Twitter (1 Viewer)

[Don Quixote]

The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days.

It isn't just the younger crowd. Nobody is interested in working in a cube

Add in that a lot of companies have redone offices so people don’t have their own cubes any more. But shared spaces or have to reserve spaces when they do go in. My wife’s office did this. Prior to covid she was working 2 days a week at home. Even before sending everyone home they had a plan to reconfigure office space like that. So now if she goes in, she reserves space…doesn’t have her same monitor set up…obviously nothing personal in any cube space and so on. She hates going in as often she is on the phone to other offices in the US and in other countries that is a pain if having to share space.

Yeah - My work did away with offices just about completely — went to open floor plan. Same issue with phone calls. They set up tiny phone booths to take calls, but no one wants to sit in there all day, and makes it impossible to both see screen for video call as well as open up documents that may be talking about. Better set up at home than work.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

It's 2022. The pandemic started in 2020. We have gobs of experience with working in offices and very little experience with working from home. So I'm extremely skeptical of broad, sweeping generalizations about how people are "archaic" for preferring work arrangements that were functioning pretty well until two years ago.

Because WFH is so new, we haven't really had a chance to explore how WFH affects things like work-life balance. Obviously this isn't the case for everyone, but for me personally, I am done for the day when I leave the office. I almost never take work home. I respond to email pretty much 24/7, but that's it. Having experienced both, I very strongly prefer the office. It's nice knowing that I can always keep things going from my living room if I'm feeling a little under the weather or something, but I'm positive I would not want that to be my default workday.

And I say that as somebody who is allowed to do his job with (almost) nobody looking over his shoulder. Lots of workers in lots of jobs need supervision. That's not because the boss is tyrannical or paranoid or weak. Human beings have slacked off at their jobs since the dawn of time, and we all hang out here as a form of work avoidance so we're no exception. For me, working from home is fairly pleasant. It wouldn't be pleasant if somebody from IT was checking my keystrokes, or they made me put a camera on my machine to verify that I was actually in front of my screen and not just cooking or watching television. I'm okay with certain "invasions of privacy" in my workplace but would not be at all okay with those exact same measures being imposed on my home office.

And that's just one dimension of this whole discussion. This is one of those topics that I think really separates the people who have heard of Chesterton's fence from the people who haven't.

 

[Insein]

WFH is definitely here to stay but I do think companies need a balance.

I believe Musk went to so hard on the in person working in order to weed out people that didn't work and didn't want to work for him. Probably close to 80% of twitters staff was dead weight costing the company billions in salary.

 

[Desert_Power]

No idea how I missed this story. And this was a WEEK AGO...

Musk paid $44 billion to buy Twitter. But it wasn’t all his money. He borrowed $13 billion of it to help foot the bill, and Bloomberg News is reporting that the banks that lent him that money are now trying to offload those loans. They’ve reportedly received offers for as little as 60 cents on the dollar.

You should check out this thread too.

I don't understand 40% of the words used in that thread. I understand more about quantum mechanics or non-eucludian geometry than financial instruments.

The financing is very expensive and the banks who underwrote the deal are facing big losses on the portfolio. It seems Elon's only way out of burning additional billions would be to let (or cause) the company to fail. He could also sink another ~$6B in to buy back the debt at half of face value.

 

[SWC]

the problem with universalisms is that they are always wrong take that to the bank brohans

 

[Desert_Power]

Add in that a lot of companies have redone offices so people don’t have their own cubes any more. But shared spaces or have to reserve spaces when they do go in. My wife’s office did this. Prior to covid she was working 2 days a week at home. Even before sending everyone home they had a plan to reconfigure office space like that. So now if she goes in, she reserves space…doesn’t have her same monitor set up…obviously nothing personal in any cube space and so on. She hates going in as often she is on the phone to other offices in the US and in other countries that is a pain if having to share space.

Yeah. We don't even allow reservations. So, it's just a free-for-all where you don't know where anyone is.

 

[Insein]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

 

[TLEF316]

My company (very large financial services firm) has been a 3/2 hybrid schedule for over a year now. Back at the start of the year, upper management assured us that it would be the norm for the foreseeable future. A few weeks ago, the company's #3 guy did a town hall and recommitted to that. But at the same time, he (while treading very lightly) also stressed that it was very clear that a big chunk of the employee base is NOT living up to our end of the bargain. I'm sure they have actual data on that (via key card swipes) but from my perspective, its pretty obvious.

