Not legally obligated no, you're right. It's just really shitty. Asking your boss if WFH is here to stay so you can finally move from a big town, where renting costs as much as a rural house, being told yes and then all of a sudden having to commute for 4 hours a day.
Just drop the whole France area. The fact they still doing work at home now. No point. Start a new studio somewhere else
True, but again - for this type of decision you better had ironclad commitment from the employer. Evening you do - what happens if you want to change jobs? You will always be limited by working at companies with very flexible wfh policies. It’s a give and take, you can’t have it all.
Yep, this is why even though I work from home about half the time, I never moved further out. You never know what happens with your job and it’s much easier to find another if you are willing to commute in.
Well, let’s be real for minute or two. Assuming they were actually able to work from home the past 4 years, they probably built their life around that by now. Perhaps some people were even hired under these conditions. Changing all that now from one day to the other… I‘d probably be pissed as well depending on the situation I‘m in.said the diktat to be in the office at least three days per week going forward was "the straw that broke the camel's back."
It's amazing we live in a time period where we can stream a 4k movie across millions of users but they can't make a job that operates in a similar manner.
Of course. No matter what dystopian tech bros are trying to convince the whole world - people are social animals. I would be very cautious of any worker that will say „I’m perfectly happy never meeting my colleagues in person”, which is what full wfh policy is. You end up with groups full of antisocial people.
Anything but an actual fight.
Back durning ww2 my grandpa got caught by germans in so called round up( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Łapanka ) and put into arbeitskamp(slave labor camp) deep into germany, he told me few french ppl were there too and they were the laziest ppl he ever met, but it was so long ago and in extreme circumstances so cant really draw much of conclusion really
Yep unless it's a formal contract that says 100% work from home. Otherwise a company will always say the "change in conditions and having to apadt to business needs line."
I'm working constantly in Home Office, and I'm way more productive at home in comparison when I'm in the Office. You get constantly interrupted with minor and unneccessary chit chat....
He has no idea what he's talking about, just like 90% of people in this thread who have never worked in a big, multinational corporation, and they are salty because their jobs can't be done from home.
How do you think these companies measure "productivity"? From my experience, most of the time it's clueless people looking at data they don't understand. They only see how many issues were done in a certain unit of time, and they don't care about any context. For example, is a junior dev who finishes let's say ten smaller tasks in two weeks more productive than a senior dev, who is working on a much harder tasks, and only manages to finish two in two weeks?
Your whole thesis is wrong, tho. Yves is the problem. Change starts at the top, not the bottom. If the culture isn’t good, it’s because he creates a bad culture and it permeates down. And I guarantee you he doesn’t work 3 days a week in the office. He just makes bad calls from one of his seven giant mansions scattered across the globe.
Strike, not a protest. Like all dem American unions striking.
