Apple Staff Complain About Plans for Return to Office Work in Letter to Tim Cook

[jk73]

I think we all approach this topic based on our own experiences and the experiences shared with us by people we know. It’s those experiences that form our opinions that we in turn share here etc. It’s amusing you dismissed my opinions and experiences because they are what you think are exclusive to me or anecdotal, but somehow promote your own ‘experiences’ as the reality that represents this topic as a whole. We clearly approach this topic from different angles but neither of us is wrong really. It would be physically impossible to do my job 100% remotely because I’m an engineer. People who sit in front of a computer 100% of the time have a different situation but even then it’s down to the employer to set the rules.

If you don’t like the terms of a job, you move on and find another and I doubt either party worries as long as they get what they want.

Exactly right. I’m amazed by the number of people who now seem to believe it’s up to employers to make employees’ lives easier rather than the reverse.

 

[Euroamerican]

The table has been set though, for many requests to continue to work at home because of fear of the bug, being generally "uncomfortable" to be around other people.

Gonna take some reprogramming!

 

[jcmoney10]

It's almost like we need better support structures and funding for social services to handle

You don’t believe one of the largest data-tracking companies in the world is able to track employee productivity?

Regardless, Apple doesn’t owe the whiny employees anything here.

As for your company, what did you expect them to say? “Our company is a mess right now, and customers should spend their money elsewhere?”

Come on, man.

Lol I’ve seen the financial numbers myself at the company I work for. Couple those numbers with an expansion of our work force and I’d say you have no idea what you’re talking about.

as for Apple, I never said they didn’t have the data, I said don’t just assume that. Also if they have the data, don’t assume it reflects less productivity. My guess, is they know that “company culture” is something that executives are proud of, but means very little to actual employees. As a result, it looks bad on them if they give their workers a choice and no one comes back to the office. Space ships don’t just fill themselves these days.

 

[Stephen.R]

It’s amusing you dismissed my opinions and experiences because they are what you think are exclusive to me or anecdotal, but somehow promote your own ‘experiences’ as the reality that represents this topic as a whole.

I've said multiple times that remote working isn't going to be for everyone - some will find it makes them as, or more productive, some will find they're less productive.


You on the other hand seem quite happy to make broad sweeping statements and un-qualified, illogical comparisons.

That's why I'm dismissing your "opinions".

 

[jk73]

You do realise there is a significant difference between someone being able to work from where they wish, and people being forced to stay indoors for the vast majority of the time, for months on end, right? Please tell me you understand those are two different scenarios.

No one here is predicting that the abuse rates would spike as much as during the lockdowns, just that they would increase. You seem to be missing that, perhaps on purpose.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

a few things things:
1) if you have anyone that essential that your "bus factor" isn't adequate and you need more people.

2) And there are very few jobs that require synchronous work for the full work day, if you can't manage with an employee out on a run for 1-22 hours something is very very wrong with your process or you have a very niche job. Do you not expect people to eat, use the bathroom, get coffee, etc either?

3) There's a *lot* of research that shows that a) nearly no one is fully productive for 8 hours/day b) breaks help with increasing that productivity, giving important resets, and log term make people and teams vastly more productive

4) I'm on call at the moment 24/7 because of some new systems, for a very large enterprise platform that hosts quite a few rather important services globally right now. You can be reachable on a run if needed, I have a smart watch, and it's likely everyone you work with at least has a phone. If they're someone who's critical to reach for some reason make sure they take a phone (and set appropriate boundaries, ie only call/text/whatever if it's actually critical). Also if someone's that critical you should be subsidizing their comms, for ex I get a $75/mo stipend towards my phone bill because I need to be reachable and be able to work when needed and that covers my unlimited data and most of my general phone bill otherwise. I have the choice of a company cell phone instead but I'd rather they subsidize my plan and I don't have to carry 2 devices. If you don't do that it's unreasonable to expect someone to be permanently reachable.

5) "People are paid to work at the end of the day" - no, people are paid to get their work done. Hours worked for anything that isn't *actually* time dependent (like working on a factory line or being on station as EMS or something) is an absolutely terrible metric for productivity and the idea that someone is in front of their machine for 8 hours means they're working at full productivity for 8 hours is absurd. As I mentioned earlier in the thread my boss has a habit of noting the stat that people are most productive and can focus on something with full productivity for 3-5 hours/day. If I estimate a task is going to take 4 hours that's a full days work (the other hours in the day include lunch, breaks, meetings, documentation work around the main task, and time for out of band asks). If I allocate 8 hours of actual tasks I'll never actually get through them without working 12 hours to account for everything else - and I'll be less productive overall. I already work a lot of long days when we're in crunch time, no need to make it worse.