I work in NYC 2 days a week (another office the 3rd day) . Nobody commutes in on Monday or Friday. So the assumption is that the office will be pretty full on Tues, Wed and Thur. But that's clearly not the case. Wednesday was considered our first "core day" and most of the time, I'd say at least 80% of the people are there. But on the other 2 days, its MAYBE 60%...often less. As someone who has one of the longest commute in the office, I certainly feel like a sucker when I wake up at 6AM to get there onto to find out that nearly half my colleagues couldn't be bothered to do so.

Everyone is still pushing back and top performers are going to get away with it. (They're still getting their stuff done). But it snowballs quickly. If the A/B team players aren't coming in, the lower level performers dont see the point either. Everyone is still seeing what they can get away with and with hiring being so tough in my industry right now....nobody is getting fired unless they're absolutely incompetent. They dont want to create even more openings.


There are a couple of AVP level people who are being threatened with having their office taken away (since they're only coming in one time a week). And we're moving to a new space that I'm sure will have a lot fewer assigned space at the end of next year. I could see that being a tipping point for sure.

 

[The General]

More like Quitter aimirite?

The litter of quitters at Twitter are becoming quite bitter.

Perhaps a baby sitter would have been a good fit fer the billionaire who flushed his cash down the ****ter.

He's saving approximately $1.5m a minute in salary.

If he fired or everyone quit he can run the company for free.

 

[SWC]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

do you have an inside source or work for twitter brohan take that to the bank

 

[sho nuff]

It's 2022. The pandemic started in 2020. We have gobs of experience with working in offices and very little experience with working from home. So I'm extremely skeptical of broad, sweeping generalizations about how people are "archaic" for preferring work arrangements that were functioning pretty well until two years ago.

Because WFH is so new, we haven't really had a chance to explore how WFH affects things like work-life balance. Obviously this isn't the case for everyone, but for me personally, I am done for the day when I leave the office. I almost never take work home. I respond to email pretty much 24/7, but that's it. Having experienced both, I very strongly prefer the office. It's nice knowing that I can always keep things going from my living room if I'm feeling a little under the weather or something, but I'm positive I would not want that to be my default workday.

And I say that as somebody who is allowed to do his job with (almost) nobody looking over his shoulder. Lots of workers in lots of jobs need supervision. That's not because the boss is tyrannical or paranoid or weak. Human beings have slacked off at their jobs since the dawn of time, and we all hang out here as a form of work avoidance so we're no exception. For me, working from home is fairly pleasant. It wouldn't be pleasant if somebody from IT was checking my keystrokes, or they made me put a camera on my machine to verify that I was actually in front of my screen and not just cooking or watching television. I'm okay with certain "invasions of privacy" in my workplace but would not be at all okay with those exact same measures being imposed on my home office.

And that's just one dimension of this whole discussion. This is one of those topics that I think really separates the people who have heard of Chesterton's fence from the people who haven't.

But I don't think WFH is that new. Full time, and everyone doing it? Yeah...but its been a thing for quite some time having people telecommute a few days a week.
Forcing them not only to come back...but also, hey, lets double the hours...not sure I would call it archaic, but don't think its a sound strategy either at the moment.

 

[sho nuff]

WFH is definitely here to stay but I do think companies need a balance.

I believe Musk went to so hard on the in person working in order to weed out people that didn't work and didn't want to work for him. Probably close to 80% of twitters staff was dead weight costing the company billions in salary.

What is this percentage based on?

 

[The Commish]

It's 2022. The pandemic started in 2020. We have gobs of experience with working in offices and very little experience with working from home. So I'm extremely skeptical of broad, sweeping generalizations about how people are "archaic" for preferring work arrangements that were functioning pretty well until two years ago.

Because WFH is so new, we haven't really had a chance to explore how WFH affects things like work-life balance. Obviously this isn't the case for everyone, but for me personally, I am done for the day when I leave the office. I almost never take work home. I respond to email pretty much 24/7, but that's it. Having experienced both, I very strongly prefer the office. It's nice knowing that I can always keep things going from my living room if I'm feeling a little under the weather or something, but I'm positive I would not want that to be my default workday.

And I say that as somebody who is allowed to do his job with (almost) nobody looking over his shoulder. Lots of workers in lots of jobs need supervision. That's not because the boss is tyrannical or paranoid or weak. Human beings have slacked off at their jobs since the dawn of time, and we all hang out here as a form of work avoidance so we're no exception. For me, working from home is fairly pleasant. It wouldn't be pleasant if somebody from IT was checking my keystrokes, or they made me put a camera on my machine to verify that I was actually in front of my screen and not just cooking or watching television. I'm okay with certain "invasions of privacy" in my workplace but would not be at all okay with those exact same measures being imposed on my home office.

