• blady_blah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    This isn’t what they want to happen. They know it will happen, but this isn’t the goal or objective.

    Amazon is a big boy company, if they want to cut staff, they’ll cut staff. The problem with cutting staff this way, is that they don’t get to decide who they’re cutting. They don’t want to cut talented employees at random, they want to pick the low performers and let them go. This is kind of the opposite of that.

    The higher skilled the employee is, the more likely they are to have been hired remote, and to feel they can find another job also. That means they’re effectively shooting themselves in the foot and getting rid of some of their talented employees for the benefit of bringing people into the office.

    There has been a swing in the business opinion that work from home isn’t as efficient. This is basically the higher-ups falling in line with that opinion.

    • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I think they do actually want to cut the high skilled talent. High skill means high pay, and now that they’ve achieved market dominance in pretty much every industry they’ve stuck their penis into they don’t need talent. Lower skilled, and therefore lower paid, employees can do just good enough to keep everything from burning down just long enough for the C-suite to get their bonuses and cash out. After that, who cares, they’re on to their next grift.

    • 0x0@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      There has been a swing in the business opinion

      Depends on where you read that info, it tends to be 50/50 pro/against really.

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah it’s 50/50 because the executives really don’t like it, but the actual data supports remote work being far more efficient. They’re working really hard to cook the books to make it look like the opposite to appease the execs but they can only do so much. Give them a few more years to cherry-pick data and bury inconvenient results and they’ll be back to the same bullshit that justified productivity destroying (but cheap) choices like hot desking and open plan offices.