to call their bluff sometime soon.....

Pretty much every news story reporting on this identifies the staff as primarily software engineers…

Also do you really think institutional knowledge and ramp up dont apply to clerical work too? Try turning over half your payroll staff and see what happens

 

[stocklen]

Pretty much every news story reporting on this identifies the staff as primarily software engineers…

Also do you really think institutional knowledge and ramp up dont apply to clerical work too? Try turning over half your payroll staff and see what happens

What I think is that people should accept that they need to go back and do the job they were hired to do in the place that their employers hired them to do it in. - just as before Covid.

 

[jlc1978]

Even if Apple could replace everyone immediately losing a flood of engineers would be a legit crisis for the company. It takes months to bring a new engineer up to speed, and losing institutional knowledge can cripple a project. Losing a key person can literally kill a project, I’ve seen it happen.

I agree, it takes time to get up to speed and key people are sometimes impossible to replace. But then again key people are likley to get a deal they can live with, even if others don't get the same deal.

The assumption a lot of people are making is that Apple faces a massive loss of talent if they insist on a hybrid schedule. I am not sure that will happen, as staff will have to weigh other benefits against a hybrid schedule and decide if wfh is that important that they are willing to quit and give up those other benefits. They may decide to quit, or that they like what they are doing, how they are treated overall, and stay.

 

[bunnicula]

Not everyone is whining and Apple should have no problem replacing those who quit. A lot of people want to work for Apple and will gladly jump at a 3-in/2-out workweek.

I disagree. I don't think it'll come to that, quite frankly. It may be a way Apple can remove people who are lower performers, but top talent aren't going to be let go over where they sit. If they live close to campus, they'll come in some. If they don't, they won't.

 

[bunnicula]

What I think is that people should accept that they need to go back and do the job they were hired to do in the place that their employers hired them to do it in. - just as before Covid.

You act like they haven't been doing their jobs this whole time. They have. This is why they are not happy with the idea that they MUST be onsite to do the jobs they've been able to do successfully for a couple of years now from home.

 

[bunnicula]

No one is crying. People are exercising their freedoms. Good for them. Cook had tried to pull this off twice in the past year and he backed off both times. If he goes through with it this time, he will lose a significant number of most talented employees. Only the mediocrities who are of no interest to competitors will oblige Cook.

You make a good point here. The people who want to stay remote and are top talent will absolutely get their way. The ones who aren't so sure of their value will cave and go in to try to use that to prove they're valuable, but it won't work that way. If this was so important, he wouldn't have acquiesced multiple times on it already.

 

[bunnicula]

That's true. And Apple it seems is one of those companies. They wanted to get people back 6 months ago, but they held off. They are working with employees to find that solution. Having a permanent WFH situation is not a solution.

Of course it is! If one can do one's job successfully from home, why shouldn't they? If Apple didn't have a very expensive new campus that was finished not long before the pandemic and they were still in the office space crunch they were pre-space ship, they would've ditched the idea to build it, reduced the number of rented buildings, and allowed WFH for people whose jobs could be accomplished via WFH. It would be logical to do so. Now, they're in a bit of a predicament because they have this huge building and a lot of people who have seen that they can do their jobs remotely from their house (even a house that costs less and is nowhere near Apple Campus) and they need to figure out how to navigate that.

Firing talented employees who are integral to key projects is NOT how that'll go, no matter how many people here on MR think that Apple employees will do whatever to stay there and work. It's not like they cannot just go work some other place where WFH is the standard. If they're the people Apple WANTS to keep, they are the people another company will bend over backward to get on their teams.

 

[stocklen]

Of course it is! If one can do one's job successfully from home, why shouldn't they? If Apple didn't have a very expensive new campus that was finished not long before the pandemic and they were still in the office space crunch they were pre-space ship, they would've ditched the idea to build it, reduced the number of rented buildings, and allowed WFH for people whose jobs could be accomplished via WFH. It would be logical to do so. Now, they're in a bit of a predicament because they have this huge building and a lot of people who have seen that they can do their jobs remotely from their house (even a house that costs less and is nowhere near Apple Campus) and they need to figure out how to navigate that.

