Yup! I spent half my day on zoom calls before COV19 anyway, we have offices spread across the planet, even the parts of our team that worked out of offices were spread across a bunch of timezones and thousands of miles, plus a nice chunk of the team I'm on was fully remote already. That's the reality of a lot of modern tech work and has been for a while, I really have zero reason to come into the office except for maybe the big planning meetings, which are nicer face-to-face.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Staff Complain About Plans for Return to Office Work in Letter to Tim Cook
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yup! I spent half my day on zoom calls before COV19 anyway, we have offices spread across the planet, even the parts of our team that worked out of offices were spread across a bunch of timezones and thousands of miles, plus a nice chunk of the team I'm on was fully remote already. That's the reality of a lot of modern tech work and has been for a while, I really have zero reason to come into the office except for maybe the big planning meetings, which are nicer face-to-face.
This is one of the most realistic statements I have heard about remote work. All of those qualifications must be true in order for long term WFH to be successful. Task-based jobs by people with high skill levels have been very successful for us in switching to WFH. However, there are limits. A collaborative job, or one where the job description includes lots of 'other duties as assigned' is not likely to be successful in the long term.
I am 100% in favor of WFH in the right situation. After doing it for several years, I recognize there are limits that only become apparent over time. I would imagine that some of these same employees will be begging to go to work after about 24 months of WFH. There is literally nothing capable of replacing certain face-to-face interactions and building trust with a new colleague in person.
If you think the title “management” instantly makes you the smartest guy in the room, capable of seein the “big picture”, then you must be management lol.
What a terrible and outdated philosophy. No one wants to work for dictators.
Interrogated? So, doing one's job well and fully, and not actively agitating against the company's interests isn't enough? Can't one be agnostic to corporate bunting-hanging and slogan singing but still be an asset? Or must one bow before the Founder's portrait, or be considered a threat?
Basecamp has like 30 employees, I'm sure it's shocking they managed to replace 10 people
If you can get all your work done in that 45 mins and the work is worth what they're paying you why would the rest matter? And of course they aren't just working 45 mins, they're working full schedules or they would have lost their jobs, you just seem salty that now in their downtime they can go hang with their family or pets instead of water cooler talk, smoke breaks, and reading MR.
No one really can work full steam 8 hours a day sustainably anyway, there's a saying my boss has, approx. "3-5 hours of focused work/day is about what an average engineer can sustain"
Anyone who measures productivity by hours of butts in chairs is terrible at measuring productivity, the point is to get your tasks done, not to work an 8hr day just because.
Basecamp has like 30 employees, I'm sure it's shocking they managed to replace 10 people
Point being - nobody is indispensable. Scott Forstall wasn’t. Jony Ive isn’t. The people pushing for WFH here likely aren’t either. People are making it sound like Apple somehow has no choice but to give in or people will quit and operations at Apple will somehow come to a grinding halt.
I guess that's the 80 that decided to step up, not the number of people in total who think that way.
That median pay is for the whole company, not those working in Apple Park. There are a lot of lower paid workers in Apple Stores which will affect (“bring down”) that median figure.
Sarcasm - the use of remarks that clearly mean the opposite of what they say, to criticize something in a humorous way.
My analogy might be a bit far fetched, but you should get my point
If your toaster manual says you should set your toaster to 4 minutes, and every time you do so, the bread gets burned and your house is filled with toxic smoke, and still you set it to 4 minutes every time because that is what the manual says and how you have always done it - and you are not alone in doing so. Then a toaster pandemic hits earth causing all toasters to stop toasting after 3 minutes, and lo and behold, the bread is now a perfect golden, crisp slice of joy. Wow, you never thought of that, 3 minutes makes for a perfect toast. People no longer gets cancer from eating burned bread, their mood increases from no longer having to endure smoke in their flats and the accumulated decrease in power usage benefits the environment. As a society we have learned something valuable. Time goes by and science finds a cure making all toasters able to toast for 4 minutes again. What should we do? Learn from our experiences, or go back to the way it used to be? I’m pretty sure most people would have learned a lesson and start a 3 minute toaster revolution, but that is only because the benefits are apparent to all. It is pretty obvious, that is not the case with the discussion in this thread. A lot of people seem stuck in the past, has very little trust in other people and have a very one sided opinion, failing to see the bigger picture; that both options are viable - work from home or go to work, depending on your position and how it can benefit both you, your employer and the environment.
