←back to thread

Amazon Makes It Harder for Disabled Employees to Work from Home

(www.bloomberg.com)
283 points belter | 1 comments | 13 Nov 24 21:16 UTC | HN request time: 1.191s | source
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]▶
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 #
no_wizard ◴[13 Nov 24 21:50 UTC] No.42130431[source]▶
Sure you can. Why can't you?

Its lack of imagination and inability for upper management leadership to even consider that the way they "always done things" may no longer be the best way, and they need to evolve with the times.

For instance, find a group of teams that work on a similar function, have some of the teams RTO, and have some WFH, and see if there is any tangible difference in the results and what they are.

Thats off the top of my head. Never mind that there are actually more scientific approaches that can be used than what I've suggested, and there are researchers that are clamoring to do this as well.

replies(2): >>42130946 #>>42133328 #
1. Ferret7446 ◴[14 Nov 24 05:15 UTC] No.42133328[source]▶
That's the same logical fallacy that makes people think that small scale UBI experimental results apply if rolled out to the entire society. There are systemic and emergent effects that are not accounted for, and the only way to actually do the science is to make a copy of society and only do the change for one of the copies.

(which is obviously impossible, which is GP's point)