How does working somewhere other than an office space make you lazy? It’s also funny you call them morons, when it’s rather moronic for many of us to commute to an office when you can do the same job at home. Work smarter, not harder….
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
Covid created a situation where many businesses closed completely and people migrated to working from home all of the time. Now as most people are vaccinated and businesses are adapting to people getting back into the workplace, hybrid schemes and full returns are happening in a lot of computer based industries. It was normal for pubs and restaurants to be closed completely, why should they reopen then if Covid created a ‘new normal’ in your view? Life goes on.
Comparing businesses that shutdown completely to companies that not only stayed open, but posted record profits, is hardly comparing apples to apples.
A waitress can’t serve someone their food while working from home, that’s physically impossible. Someone working at a computer for 8-10 hours a day can, for the most part, do that anywhere. As someone that works as a developer, I find it hard to understand why 2 people need to be face to face in order to collaborate. To me, it seems like one of those things that sounds good in theory, but in practice it’s not really as important as one might believe.
There’s plenty of companies that posted record profits throughout 2020 that have migrated staff back into the workplace though. Just because staff managed to work from home and still get their work done does not mean that should be the culture going forward. It all depends on the type of business and whether that model is suitable going forward.
The other argument for the waitress point could be; why do we need to go out to eat when we managed perfectly fine not doing this for 10 months? Tough on the waitress but some normality is needed to boost business in many sectors.
My argument wasn’t whether Apple or others could make record profits I was saying your comparison didn’t make sense because Apple was still able to profit unlike a business who had to completely shutdown.
at the end of the day, if they can find a way to let the waitress work from home and still make a living… I’m 100% for it. I don’t need her physically coming to my table.
I’m sure Apple would like employees to return to the workplace just the same as a restaurant would like their waitress’ to return. It just so happens one type of employee can work remotely and the other can’t. It’s nice to get colleagues back together and being fully productive after a rather disruptive year, profits or not.
If people do a better job in the office vs working from home, then something is off. That can be either management/team lead or each individual member of a team. Unless someone needs physical access to the office, this can and should be fixed. And if whoever is in charge can't fix it... well... 
And don't worry, I've seen this. Some people are trying to slack off. It needs to be clear, that's not acceptable. No one is expecting a perfect switch from one day to the next. But it also shouldn't take 4 months to adapt.
And don't worry, I've seen this. Some people are trying to slack off. It needs to be clear, that's not acceptable. No one is expecting a perfect switch from one day to the next. But it also shouldn't take 4 months to adapt.
As a Microsoft employee, I feel for them. We are quite happy about the remote work opportunities we are being given (and thus far have been told will be permanent). Several peers have already left WA and moved all over the country.
I kinda suspect this is getting into Apple’s focus on secrecy (like the dude who got fired cause his daughter snapped photos in their cafeteria).
But who knows, from what I recall hearing Amazon is also having their employees come back to the offices. Not sure if I’ve seen anything about Google.
That said, I totally get both sides of the argument. It is a HUGE change and if not well executed it CAN massively reduce productivity. That’s why for us, it’s still discretionary based on our management. If it’s not viable for a certain team or project they can decide to not allow it, but at least so far, those cases seem to be the outliers.
Either way though, it will likely be at least a few years or even a few decades before we really know the full impact of remote work arrangements. That said, it will clearly impact recruiting in the short term, since they are advertising flexible/remote options in the job postings for some roles already, and being able to work from anywhere is always gonna increase your applicant pool since there will always be some people who don’t wanna move to one of the big expensive tech cities.
I kinda suspect this is getting into Apple’s focus on secrecy (like the dude who got fired cause his daughter snapped photos in their cafeteria).
But who knows, from what I recall hearing Amazon is also having their employees come back to the offices. Not sure if I’ve seen anything about Google.
That said, I totally get both sides of the argument. It is a HUGE change and if not well executed it CAN massively reduce productivity. That’s why for us, it’s still discretionary based on our management. If it’s not viable for a certain team or project they can decide to not allow it, but at least so far, those cases seem to be the outliers.
Either way though, it will likely be at least a few years or even a few decades before we really know the full impact of remote work arrangements. That said, it will clearly impact recruiting in the short term, since they are advertising flexible/remote options in the job postings for some roles already, and being able to work from anywhere is always gonna increase your applicant pool since there will always be some people who don’t wanna move to one of the big expensive tech cities.