And that's just one dimension of this whole discussion. This is one of those topics that I think really separates the people who have heard of Chesterton's fence from the people who haven't.

WFH has been a thing since the early 2000s in tech anyway...the bold statements don't really apply to this particular industry. I understand it might be new for a great many, but it's not new for the tech industry. Yes, even in the tech industry there are still some dino types who can't get beyond the status quo of the 40-50 years prior, but there aren't many left. The pandemic just forced the consideration to other industries.

 

[uwillbsoon]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

So why did he change his stance on work from home? Why did he have meetings with some engineers to convince them to stay?

That may have been the case for the first cuts. It certainly wasn't for this mass quit.

It was a mistake, plain and simple. He came in heavy handed and it backfired.

He'll certainly survive, but a certain type of employee is going to basically not be interested in working for him based on his behavior. And he's going to blow through more money. I saw an estimate that his severance costs are going to exceed 100 million.

Didn't have to be this way. I've heard Bezos was very similar in demanding a lot from employees. Difference being he didn't do it publicly.

 

[massraider]

Always a good idea to cut the dead weight. When did he evaluate the 7,000 people to figure out who was dead weight?


That's rhetorical. I know the answer.

 

[The General]

If the office is closed for the next few days aren’t people who are keeping things running working from home?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

you will find out that twitter did not need nearly the # of employees they had

the truth is, most companies probably don't.

 

[Insein]

WFH is definitely here to stay but I do think companies need a balance.

I believe Musk went to so hard on the in person working in order to weed out people that didn't work and didn't want to work for him. Probably close to 80% of twitters staff was dead weight costing the company billions in salary.

What is this percentage based on?

He just laid off 75% of the company and it's still running fine. Their average salary I had thought was $85k. Turns out it was closer to $120k.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

WFH is definitely here to stay but I do think companies need a balance.

I believe Musk went to so hard on the in person working in order to weed out people that didn't work and didn't want to work for him. Probably close to 80% of twitters staff was dead weight costing the company billions in salary.

What is this percentage based on?

He just laid off 75% of the company and it's still running fine. Their average salary I had thought was $85k. Turns out it was closer to $120k.

It's going to run beautifully until they run into an issue. Or until the 50% of people that stayed realize that they are working twice as hard and decide to leave. Do more with less is not popular.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

This. In some places/industries the pendulum has swung towards workers having a lot more power. Companies that understand this and react to the market forces (capitalism!) will probably do a bit better than companies that fight it and try to hold the line.

 

[Insein]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

So why did he change his stance on work from home? Why did he have meetings with some engineers to convince them to stay?

That may have been the case for the first cuts. It certainly wasn't for this mass quit.

It was a mistake, plain and simple. He came in heavy handed and it backfired.

He'll certainly survive, but a certain type of employee is going to basically not be interested in working for him based on his behavior. And he's going to blow through more money. I saw an estimate that his severance costs are going to exceed 100 million.

Didn't have to be this way. I've heard Bezos was very similar in demanding a lot from employees. Difference being he didn't do it publicly.

Bezos just laid off 11000 people. Zuckerberg 10000. This is the state of the tech world.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

you will find out that twitter did not need nearly the # of employees they had

the truth is, most companies probably don't.

The cool thing about this is that we're going to get to see who's right.

I mentioned earlier in the thread that I was fairly confident that Twitter would be better off if it fired the right 20% or so of its workforce. Lots of modern organizations are in that boat -- they're bloated with a very specific type of person who is more interested in being the main character of their own private sweeping drama than just doing their job.

However, there's a big difference between getting rid of 20% of your workforce and getting rid of 90% of your workforce. I would not expect most firms to be able to function, like at all, if they lost that many workers. I feel like I'm going to learn something interesting about tech companies one way or the other over the next few days.

 

[uwillbsoon]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

So why did he change his stance on work from home? Why did he have meetings with some engineers to convince them to stay?

That may have been the case for the first cuts. It certainly wasn't for this mass quit.

It was a mistake, plain and simple. He came in heavy handed and it backfired.

He'll certainly survive, but a certain type of employee is going to basically not be interested in working for him based on his behavior. And he's going to blow through more money. I saw an estimate that his severance costs are going to exceed 100 million.