6) "That also creates the headache for management to make sure that employee is in fact making up their hours" - no, again, unless it's time sensitive the appropriate metric is "are they getting their work done" not "are they literally in front of their screen for 8 hours"

7) "People are paid to work at the end of the day and disappearing and loving it up at home is not part of the deal when working from home in my view" ok, but you know what? I don't live for my job. Don't get me wrong, I love my job, but my job is what pays for my life, not the other way around. My pet had a medical issue recently that I only spotted in time because I was home with them. I let my team know and bolted to the vet. Saved their life. If you don't think that's more important than work I don't know what to tell you. My team gets it and that retains staff, long run net benefit for the company too. If I had a job that told me my pet was less important than work I'd instantly quit.

8) Lastly I think you don't understand a key important metric in hiring talented engineers these days: "work/life balance". A lot of companies pay lip service to that idea, but until WFH suddenly became common it wasn't really actually doable. It seems like a lot of managers like you are having trouble coming to terms with the fact that people actually want what it says on the tin.

I can’t read and address all that but the jist from the first part comes back to my point about it depending on the type of job. If your job requires meetings on a regular basis (mine does), it’s important to be available during the day. I couldn’t have a meeting with a supplier, car manufacturer at 9pm at night and most of our meetings are scheduled between 8am and 5pm. I quite often work into the evenings and leave or start early but it’s managed.

Do you see why my point about not allowing a WFH policy to be mandatory across all office based professions becomes a quagmire of difficulties? It’s down to the employer to judge whether it works for their business, not the employee to demand what makes it easier for them. If you’ve got a good working relationship with your employer then it’s great to split between office and home. I wouldn’t trust everybody to have this perk though and making it a legal right would put a lot of companies in a very difficult position.

 

[grandM]

In school, they preach identifying what you value before negotiating with an employer. I made it clear early on that I work best in a t-shirt, jeans, and hat. I will wear a tie, but only for events where I personally would feel uncomfortable not wearing one. Any loss of pay I accepted in exchange for that condition was quickly reversed in bonuses led by increased productivity. When employers accept that the old school way of doing business isn't always the best, and listen to their employees, they stand to gain a lot.

Isn't is pathetic a company pays you less for not wearing a tie? I could understand a dress code leading to not hiring someone, but paying less?

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I've said multiple times that remote working isn't going to be for everyone - some will find it makes them as, or more productive, some will find they're less productive.


You on the other hand seem quite happy to make broad sweeping statements and un-qualified, illogical comparisons.

That's why I'm dismissing your "opinions".

If you think ‘remote working’ isn’t for everybody then what the hell are you disagreeing with me on?! That’s my point of view too. It’s something that needs to be managed by an employer.

What sweeping generalisations have I made? Please elaborate.

 

[grandM]

I’d immediately fire every person who signed that letter without any further discussion.

That's illegal and cost you dearly.

 

[jk73]

Lol I’ve seen the financial numbers myself at the company I work for. Couple those numbers with an expansion of our work force and I’d say you have no idea what you’re talking about.

as for Apple, I never said they didn’t have the data, I said don’t just assume that. Also if they have the data, don’t assume it reflects less productivity. My guess, is they know that “company culture” is something that executives are proud of, but means very little to actual employees. As a result, it looks bad on them if they give their workers a choice and no one comes back to the office. Space ships don’t just fill themselves these days.

Your theory is that companies, including yours, are doing something that could hurt their bottom line just to spite their employees? If so, one hopes you are searching for a different job.

 

[jk73]

That's illegal and cost you dearly.

Whiny employees are a legally protected class? Since when?

 

[Stephen.R]

No one here is predicting that the abuse rates would spike as much as during the lockdowns, just that they would increase. You seem to be missing that.

And yet the only evidence presented to back up the argument that people allowed to work from home if they wish, will be more likely to commit/suffer domestic abuse, is to reference the increased DV rate when people were forced to stay indoors, for the vast majority of their time.

It's not that I'm missing your point - it's that you're trying to make a point based on an entirely different scenario.

 

[grandM]

Dang, I’m off the computer for one weekend, and I missed out on all this gold. Curious if these Apple employees would agree to less salary to work from home now - you know because they wouldn’t be commuting and would be spending more quality family time. Probably not.