Part of management for some people is to make sure you can check on what they are doing and where they are. We knew at my place as soon as everybody started working from home there would be some who were going to be difficult. Our predictions were soon realised. We found some people who are very good in the office became rather demanding and suddenly experts in employment rights as soon as they were asked to do a full days work from their home. Disappearing in the middle of the day for a run or popping out to do their weekly food shop were two examples that were common. Those with children were obviously treated a bit differently as the schools were closed and learning had to continue.If people do a better job in the office vs working from home, then something is off. That can be either management/team lead or each individual member of a team. Unless someone needs physical access to the office, this can and should be fixed. And if whoever is in charge can't fix it... well...
And don't worry, I've seen this. Some people are trying to slack off. It needs to be clear, that's not acceptable. No one is expecting a perfect switch from one day to the next. But it also shouldn't take 4 months to adapt.
Some jobs like my own can be done mostly from home and I have had this perk for years now. Some can be done remotely but really shouldn’t. Some people aren’t disciplined enough to work in their own space too. It’s a minefield really and not a situation that suits every computer based position or person for that matter.
I don't think anyone who's (a) seriously debating the topic and (b) has actual experience would try to claim that every person in every role that primarily/completely uses a computer, is suited (either personally or the role) to remote work, either part time or full time. There's nuance to everything.
But the problem I still have is the (yes paraphrased) general argument/concept "it doesn't work for all so not allowing it is the right decision".
Let's look at what some of the other tech heavyweights are doing, based on CNN reporting (https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/19/business/return-to-office-company-policies/index.html):
I'm not suggesting every company should take the Twitter approach by default. I applaud them for giving employees the choice, but I won't be surprised if a small number of their employees try to take advantage of it and end up either told they specifically need to work from an office or find work elsewhere.
I don't know the specifics of what e.g. Microsoft is offering (@amnesia0287's post gives me the impression it's similar to Twitter's ?) but to me it seems pretty clear that the 'big tech' companies are largely being a lot more flexible than Apple is.
So here's my question, for those of you who can acknowledge that some people in some roles are perfectly capable of working remotely and being just as/more productive, but still claim Apple's decision so far is "the right one":
What's so wrong with letting people request full time remote working?
Nobody in this thread has said that but if Apple have then maybe they have reasons? They are obviously not anti WFH as they’ve changed their policy to include it in a hybrid approach. It’s not always a nice situation where you only see colleagues via video, instant messaging and emails. It’s quite nice to have a culture where people interact in person I think. Then again it depends on the job. Some software people like to work solo with minimal collaboration and digital communication works for them. I work in R&D so that sort of working is ok some of the time but not all.
I think if you allowed employees to decide on where they work you’ll get some that will grasp it and be productive and others that will take advantage. I’ve seen that in the past year. It’s difficult to manage and adds to the workload of managers in some cases. I think it has to be down to the company to decide who does it and who doesn’t as they are the best to judge based on output in my opinion. We got rid of an engineer in my team back in April as his output was difficult to gauge over lockdown. He was also renovating his house over that period and we all know he was often away from his laptop and moving the mouse every so often to remain available on Teams lol. It can just bring out the best and worst in people IMO.
In those words? No. The general implications? Plenty of times.
A goodly number, if not the majority of arguments "supporting" the Apple stance (beyond "well apple says so") have mentioned that some people are unsuited to remote work (for a variety of reasons).
If that is your (not you personally) argument for why Apple requires all staff to spend 3 days a week in the office, you (again not you personally) are then implicitly saying that the reason it (full time remote work) is not allowed for some is because it doesn't work for all.
You realise I didn't advocate for "employees decide, the boss can suck it" right? I specifically said I won't be surprised if there are consequences to Twitter's "you do you" approach.
Right, but Apple's decision so far is "no one does it" (by it, I mean 100% remote working).
So just to re-iterate, this is what I'm asking:
I'm not suggesting you know why Apple doesn't, or expecting you to defend their decision not to. This is all hypothetical because AFAIK no one in this discussion even works for Apple, much less has any decision making powers on this type of thing.
I'm asking why you think that a blanket "everyone whose job does not otherwise require in-person presence, must be in the office a minimum of 3 days per week" is "the right decision". Or conversely why would "allowing staff to request full time remote working" (as e.g. Google and Facebook are doing) be "the wrong decision".
My only assumption is a total block on 100% working from home is to avoid HR issues. I suppose if one employee works 100% at home but others are less productive and don’t get the perk, it’s awkward from a management perspective as you can’t always single people out. Not saying that is the reason but one I can personally relate to.
I find it hard to believe that's the case. I don't think I've ever worked anywhere, where different people didn't have different 'perks' to their job that other people were unhappy/jealous about.. Well except now, but it doesn't make much sense to be jealous of perks I give to... myself.