Didn't have to be this way. I've heard Bezos was very similar in demanding a lot from employees. Difference being he didn't do it publicly. Hired

Bezos just laid off 11000 people. Zuckerberg 10000. This is the state of the tech world.

Bezos is no longer leading Amazon.

To put that in perspective, I believe the Facebook cut was less than 1/4 of the folks they'd hired since the pandemic started.

They over hired for their metaverse project. Not their core products.

Amazon hired because of the pandemic increased demand.

This is entirely different. Again, Twitter was losing money before (though I believe as recently as 2020 they were profitable. So they had a path there). Musk poured gasoline on that because the leveraged buyout added over $1 billion in debt service annually.

This wasn't a "damn, these employees are lazy, I need to fire them" act. This was a "damn, we're losing 3x what we were losing before I bought the company and employees and hosting costs are the primary expenses" act. Advertisers pulling out because of musk's dumb statements and botched Blue rollout contributed a revenue decline, too.

He wouldn't have had to cut so deep without overpaying for the company, too.

 

[The General]

WFH is definitely here to stay but I do think companies need a balance.

I believe Musk went to so hard on the in person working in order to weed out people that didn't work and didn't want to work for him. Probably close to 80% of twitters staff was dead weight costing the company billions in salary.

What is this percentage based on?

He just laid off 75% of the company and it's still running fine. Their average salary I had thought was $85k. Turns out it was closer to $120k.

Many of these are still being paid for 3 months so not saving much til that lapses and they don’t fill those positions. if they fill them before than they are paying double.

I’m sure there was dead weight like any place. People working there just have to pickup more work which probably kind of sucks.

 

[Buckna]

The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days.

It isn't just the younger crowd. Nobody is interested in working in a cube

Add in that a lot of companies have redone offices so people don’t have their own cubes any more. But shared spaces or have to reserve spaces when they do go in. My wife’s office did this. Prior to covid she was working 2 days a week at home. Even before sending everyone home they had a plan to reconfigure office space like that. So now if she goes in, she reserves space…doesn’t have her same monitor set up…obviously nothing personal in any cube space and so on. She hates going in as often she is on the phone to other offices in the US and in other countries that is a pain if having to share space.

Yeah - My work did away with offices just about completely — went to open floor plan. Same issue with phone calls. They set up tiny phone booths to take calls, but no one wants to sit in there all day, and makes it impossible to both see screen for video call as well as open up documents that may be talking about. Better set up at home than work.

About 6 months before COVID my company did the same, moved us to a newly built out floor with few offices and nearly everyone in cubes. Shared spaces for a handful of conference rooms you had to book ahead of time competing with other business lines on the floor and 2 or 3 little one person like "phone-call cubbies" for privacy that you could still hear peoples conversations. Very modern white and gray with "modern business art" on the walls and with open air little couches and tables to do brainstorming sessions together as well that no one ever used. All recommended by the latest trends in corporate properties promoting "teamwork" and "efficiency." Everyone predictably hated it.

Thank goodness that company sold my business line during COVID. We are now full-time work from home with our new company. The old one started making people go into the office early this year. They would have lost half my team at least had they forced us to go back in, myself included.

 

[Sammy3469]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

So why did he change his stance on work from home? Why did he have meetings with some engineers to convince them to stay?

That may have been the case for the first cuts. It certainly wasn't for this mass quit.

It was a mistake, plain and simple. He came in heavy handed and it backfired.

He'll certainly survive, but a certain type of employee is going to basically not be interested in working for him based on his behavior. And he's going to blow through more money. I saw an estimate that his severance costs are going to exceed 100 million.

Didn't have to be this way. I've heard Bezos was very similar in demanding a lot from employees. Difference being he didn't do it publicly.

Bezos just laid off 11000 people. Zuckerberg 10000. This is the state of the tech world.

That's not core computer engineers though.

 

[the moops]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

So why did he change his stance on work from home? Why did he have meetings with some engineers to convince them to stay?

That may have been the case for the first cuts. It certainly wasn't for this mass quit.

It was a mistake, plain and simple. He came in heavy handed and it backfired.

He'll certainly survive, but a certain type of employee is going to basically not be interested in working for him based on his behavior. And he's going to blow through more money. I saw an estimate that his severance costs are going to exceed 100 million.

Didn't have to be this way. I've heard Bezos was very similar in demanding a lot from employees. Difference being he didn't do it publicly.

Bezos just laid off 11000 people. Zuckerberg 10000. This is the state of the tech world.

That 10,000 is only one percent of Amazons employees though.

