Amazon Makes It Harder for Disabled Employees to Work from Home

(www.bloomberg.com)

Show context

no_wizard ◴[13 Nov 24 21:45 UTC] No.42130354[source]▶

For a company that is supposedly data driven like Amazon likes to tout, they have zero data that RTO would provide the benefits they claim[0]. They even admitted as much[1].

I wouldn't be shocked if one day some leaked memos or emails come to light that prove it was all about control and/or backdoor layoffs, despite their PR spin that it isn't (what competent company leader would openly admit this?)

[0]: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/over-500-amazon-...

[1]: https://fortune.com/2023/09/05/amazon-andy-jassy-return-to-o...

replies(16): >>42130377 #>>42130698 #>>42130723 #>>42130821 #>>42130967 #>>42131021 #>>42131355 #>>42131509 #>>42131862 #>>42132003 #>>42132082 #>>42132201 #>>42132360 #>>42132636 #>>42132789 #>>42133171 #

changoplatanero ◴[13 Nov 24 21:46 UTC] No.42130377[source]▶

>>42130354 #

How would you even gather data to support this? You can't a/b test company culture.

replies(9): >>42130431 #>>42130451 #>>42130452 #>>42130463 #>>42130509 #>>42130846 #>>42131072 #>>42132362 #>>42132673 #

xyst ◴[13 Nov 24 21:52 UTC] No.42130452[source]▶

>>42130377 #

Let’s just ignore the quarterly employee feedback, historical performance records of employees before, during, and after COVID-19 lockdowns, business performance before, during , after COVID-19 lockdowns; and rates of attrition in across organizations and teams…

There is plenty of data to support why forced RTO makes no sense.

replies(2): >>42131076 #>>42133314 #

1. thrw42A8N ◴[13 Nov 24 22:48 UTC] No.42131076[source]▶

>>42130452 #

How are you so sure this data is favorable to remote work?

replies(1): >>42131199 #

2. KerrAvon ◴[13 Nov 24 23:03 UTC] No.42131199[source]▶

>>42131076 (TP) #

because that's what the data says

replies(1): >>42131367 #

3. thrw42A8N ◴[13 Nov 24 23:27 UTC] No.42131367[source]▶

>>42131199 #

Can you show me, please?

replies(1): >>42131587 #

4. no_wizard ◴[13 Nov 24 23:56 UTC] No.42131587{3}[source]▶

>>42131367 #

There's been numerous articles about it:

https://www.vox.com/recode/23129752/work-from-home-productiv...

https://www.nber.org/papers/w30267

https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/4443825-telework-prod...

https://hubstaff.com/blog/remote-work-deeper-focus-fewer-int...

https://atlassianblog.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/0...

https://www.opm.gov/telework/documents-for-telework/2023-rep...

replies(1): >>42131734 #

5. thrw42A8N ◴[14 Nov 24 00:16 UTC] No.42131734{4}[source]▶

>>42131587 #

I thought you were talking about Amazon data. I don't think this is something that can be said generally - I have been in companies that worked much better in person, and in companies that wouldn't work without remote. I have no idea which one is Amazon.

Ultimately though, I think this is a cultural choice - the companies that worked well in person specifically hired only people who wanted to work in that way. Some changed their mind during the pandemic, and they were asked to move on. I don't think they were wrong. I was one of these who went away, and I joined a remote first global corporate with people from all over the world. I had a blast working there and nothing like it would be possible otherwise.

So I don't think Amazon is wrong in choosing their own way - even if we don't like it. It's style; it's like if we were criticizing their brand colors.

replies(1): >>42131887 #

6. no_wizard ◴[14 Nov 24 00:41 UTC] No.42131887{5}[source]▶

>>42131734 #

I wasn't, but thats largely because they haven't produced any, by their own admission, and they aren't currently from what anyone - even those inside the company - gathering any in a rigorous manner.

↑