If your toaster manual says you should set your toaster to 4 minutes, and every time you do so, the bread gets burned and your house is filled with toxic smoke, and still you set it to 4 minutes every time because that is what the manual says and how you have always done it - and you are not alone in doing so. Then a toaster pandemic hits earth causing all toasters to stop toasting after 3 minutes, and lo and behold, the bread is now a perfect golden, crisp slice of joy. Wow, you never thought of that, 3 minutes makes for a perfect toast. People no longer gets cancer from eating burned bread, their mood increases from no longer having to endure smoke in their flats and the accumulated decrease in power usage benefits the environment. As a society we have learned something valuable. Time goes by and science finds a cure making all toasters able to toast for 4 minutes again. What should we do? Learn from our experiences, or go back to the way it used to be? I’m pretty sure most people would have learned a lesson and start a 3 minute toaster revolution, but that is only because the benefits are apparent to all. It is pretty obvious, that is not the case with the discussion in this thread. A lot of people seem stuck in the past, has very little trust in other people and have a very one sided opinion, failing to see the bigger picture; that both options are viable - work from home or go to work, depending on your position and how it can benefit both you, your employer and the environment.
Last edited:
This includes all retail employees and not just the corporate employees who wrote this letter.
I think after all the discussion here and elsewhere publicly, that the letters authors since this leaked are not getting a good nights sleep.
Bet they were all glad that grocery and hardware store workers (oh and most importantly, baristas) showed up for work during this whole deal.
It's always very interesting to me (and not in a good way), seeing a bunch of people who were 'forced' into ad-hoc remote working scenarios due to the recent/ongoing apocalypse, suddenly consider themselves subject matter experts on the topic of remote working. How effective it is, how productive people can be, etc.
Here's a little tip: if you'd never practiced "WFH" besides the odd day here or there to look after someone sick/etc before 2020, you're not sufficiently experienced on the matter to be making claims about what is/isn't viable as blanket statements.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, and it's (obviously) very relevant to how you personally feel about remote working, and that's an important thing to consider for your own personal career choices. But it's not really relevant to any discussion about overall productivity, capabilities, or trends of a remote workforce.
Here's a little tip: if you'd never practiced "WFH" besides the odd day here or there to look after someone sick/etc before 2020, you're not sufficiently experienced on the matter to be making claims about what is/isn't viable as blanket statements.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, and it's (obviously) very relevant to how you personally feel about remote working, and that's an important thing to consider for your own personal career choices. But it's not really relevant to any discussion about overall productivity, capabilities, or trends of a remote workforce.
I do sympathise with American workers, they can only dream of having 8.5 weeks paid leave like my colleagues and I do here in Australia. In my opinion, permanent employees demanding that they NEVER again attend work is not ideal for employee or employer. I get the impression here that some people would like to permanently live in their bedroom/study, work from home, socialise from home, date from home.
How about your team, your colleagues? Personal productivity may be better from home, but many companies rely on teamwork and collaboration. I'd argue that email, Slack and Zoom are not the best tools 100% of the time.
I worked from home for much of last year but it’s great to get into the office. I still work from home on the odd day here and there and Microsoft Teams is great, but no substitute for actual conversation in person. Working remotely forever would be a dim prospect IMO and no good for building relationships and maintaining productivity. A balance is needed.
Just as well they didn't say that then.
Working remotely 5 days a week on a regular/ongoing basis is not the same as "NEVER again attend work", even if you substitute the phrase "the office" for the word "work".
Just as I get the impression some people feel threatened by others being productive away from an office, and thus start to make outlandish comments.
As mentioned in some of my prior posts, I worked at Apple in several capacities — this being the age prior to the iPod. Our pay and benefits were phenomenal then and we were in serious financial trouble at one point. I’m guessing pay and bennies now are staggeringly sweet.
so when you say “spoiled overpaid brats”, that’s probably understating it 😀
What I think will be interesting will be the competition for employers who are offering more flexible WFH schedules. Employers are already complaining that they're having problems finding employees, blaming it on the unemployment packages, etc
Prior to the pandemic, I'd think the pay and health insurance were what most people would have used to determine what employer to sign with, if given a list of choices of employers with comparable roles
After the pandemic, I think WFH is right up there and we'll find plenty of employers who'll offer a decent WFH schedules but pay less and still be a viable option
Prior to the pandemic, I'd think the pay and health insurance were what most people would have used to determine what employer to sign with, if given a list of choices of employers with comparable roles
After the pandemic, I think WFH is right up there and we'll find plenty of employers who'll offer a decent WFH schedules but pay less and still be a viable option