 

[jobarules]

My company (very large financial services firm) has been a 3/2 hybrid schedule for over a year now. Back at the start of the year, upper management assured us that it would be the norm for the foreseeable future. A few weeks ago, the company's #3 guy did a town hall and recommitted to that. But at the same time, he (while treading very lightly) also stressed that it was very clear that a big chunk of the employee base is NOT living up to our end of the bargain. I'm sure they have actual data on that (via key card swipes) but from my perspective, its pretty obvious.

I work in NYC 2 days a week (another office the 3rd day) . Nobody commutes in on Monday or Friday. So the assumption is that the office will be pretty full on Tues, Wed and Thur. But that's clearly not the case. Wednesday was considered our first "core day" and most of the time, I'd say at least 80% of the people are there. But on the other 2 days, its MAYBE 60%...often less. As someone who has one of the longest commute in the office, I certainly feel like a sucker when I wake up at 6AM to get there onto to find out that nearly half my colleagues couldn't be bothered to do so.

Everyone is still pushing back and top performers are going to get away with it. (They're still getting their stuff done). But it snowballs quickly. If the A/B team players aren't coming in, the lower level performers dont see the point either. Everyone is still seeing what they can get away with and with hiring being so tough in my industry right now....nobody is getting fired unless they're absolutely incompetent. They dont want to create even more openings.


There are a couple of AVP level people who are being threatened with having their office taken away (since they're only coming in one time a week). And we're moving to a new space that I'm sure will have a lot fewer assigned space at the end of next year. I could see that being a tipping point for sure.

We went back to hybrid (2-3 days in office) in September. Ive been in the office 2 times since then. Nobody follows it and nobody seems to care.

 

[massraider]

We went back to hybrid (2-3 days in office) in September. Ive been in the office 2 times since then. Nobody follows it and nobody seems to care

That's not very hardcore bro.
Maybe slam a Mt Dew and snap into a Slim Jim and step up your game.

 

[Battersbox]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

So why did he change his stance on work from home? Why did he have meetings with some engineers to convince them to stay?

That may have been the case for the first cuts. It certainly wasn't for this mass quit.

It was a mistake, plain and simple. He came in heavy handed and it backfired.

He'll certainly survive, but a certain type of employee is going to basically not be interested in working for him based on his behavior. And he's going to blow through more money. I saw an estimate that his severance costs are going to exceed 100 million.

Didn't have to be this way. I've heard Bezos was very similar in demanding a lot from employees. Difference being he didn't do it publicly. Hired

Bezos just laid off 11000 people. Zuckerberg 10000. This is the state of the tech world.

Bezos is no longer leading Amazon.

To put that in perspective, I believe the Facebook cut was less than 1/4 of the folks they'd hired since the pandemic started.

They over hired for their metaverse project. Not their core products.

Amazon hired because of the pandemic increased demand.

This is entirely different. Again, Twitter was losing money before (though I believe as recently as 2020 they were profitable. So they had a path there). Musk poured gasoline on that because the leveraged buyout added over $1 billion in debt service annually.

This wasn't a "damn, these employees are lazy, I need to fire them" act. This was a "damn, we're losing 3x what we were losing before I bought the company and employees and hosting costs are the primary expenses" act. Advertisers pulling out because of musk's dumb statements and botched Blue rollout contributed a revenue decline, too.

He wouldn't have had to cut so deep without overpaying for the company, too.

Twitter had been consistently profitable since roughly late 2016. There were a couple quarters they reported small losses since then, but the company was definitely profitable up until this chaotic year. With that said, they never had the types of profit margins many thought they should have had over the past several years. It's no secret that many thought management there did a terrible job on behalf of shareholders for a long, long time.

 

[The General]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

So why did he change his stance on work from home? Why did he have meetings with some engineers to convince them to stay?

That may have been the case for the first cuts. It certainly wasn't for this mass quit.

It was a mistake, plain and simple. He came in heavy handed and it backfired.

He'll certainly survive, but a certain type of employee is going to basically not be interested in working for him based on his behavior. And he's going to blow through more money. I saw an estimate that his severance costs are going to exceed 100 million.

Didn't have to be this way. I've heard Bezos was very similar in demanding a lot from employees. Difference being he didn't do it publicly. Hired

Bezos just laid off 11000 people. Zuckerberg 10000. This is the state of the tech world.

Bezos is no longer leading Amazon.

To put that in perspective, I believe the Facebook cut was less than 1/4 of the folks they'd hired since the pandemic started.