Firing talented employees who are integral to key projects is NOT how that'll go, no matter how many people here on MR think that Apple employees will do whatever to stay there and work. It's not like they cannot just go work some other place where WFH is the standard. If they're the people Apple WANTS to keep, they are the people another company will bend over backward to get on their teams.

You are ignoring all the many very valid point people have raised in this thread...

Why shouldn't they?.... i cant reiterate them all but insurance, liability, equipment, lower wages as their wage was set allowing some commuting compensation, professional image (barking dogs and screaming kids in the background with customer facing roles), loss of team working, consideration for new employees joining (who trains them, where, how, and how do they ever find that belonging feeling in an empty office or working from home),
etc... etc.... etc....
Its not was clear cut as "if they can why shouldn't they"..... they are employees, and they have a responsibility to conform to the employment contract they signed not start rallying against it - their option is to resign and let someone do the job in the place the employer wants it done.....

 

[bunnicula]

You are ignoring all the many very valid point people have raised in this thread...

Why shouldn't they?.... i cant reiterate them all but insurance, liability, equipment, lower wages as their wage was set allowing some commuting compensation, professional image (barking dogs and screaming kids in the background with customer facing roles), loss of team working, consideration for new employees joining (who trains them, where, how, and how do they ever find that belonging feeling in an empty office or working from home),
etc... etc.... etc....
Its not was clear cut as "if they can why shouldn't they"..... they are employees, and they have a responsibility to conform to the employment contract they signed not start rallying against it - their option is to resign and let someone do the job in the place the employer wants it done.....

I'm not ignoring what people are saying... I'm arguing that those points aren't particularly valid.

It costs a company less to allow an employee to work remote than it does to host them in their corporate offices.

Do you really think Apple is allowing unprofessional people to be on calls, disrupting other people's work? Come on. It's like you think the typical Apple software engineer lives in a tiny house with 12 other people and doesn't have a dedicated room for a home office. In fact, if they moved to a place with a lower cost of living during the pandemic, that salary likely went way further on housing and they have a pretty sweet, private setup.

People work just fine in teams when they are remote. Apple quite literally CREATES stuff that allows people to feel like they're up close when miles away.

You have a point re: new people, but clearly there are folks who are willing to work on campus and it's not like new people will be stuck alone if they are in the offices. Also, I've started and stopped a few jobs fully remote and it's not terrifying in the slightest. If a person can't figure out how to open a computer and log onto a corporate network when they work in tech, they were a poor hiring decision.

Conforming to the employment contract... I rather doubt any of those contracts stated that said person must be on campus 3 days per week or 5 days per week or 1 day per week. They likely stated that the person was assigned to X office (in this case, Cupertino), but that flew out the window during the pandemic, so it's not like you are going to have HR trying to use the "you were assigned to X office" argument here. If they are getting their jobs done in a satisfactory manner, it's hard to just be like "ok... come in or we'll just fire you." This is Apple and the jobs are complex. This is not Denny's 3rd shift waiting tables.

 

[DeepIn2U]

WFH is the new work benefit and it’s absolutely free for the company to provide. Hunch tells me that Apple just wants to get usage out of the new spaceship more than anything else.

This is NOT in ANY Way FREE!

VPN costs licenses per user!
Certificates to authenticate or secure VPN
laptops have a cost! A big one even if leased, tends to potentially have more and faster end user damage in the 3yr lifecycle.
Monitors, Keyboards, Mice, WebCams all if provided by the corp have a COST associated to them. Just like in office.

Some employees may need a dedicated VPN box.
Some employees can expense their internet service monthly fees - even if prorated for working hours.

Why or where the hell did you come up thinking WFH is 'FREE' for a company to provide? lol

 

[jdclifford]

Even if Apple could replace everyone immediately losing a flood of engineers would be a legit crisis for the company. It takes months to bring a new engineer up to speed, and losing institutional knowledge can cripple a project. Losing a key person can literally kill a project, I’ve seen it happen.

Key people are not the problem. They are not the whiners. Apple will not lose any key people over this little uprising. Those petitioners should remember Apple is a for profit enterprise run by a Board of Directors for the benefit of its stockholders. It's not a democracy!

