1y ago

Return-to-office orders look like a way for rich, work-obsessed CEOs to grab power back from employees

www.businessinsider.com Return-to-office orders look like a way for elite, work-obsessed CEOs to grab power back from employees

White-collar workers temporarily enjoyed unprecedented power during the pandemic to decide where and how they worked.

Return-to-office orders look like a way for rich, work-obsessed CEOs to grab power back from employees::White-collar workers temporarily enjoyed unprecedented power during the pandemic to decide where and how they worked.

Work Reform @lemmy.world

Return-to-office orders look like a way for elite, work-obsessed CEOs to grab power back from employees

www.businessinsider.com /return-to-office-mandates-restore-ceo-power-2023-8

727 92

You're viewing a single thread.

109 comments

Seems like the commercial real estate collapse has a lot to do with it too.
- Eh, that may play a role for the big firms, but most of the small to mid sized businesses just lease their real estate. They'd realistically come out ahead by downsizing their offices.
  I think what we are seeing is management really struggling to adapt and find reliable metrics for performance management as well as to promote employee retention and engagement without the social bonds of an office culture.
  
  Small companies are often under long leases. Our landlord was quite flexible and let us break the lease if we did the work to find a new tenant, but most wouldn't be.
  And yes we are coming out ahead, by quite a lot.. offices aren't cheap even the tiny one we tried to use temporarily.. have now ditched that and gone totally remote.
- How so?
  
  Super simplified version: the office buildings are losing value due to low occupation. Owners of those buildings lose money if the value goes down. Those owners do not want that.
  
  And those owners can almost always find a compassionate ear from their loyal rich CEOs who don't want to upset a however many years relationship of "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" kinda thing.
  
  Highly plausible deduction.
  
  I see a lot of people say this but I haven't seen real data that this is actually a trend. Though I live in Australia, maybe it's different elsewhere.
  
  If I'm understanding correctly, you're saying you don't see the trend of office real estate losing value? This might be a problem mostly for the US, but Manhattan real estate is definitely struggling. There's also the company WeWork, which is basically AirBnB for office spaces, which is now on the brink of collapse.. WeWork had bought up so much office space for renting out that US banks are legit concerned over what happens if the business fails.
  
  Thanks for the sources, yes looks like the US commercial real estate market is in trouble. Here in Australia it's not that bad, though there are predictions that there may be issues due to economic reasons, with WFH playing a small part.
  
  My understanding is as follows: A lot of corporate debt is backed by the real estate. For example, McDonald's food operations are far less valuable than its real estate portfolio. If that property is now worthless because no one wants it and it's unoccupied, banks now have assets worth less than what's owed on them. That in turn means when the loan term ends, banks can't just re-finance the debt, because the collateral that secured the loan in the first place isn't worth what the debt is. That means big problems for companies who now need those loans as a source of cash to pay off the old loans. They now have to scrape up actual cash to pay, leading to more austerity. Because corps can't pay the banks, the banks lose out on revenue, which means they have to tighten their belts, and so on and so on in a self-reinforcing spiral. If the corps default, the banks can seize the assets, but again, they're worthless, so it's a one-two punch.
  It's a giant shell game, and from what I've read economists are afraid a 2008-style crash may be in the works due to the cycle of debt above.
  
  Don't forget the hoarding of cash offshore too. A lot of themcan pay, they just don't want to use their own money.
  
  A lot of the foreign currency was brought back under the trump years when companies were given a one time reduction in taxes to repatriot their cash. From 35% to 15% tax rate.
  https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-12-19/companies-repatriate-1-trillion-since-tax-overhaul
  
  That's an amazingly non-nuanced response. Very curious.
  
  To add what other folks have said... Banks have a conflict of interest in regards to employees coming back into the office: They hold the mortgages on all that office space. If the work-from-home trend doesn't let up they stand to lose trillions of dollars.
  The bigger the bank the more they stand to lose. This is why banks like Goldman Sachs are extremely vocal about bringing people back into the office and grasp at every little thing that can find to back their claims that, "it's better". Even if the arguments they're making are based on 100% bullshit.
  Example: You'll often hear big bank executives say things like, "teams that work near each other work better" knowing full well that their global workforce doesn't actually "sit near each other". On any given internal team employees will live all over the damned world so even if every one of them came back into the office they still wouldn't be anywhere near each other.
  We know this is 100% bullshit anyway because if they actually stood behind these words they'd issue mandates that huge amounts of employees be relocated to the same physical locations and that hiring could only happen locally. They're not going to do that though because they know what they're saying is bullshit.

109 comments