They over hired for their metaverse project. Not their core products.

Amazon hired because of the pandemic increased demand.

This is entirely different. Again, Twitter was losing money before (though I believe as recently as 2020 they were profitable. So they had a path there). Musk poured gasoline on that because the leveraged buyout added over $1 billion in debt service annually.

This wasn't a "damn, these employees are lazy, I need to fire them" act. This was a "damn, we're losing 3x what we were losing before I bought the company and employees and hosting costs are the primary expenses" act. Advertisers pulling out because of musk's dumb statements and botched Blue rollout contributed a revenue decline, too.

He wouldn't have had to cut so deep without overpaying for the company, too.

Twitter had been consistently profitable since roughly late 2016. There were a couple quarters they reported small losses since then, but the company was definitely profitable up until this chaotic year. With that said, they never had the types of profit margins many thought they should have had over the past several years. It's no secret that many thought management there did a terrible job on behalf of shareholders for a long, long time.

Is this right? I thought they had a couple profitable years and the rest were loses.

 

[Battersbox]

It’s interesting that a lot of guys in here are calling Musk archaic because he is trying to get people back into the office. And its understandable - we are a bunch of old farts with long careers and wives and families and all these responsibilities.

But I can tell you, I know a handful of recently graduated college kids who WANT some kind of office experience. That is where they meet people, actually learn their jobs, go out for beers with their colleagues….etc….

I know some kids who have turned down full work from home jobs because they want to meet people and be around like minded workers.

They are young and are just starting their lives. Don’t assume that concept is so archaic. And as these covid kids grow up who were isolated for two years, they are going to need that office experience. They are going to need to be around people.

Now, I know for some jobs working at home is much better for them, and Musk should be flexible of course. But I can see a shift BACK to the office environment for these young workers who need that kind of thing.

On the WFH stuff I find a ton of different arguments. I personally find the argument "you are more productive when you're in the office" and/or "you need to be in the office so I can keep an eye on you" which Musk is making to be archaic for certain. That sort of black/white thinking is very archaic IMO. Of course WFH is not for everyone nor can everyone do it well. That's different than the construct itself being archaic. I don't think that's been said. A TON of people had their eyes opened to what I've known for 20 years. WFH is going to become a benefit of employment at some point. It will be valued/factored differently from one person to the next for sure.

I agree with you. We're dreading the WFH movement from the opposite end of the spectrum. Certain positions and jobs will never be able to work from home and we've already lost good people to those WFH jobs and it's starting to limit the candidate pool. Our people with experience are leaving for it because it's something new that fits their schedules better. The younger crowd seems much less interested in cubical working these days. It's really limiting the candidate pool and what we're viewing as an acceptable new hire.

We make our own problem worse with a lack of accountability because there is a fear we can't hire someone better. Hopefully this trend reverses, but we've been hurting for several years now.

Pandemic realizations are going to have a meaningful impact on a lot of industries IMO. You give a really good example of what I'm talking about. It's my guess that some will want to have a job where this sort of thing is an option and not all jobs can be done this way. It's likely going to create shortages in those areas not unlike the push when I was a kid where the only "successful" people in life were "college educated". Look what that did to our trade industries. There are going to be similar impacts to industries where WFH isn't an option IMO.

Yup. So industries/positions that require working in the office may have to find other ways to attract good employees. Higher pay, better benefits packages, bonuses, etc, may be required. The problem is that upper management/clients are very slow to understand this. Rather than quickly adapt and realize that you’re going to have to pay 20% more to retain and gain good employees, they resist it because “that’s not what we pay those positions” and so those workers go find other jobs where they can work from home or go somewhere else that adapts quicker and increases compensation.

That’s one thing that Musk really doesn’t seem to understand. He’s treating his employees like they’re a tech startup with his demands to work “extreme”, only he’s not providing them with the equity bonuses that employees working extreme hours at startups typically get. Yeah, a lot of the workers are compensated well, but most of them can find similar jobs fairly easily without having to work “ExTReME” hours/conditions.

That's what he's hoping for. He's weeding out the people that aren't onboard with the new plan but were "quiet quitting" and just collecting their check while doing nothing.

So why did he change his stance on work from home? Why did he have meetings with some engineers to convince them to stay?

That may have been the case for the first cuts. It certainly wasn't for this mass quit.

It was a mistake, plain and simple. He came in heavy handed and it backfired.

