Amazon Makes It Harder for Disabled Employees to Work from Home

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...

With respect, I'd like to suggest that they don't need to prove their preference to you. And I am genuinely trying to discuss a policy, not to be argumentative. I am also not assuming it's any better than remote. Maybe it is, I have no clue.

If I ran a company, and I have, I would want the ability to require that people work at the office. (I didn't always require it; in fact, my last company was 100% remote for 21 years.) I wouldn't feel like I had to defend that policy to anyone.

Put another way: why would Amazon need data for this? What's wrong with simply telling people they have to come in? If you don't want to come in, why not just find a remote job?

You don't have to defend it, but if your motivations are that you want to have some measure of control over the serfs you own, be prepared for people to also mock and scorn you for it.

That right to have an opinion cuts both ways, bud.

Do you feel that if you ran a business, you should be unable to control the (legally allowable) terms of employment, bud?

As the entity responsible for the livelihood of your employees, do you think it is fair to change the terms of their employment, in a way that can have a serious impact on their life, just because you feel like it?