 

[seek3r]

Of course it is! If one can do one's job successfully from home, why shouldn't they? If Apple didn't have a very expensive new campus that was finished not long before the pandemic and they were still in the office space crunch they were pre-space ship, they would've ditched the idea to build it, reduced the number of rented buildings, and allowed WFH for people whose jobs could be accomplished via WFH. It would be logical to do so. Now, they're in a bit of a predicament because they have this huge building and a lot of people who have seen that they can do their jobs remotely from their house (even a house that costs less and is nowhere near Apple Campus) and they need to figure out how to navigate that.

Firing talented employees who are integral to key projects is NOT how that'll go, no matter how many people here on MR think that Apple employees will do whatever to stay there and work. It's not like they cannot just go work some other place where WFH is the standard. If they're the people Apple WANTS to keep, they are the people another company will bend over backward to get on their teams.

My job before my current was with one of the largest tech companies around. It’s pretty old and built out a lot of huge corp campuses in the heyday of that kinda thing. Most are now long since shuttered but HQ, a massive facility designed to hold 10s of thousands of employees, is still extant. It has only a couple thousand folks working there these days and most of the core buildings are mothballed. A colleague who worked there once told me he felt like they kept just enough people there that if a pipe burst there’d be someone around to call for maintenance.

Tldr the days of massive suburban office campuses were long numbered long before Apple even started on the spaceship, Jobs I guess shoved it through as a vanity project but even before the pandemic such a campus was a rough proposition. Now it’s just a liability I think

 

[I7guy]

You make a good point here. The people who want to stay remote and are top talent will absolutely get their way. The ones who aren't so sure of their value will cave and go in to try to use that to prove they're valuable, but it won't work that way. If this was so important, he wouldn't have acquiesced multiple times on it already.

Top talent that is a square peg in a round hole will be given the boot or leave on their own accord… I’ve seen it happen.

 

[I7guy]

[…]. Now it’s just a liability I think

Apple will ultimately turn it into the hub they envision.

 

[Craigwilliam]

I say do it the other way. Let them work from home as independent contractors. They will lose all their benefits except working from home. And the biggest benefit they lose is the potential to move up the ladder to a better job by being a valuable part of a team. They could get rid of so much overhead and restructure these employees as contractors. This is the way by which health insurance, employment rights, matching employer contributions for taxes and 401K all go away.

I think Apple should give them the ultimatum at about this point. Work from home as a contractor with no employment at all, no employment benefits, and those people can continue to do so from home. For the people that come back to the office, the benefits keep flowing. This is how I trust Apple should play this game. Give employees the choice.

Okay you don’t want to come back to the office. You can resign, and Apple will permit you to work as an independent contractor doing the same work you did before on your own. Or if you want the benefits again, you agree to come at least three days per week or maybe more. Tuesday to Thursday in the office. If management/leadership you come back to the office now or hand in your resignation.

This way allows Apple to win and employees to be able to choose work from home. Win and win.

Apple can't do this, this isn't like a Barista at Starbucks or something, there is only so much talent at the level that Apple is after so they have to make their company an attractive place to work. Without these people, Apple falls apart, bugs don't get fixed. New Software isn't written, and new chips are left unfinished.

It comes down to basic supply and demand, you can't muscle people if you don't have any muscle.

 

[jlc1978]

Conforming to the employment contract... I rather doubt any of those contracts stated that said person must be on campus 3 days per week or 5 days per week or 1 day per week. They likely stated that the person was assigned to X office (in this case, Cupertino), but that flew out the window during the pandemic, so it's not like you are going to have HR trying to use the "you were assigned to X office" argument here. If they are getting their jobs done in a satisfactory manner, it's hard to just be like "ok... come in or we'll just fire you."

In the US at least, you would not have to specifically call out the location. Ones I've had often simply said "and otehrs as required..." and it is understood by both parties that offices can change, etc.

This is Apple and the jobs are complex

Right, and may require in person interaction an some cases.

Why or where the hell did you come up thinking WFH is 'FREE' for a company to provide? lol

Good points. You left out all the resolution of issues such as worker's comp, liability when traveling from home to an office taht is not your regular place of work now during working hours, right to access internet activity I employeer pays for access, who pays for damages to equipment, etc. There is a lot more to this than just "I no longer need to commute and spend gas so I want to do this..." The discussion here has oversimplified a complex issue.