He'll certainly survive, but a certain type of employee is going to basically not be interested in working for him based on his behavior. And he's going to blow through more money. I saw an estimate that his severance costs are going to exceed 100 million.

Didn't have to be this way. I've heard Bezos was very similar in demanding a lot from employees. Difference being he didn't do it publicly. Hired

Bezos just laid off 11000 people. Zuckerberg 10000. This is the state of the tech world.

Bezos is no longer leading Amazon.

To put that in perspective, I believe the Facebook cut was less than 1/4 of the folks they'd hired since the pandemic started.

They over hired for their metaverse project. Not their core products.

Amazon hired because of the pandemic increased demand.

This is entirely different. Again, Twitter was losing money before (though I believe as recently as 2020 they were profitable. So they had a path there). Musk poured gasoline on that because the leveraged buyout added over $1 billion in debt service annually.

This wasn't a "damn, these employees are lazy, I need to fire them" act. This was a "damn, we're losing 3x what we were losing before I bought the company and employees and hosting costs are the primary expenses" act. Advertisers pulling out because of musk's dumb statements and botched Blue rollout contributed a revenue decline, too.

He wouldn't have had to cut so deep without overpaying for the company, too.

Twitter had been consistently profitable since roughly late 2016. There were a couple quarters they reported small losses since then, but the company was definitely profitable up until this chaotic year. With that said, they never had the types of profit margins many thought they should have had over the past several years. It's no secret that many thought management there did a terrible job on behalf of shareholders for a long, long time.

Is this right? I thought they had a couple profitable years and the rest were loses.

Yes. I was a stockholder for most of Twitter's existence.

07/22/2022	Q2 22	06/22		-0.375​
04/28/2022	Q1 22	03/22		-0.325​
02/10/2022	Q4 21	12/21		0.192​
10/26/2021	Q3 21	09/21		0.064​
07/22/2021	Q2 21	06/21		0.031​
04/29/2021	Q1 21	03/21		0.08​
02/09/2021	Q4 20	12/20		0.27​
10/29/2020	Q3 20	09/20		0.037​
07/23/2020	Q2 20	06/20		-0.417​
04/30/2020	Q1 20	03/20		-0.005​
02/06/2020	Q4 19	12/19		0.15​
10/24/2019	Q3 19	09/19		0.05​
07/26/2019	Q2 19	06/19		0.037​
04/23/2019	Q1 19	03/19		0.25​
02/07/2019	Q4 18	12/18		0.333​
10/25/2018	Q3 18	09/18		0.139​
07/27/2018	Q2 18	06/18		0.131​
04/25/2018	Q1 18	03/18		0.079​
02/08/2018	Q4 17	12/17		0.088​
10/26/2017	Q3 17	09/17		-0.022​

 

[Battersbox]

That's from Bloomberg. Sorry if the formatting is trash.

 

[Scoresman]

It's 2022. The pandemic started in 2020. We have gobs of experience with working in offices and very little experience with working from home. So I'm extremely skeptical of broad, sweeping generalizations about how people are "archaic" for preferring work arrangements that were functioning pretty well until two years ago.

Because WFH is so new, we haven't really had a chance to explore how WFH affects things like work-life balance. Obviously this isn't the case for everyone, but for me personally, I am done for the day when I leave the office. I almost never take work home. I respond to email pretty much 24/7, but that's it. Having experienced both, I very strongly prefer the office. It's nice knowing that I can always keep things going from my living room if I'm feeling a little under the weather or something, but I'm positive I would not want that to be my default workday.

And I say that as somebody who is allowed to do his job with (almost) nobody looking over his shoulder. Lots of workers in lots of jobs need supervision. That's not because the boss is tyrannical or paranoid or weak. Human beings have slacked off at their jobs since the dawn of time, and we all hang out here as a form of work avoidance so we're no exception. For me, working from home is fairly pleasant. It wouldn't be pleasant if somebody from IT was checking my keystrokes, or they made me put a camera on my machine to verify that I was actually in front of my screen and not just cooking or watching television. I'm okay with certain "invasions of privacy" in my workplace but would not be at all okay with those exact same measures being imposed on my home office.

And that's just one dimension of this whole discussion. This is one of those topics that I think really separates the people who have heard of Chesterton's fence from the people who haven't.

Almost three years WFH is plenty of time to determine whether it's detrimental/beneficial to a business. Everyone I know is working from home right now for a multitude of different companies and they all are doing just fine. At this point, if your business is suffering because of remote work, you need to look at who you hired and maybe other internal company policies, not the concept of remote work.