Paid less because the employer saves on heating, office space, and so on?

 

[Stephen.R]

Your theory is that companies, including yours, are doing something that could hurt their bottom line just to spite their employees? If so, one hopes you are searching for a different job.

You know a company isn't a sentient being right? It's people.

If you really think middle management types are above forcing others to be in an office for no practical reason, I'd suggest you haven't read this thread very closely.

 

[seek3r]

Lol I’ve seen the financial numbers myself at the company I work for. Couple those numbers with an expansion of our work force and I’d say you have no idea what you’re talking about.

as for Apple, I never said they didn’t have the data, I said don’t just assume that. Also if they have the data, don’t assume it reflects less productivity. My guess, is they know that “company culture” is something that executives are proud of, but means very little to actual employees. As a result, it looks bad on them if they give their workers a choice and no one comes back to the office. Space ships don’t just fill themselves these days.

What are you talking about? Funding for social services isn't a company budget thing, it's a government and taxes thing....

 

[grandM]

You remind me a lot of someone I interviewed with for a job before I started working remotely.

I asked him if they had flexible working hours - not even remote, just flexible hours in the office.

"Oh yeah, sure. I mean, there's a daily team meeting at 8.30am, and you'd only be paid for fixed hours per day.... but hey you can take your lunch break any time you want".

I'm sure it will surprise no one to hear that when they offered me the job, I didn't even bother to respond to their email.

It's a pretty poor state of affairs when the working hours are more strict than either of the state or federal government departments I'd worked in previously. Funnily enough, none of those managers seemed to be overly bothered about my working hours, so long as the work was done. Turn up at 11, leave at 8, jobs done, no wuckin' furries mate.

I recall Steve Jobs working solely alone at night at Atari to work in peace?

 

[jk73]

And yet the only evidence presented to back up the argument that people allowed to work from home if they wish, will be more likely to commit/suffer domestic abuse, is to reference the increased DV rate when people were forced to stay indoors, for the vast majority of their time.

It's not that I'm missing your point - it's that you're trying to make a point based on an entirely different scenario.

Never heard the old saying, “Familiarity breeds contempt”?

 

[jk73]

You know a company isn't a sentient being right? It's people.

If you really think middle management types are above forcing others to be in an office for no practical reason, I'd suggest you haven't read this thread very closely.

That’s a yes? Companies are doing this primarily out of spite?

 

[Stephen.R]

If you think ‘remote working’ isn’t for everybody then what the hell are you disagreeing with me on?! That’s my point of view too. It’s something that needs to be managed by an employer.

What sweeping generalisations have I made? Please elaborate.

You've repeatedly stated that you think everyone wants to be "back in an office", and come up with some quite ridiculous excuses why those who are able and willing to work remotely, cannot be allowed to - things like "we need to measure their output differently". I did ask if you need to check for a "home made" sticker on their work, but I don't think you ever clarified what this even means. Oh and let's not forget how "other people" will complain that they have to be in the office. Just like (apparently) everyone else in your company also whines about how someone else has it better than them.

 

[Stephen.R]

I recall Steve Jobs working solely alone at night at Atari to work in peace?

I've known for a long time that I am much more productive at night. I don't think it's necessarily about working in peace - I'm alone in my home office pretty much regardless of the time of day, I just find myself more productive generally, at night.

 

[Stephen.R]

Never heard the old saying, “Familiarity breeds contempt”?

Did you read what I wrote? Do you understand how choosing to work somewhere you're comfortable doing so, is different than being forced to share the same small space with someone else, with near zero opportunities to go outside, relax, and enjoy life?

 

[Stephen.R]

That’s a yes? Companies are doing this primarily out of spite?

Companies are not sentient beings. They do not do anything.

 

[grandM]

Whiny employees are a legally protected class? Since when?

People have the right to form a group (unions). In this case they wrote a letter to their CEO with a request. In my country you can not fire someone for doing so. Anyone willing to work for such a boss must love being abused.

 

[jk73]

Did you read what I wrote? Do you understand how choosing to work somewhere you're comfortable doing so, is different than being forced to share the same small space with someone else, with near zero opportunities to go outside, relax, and enjoy life?

Do the spouses get a vote?

 

[grandM]

I've known for a long time that I am much more productive at night. I don't think it's necessarily about working in peace - I'm alone in my home office pretty much regardless of the time of day, I just find myself more productive generally, at night.

As long as the job gets done, right