Tldr the days of massive suburban office campuses were long numbered long before Apple even started on the spaceship,

I agree. Having either wfh or at a client site for many years, I don't miss it. Going in now and then to get something done or just for a meeting was enough for me.

 

[seek3r]

Apple will ultimately turn it into the hub they envision.

I'm failing to see how, even outside the current issue, Apple's already been leaning more heavily on their urban dev centers in recent years because that's where the talent is. I have my doubts that the spaceship will ever be filled, even should Apple with this particular battle, there's just not enough *new* talent who will want to work there even if they work out of an office

 

[stocklen]

Of course nobody seems to care about the knock on effects of this new "right" to work from home..

.. many other business exist and rely on office workers nearby to survive.... coffee shops, sandwich bars, retail in general...

Office footfall is why they are there in the first place and then when it dries up, the businesses folds.

This has been observed in many places - London particularly. Getting back to the office is essential for the vibrancy of the location...

So, theres far more to this subject outside of the rather self-centred attitude that seems to prevail about "well its better for ME so all others be damned"....

 

[I7guy]

Apple can't do this, this isn't like a Barista at Starbucks or something, there is only so much talent at the level that Apple is after so they have to make their company an attractive place to work. Without these people, Apple falls apart, bugs don't get fixed. New Software isn't written, and new chips are left unfinished.

It comes down to basic supply and demand, you can't muscle people if you don't have any muscle.

They can do it. How much can the area afford in terms of job reqs? You think apple will fall apart?

 

[bunnicula]

In the US at least, you would not have to specifically call out the location. Ones I've had often simply said "and otehrs as required..." and it is understood by both parties that offices can change, etc.



Right, and may require in person interaction an some cases.

You have to call out A location. Doesn't mean you cannot modify that location, so WFH isn't out of the question if it can be accomplished for a given job type.

And... it may be that some things need to be in-person now, but that's really more on the hardware side of things than software, which is what we've been discussing as the bulk of the employees who are wanting to keep their WFH arrangements.

 

[bunnicula]

They can do it. How much can the area afford in terms of job reqs? You think apple will fall apart?

Of course they CAN. Do they WANT to? I bet not or they'd not have backed off twice on it already.

 

[bunnicula]

Of course nobody seems to care about the knock on effects of this new "right" to work from home..

.. many other business exist and rely on office workers nearby to survive.... coffee shops, sandwich bars, retail in general...

Office footfall is why they are there in the first place and then when it dries up, the businesses folds.

This has been observed in many places - London particularly. Getting back to the office is essential for the vibrancy of the location...

So, theres far more to this subject outside of the rather self-centred attitude that seems to prevail about "well its better for ME so all others be damned"....

So, people should give up the option to save on commute costs, food costs, and clothing costs, etc... to keep another business thriving? Why?

For all the people working from home, there is a local area where they DO spend more time now and those businesses are seeing an uptick in revenue, I'm certain. Are we suggesting some businesses are more worthy of others? If a business isn't getting enough traffic, it needs to adapt, close, or find a new location.

It's not self-centered of me, for example, to prefer to keep my local shops and restaurants thriving instead of some an hour away. Nobody owes some restaurant their business.

 

[bunnicula]

This is NOT in ANY Way FREE!

VPN costs licenses per user!
Certificates to authenticate or secure VPN
laptops have a cost! A big one even if leased, tends to potentially have more and faster end user damage in the 3yr lifecycle.
Monitors, Keyboards, Mice, WebCams all if provided by the corp have a COST associated to them. Just like in office.

Some employees may need a dedicated VPN box.
Some employees can expense their internet service monthly fees - even if prorated for working hours.

Why or where the hell did you come up thinking WFH is 'FREE' for a company to provide? lol

You say that like Apple employees already didn't have laptops and VPN access PRIOR TO THE PANDEMIC.

As someone who has worked in corporate for a couple decades or so now, I can assure you I have had all that whether I was working in-office or remote. Just, now that I am fully remote (and was pre-pandemic), I don't cost an employer a dime in electricity, water, cleaning costs of an office, office furniture, etc.

 

[I7guy]

Of course they CAN. Do they WANT to? I bet not or they'd not have backed off twice on it already.

They probably won’t back off a third time.