RTO doesn’t improve company value, but does make employees miserable: Study::Data is consistent with bosses using RTO to reassert control and scapegoat workers.

  • Ekybio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    One of the more honest arguments I have seen about RTO:

    The company has rented an important building for operations.

    That building is prime real-estate, which is now loosing value, because no one is using it and no one wants to buy it.

    Since that can get very expensive, forcing use of the building to keep the investment stable makes sense on paper.

    Result: Workers are forced back into office, to everyones detremend. Just because some guys asset is loosing value and now everyone else has to suffer because of it.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Has less to do with companies who rent and more to do with ones whom finance the construction of the building in the first place. It was a lot more common back in the day for companies like sears to build sky scrapers as a vanity project that they could park money into. Trump wasn’t the only person in the real estate market advantageously overvaluing his properties.

        Pretty much every sky scraper devoted to office space is a huge waste of money, and are rarely ever utilized anywhere near their capacity. It why so many NYC government agencies were located in the world trade center. The local government was basically helping achieve some of the capacity they approved for the project, helping make the wtc look more utilized that what it was.

        There used to be a pseudo economic model that was surprisingly consistent. That anytime the newest tallest building in the world was announced, there would be some sort of recession within a couple years. It was seen as a sign that corporations were running out of productive places to stick their earnings.

    • SinningStromgald@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      It is one of the driving forces behind RTO. There is no small amount of worry over a total collapse of the commercial real estate market. When large companies announce RTO it helps keep the commercial real estate market going.

      Counter point to that is that companies that force RTO end up loosing the good employees who actually liked remote work. So the real estate is “saved” and they get a “free” layoff with no severance payouts but the company gets a brain drain.

      Companies, currently, are viewing this as a net positive.

  • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    That’s the entire point of RTO drives.

    Make everybody miserable, pressure some to leave, not have to pay redundancy. Scummy as fuck.

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s the entire point of RTO drives.

      It’s really not, although I’m sure more than one C-Suite dweller has gotten a chuckle out of it. No the real point of RTO is trying to stop or soften a pending Commercial Real Estate apocalypse that could be even worse than the 2008 Financial Crisis. It’s imminent too, like if it hasn’t started already then it will in the next 60-90 days.

      We’ll know if its begun by looking at the Q1 CRE default rates when they come out in April. If the rate is over 1.9% then you should start keeping your cash in a mattress and stockpiling food…and I’m only semi-joking.

      • cmbabul@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        In the least callous to the everyday people that will suffer way I can say it, good it needs to die. Real estate as an investment needs to die

        • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I can understand your opinion when it comes to Residential Real Estate, the stuff that people live in, but I wouldn’t extend that to Commercial Real Estate. I see nothing wrong with a Business owning properties that are used by itself or other Businesses. I think the problem comes in when Businesses, especially large Businesses, own Residential Real Estate; especially if ownership of RRE exceeds a certain threshold inside a designated area.

          I honestly think a lot of the problems with businesses owning RRE could be solved by not allowing those businesses to be C Corps, maybe constrain them to only Sole Proprietorship or LLC.

          • cmbabul@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            See I could agree with you for a company owning a building it uses, I don’t consider that investment, I consider that ownership and use, but I don’t think any entity should own land or shelter they aren’t utilizing. I don’t see any real benefit for any but capitalists

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I know it’s not indending it but the way the headline is phrased makes it sound like the employees being miserable is a positive.

    RTO doesn’t improve company value, but does make employees miserable 🤷

    • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Considering how this is being pushed by petty micromanagers at expense of profits, they might as well see it that way.

  • Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    The daily driving to and from the office (for those of us in areas with shitty or non-existent public transportation) is also one of the most dangerous things we do by far.

    Kinda wish that risk were acknowledged by the C levels when they make these decisions.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Considering the most highly correlated trait for being a CEO of a large and successful company is psychopathy, I’m going to file that under “highly unlikely”