I would say the same thing as you if I hadn’t worked at three companies where that mentality exists to some degree.
Depending on projects, that's what daily/weekly/... meetings are for. Even if it's just a 10 minute meeting, people can present their work. If they can't, there's either a technical reason or they fail to do their job properly. I personally don't hire people if they can't work in extreme situations. And I usually throw them in the cold water in the beginning to test them. I'm well aware that some people can't work if they have no one breathing down their neck, these are not the type of people I want to work with anyway. Then again, I've been working with people all around the world for a long time (Apple was on PPC back then). So maybe that is an advantage.
Sure not everyone can do it. I occasionally went to the office / my lab during the pandemic, because I can't do some things at home. I also had personal meetings with reduced stuff occasionally. But in the end, not commuting for 2-3 hours per day (depending on traffic for about 12 miles), in addition with not having to talk to people in the kitchen made me more productive. Same for my team. I see people in other research groups spending half the day in various kitchens drinking coffee. They also became a little more productive working from home.
Sure, the janitors can't do it. Plenty of others can't either. However, many people can.
People who have never been inside Apple think it's this dream job, everything is chill and everyone is enjoying their work. The truth is far from it. Apple is breathing down necks, people are pushed over their limit. If you can get the job done, you get a pad on the back. If you don't deliver the next day, you're fired. There's massive pressure on people, think of it like having to be the overall best in university (we're talking Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, ... here). Some of my former CS students wrote their thesis at Apple and/or started working there, few are still there. The working environment is toxic. It's like playing football for the Patriots, you don't do it to have fun, you do it to win Super Bowls.
Looking at what Apple accomplished this past year, it looks like what's missing is the pressure and pushing people over their limits. I'm not surprised.
Not that working at other large companies is different, you'll find similar things at Google and Microsoft, maybe not to the same degree, but it's there.
The only "dream" working scenario I've ever seen is at CERN. Most people work there because they love it. Sure they also have their own tax system and employees are exempt from any federal taxation on salaries, but I doubt that's the reason.
I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying people don't get jealous of other's perks. I'm saying everywhere I've worked until I was self-employed, has had people getting different "perks" and others being "unhappy" about it - but none of that stopped people from getting those things.
Heck the most basic one is people being jealous of others who get paid more. You mentioned yourself earlier about people working in a.. warehouse? Factory? I don't remember exactly - something "blue collar" - being "jealous" of those who work in the office, because they saw it as "cushy" or something? (I can go find the post but I assume you'll remember what I'm referring to).
The situation of people being "jealous" of what they perceive to be unfair "perks" is not a new scenario that remote working suddenly introduces, so if HR / Managers think that is too much of a challenge, I'd love to see their proposal for 100% equal pay rates, air-conditioned private offices and comfortable chairs for all employees, including those who work outside like gardeners.
Sounds like you have a similar situation to me in that you can work from home but do have to go in for certain things. I’ll be honest I know nothing about the inner workings of Apple and all my comments here have been a general view on WFH and not confined to thinking of Apple solely. I’ve got no affiliation or allegiance to Apple personally so can’t comment with any certainty what it’s like there or any other software company for that matter.
It doesn’t stop people in my place getting perks either and as I said I’ve done it for years. The pay thing is apparent in every company which is why I’d never discuss my salary with anyone as it can be a cancer to any working culture. It’s all assumed. Yes I remember my comments about factory floor staff disliking those from the office side of the company but again that is everywhere. The people in the manual hands on jobs always feel they are the most important cog in the engine, and that will never change as long as people sit in front of computers and allegedly get paid more etc.
My point has always been about not allowing everybody who is capable of, to work 100% remotely. I say that because even with the best management in the world you cannot always manage individuals that are out of sight, out of mind. I think it’s a perk that needs to be earned and demonstrated. I definitely agree with allowing those who can and work effectively to do it, but I am always in favour of working in others company too rather than digitally. I think it’s good from a relationship, collaborative sense and is preferable when getting to know people as chatting over Teams is not quite the same for me.
So if Apple changed direction and said "we're gonna do what we always do and 'innovate' on an existing idea: staff whose job is not implicitly tied to being in the office, can work as per the current request of minimum 3 days p/w in the office, or they can request to work remotely 100%" you'd agree that's a better policy than the current one?
Maybe you missed it, but it’s been reported that additional WFH can be approved on a case by case basis. Employees are free to request it, and bosses are free to deny it.
Absolutely yes. It depends on the company and what they feel is best for the business