The days of spending hours commuting should be over. People are now realizing it is completely unnecessary. In my case, our client is talking about turning one of their massive parking lots into another fab facility. For every Elon Musk, there are others embracing the change. So yeah, I feel like the concept of needing to be in the office is quickly becoming "archaic", and rightly so.

At this point if companies want people in the office, we should be demanding that the commute costs be covered by the company, including time spent in the car as part of the 8 hour work day.

 

[The General]

That's from Bloomberg. Sorry if the formatting is trash.

I guess what I had read was some parsing of the terms or something. Thought it was they very rarely had profitable years something like 2 in their existence or something.

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

Musk's missteps have been so over-the-top, the outcome so predictable and counter to the Bay Area's, never mind the country's (newfound), work culture, I can't help but think about whether any of this is intentional. Burn it all to the ground. Expensive endeavor, obviously.

I'm leaning toward this outcome being a combination of Musk's "neurodiversity" and his ego, which has probably reached Midas touch levels and is distant from reality at times.

It's been one bad idea after another.

 

[sho nuff]

WFH is definitely here to stay but I do think companies need a balance.

I believe Musk went to so hard on the in person working in order to weed out people that didn't work and didn't want to work for him. Probably close to 80% of twitters staff was dead weight costing the company billions in salary.

What is this percentage based on?

He just laid off 75% of the company and it's still running fine. Their average salary I had thought was $85k. Turns out it was closer to $120k.

The company is still running fine? Not sure I can agree there.

 

[RCon]

That's from Bloomberg. Sorry if the formatting is trash.

Just an FYI: On a laptop as opposed to a phone, and the formatting looks perfect to me.

 

[krista4]

I've worked remotely since 2013 when I went into my current job. Our team is all over the country, with many people having been WFH for years before I joined. Several years ago, I presented to a group of HR professionals (outside my company) on the positives and negatives of remote work. At the time, I found a 2014 Stanford study that showed, at least in the company they studied, that people were actually more productive in WFH. This is not a new phenomenon. Given the discussion here, I decided to find that study for you, but first came across this update from Stanford. Original study can be found here. All interesting stuff, if a little off-topic from the Twitter debacle.

 

[Desert_Power]

Musk's missteps have been so over-the-top, the outcome so predictable and counter to the Bay Area's, never mind the country's (newfound), work culture, I can't help but think about whether any of this is intentional. Burn it all to the ground. Expensive endeavor, obviously.

Probably wasn't this way initially. However, this half-cocked deal he ended up being forced to complete is very bad. Twitter is going to bleed a lot more of his cash to pay bondholders if it does not go under quickly.

 

[Desert_Power]

StockMKTNewz - Evan
@StockMKTNewz

Elon Musk just said this in an email to Twitter employees - Platformer "Anyone who can actually write software, please report to the 10th floor at 2pm today. Before doing so, please email me a bullet point summary of what your code commits have achieved in the past 6 months"

 

[GroveDiesel]

StockMKTNewz - Evan
@StockMKTNewz

Elon Musk just said this in an email to Twitter employees - Platformer "Anyone who can actually write software, please report to the 10th floor at 2pm today. Before doing so, please email me a bullet point summary of what your code commits have achieved in the past 6 months"

Well, this and the report that everyone is locked out until Monday can’t possibly both be true. So one of them is fake. Guessing it’s the report that everyone was being locked out as there would be plenty of confirmation of that by now.

 

[uwillbsoon]

StockMKTNewz - Evan
@StockMKTNewz

Elon Musk just said this in an email to Twitter employees - Platformer "Anyone who can actually write software, please report to the 10th floor at 2pm today. Before doing so, please email me a bullet point summary of what your code commits have achieved in the past 6 months"

Also wants screenshots of "salient lines of code" .

https://twitter.com/CaseyNewton/status/1593651264419684359?t=tEh_OPIOW6KoIs5q8zulRQ&s=19

 

[uwillbsoon]

StockMKTNewz - Evan
@StockMKTNewz

Elon Musk just said this in an email to Twitter employees - Platformer "Anyone who can actually write software, please report to the 10th floor at 2pm today. Before doing so, please email me a bullet point summary of what your code commits have achieved in the past 6 months"

Well, this and the report that everyone is locked out until Monday can’t possibly both be true. So one of them is fake. Guessing it’s the report that everyone was being locked out as there would be plenty of confirmation of that by now.

The Platformer has been pretty reliable to date.

 

[GroveDiesel]

StockMKTNewz - Evan
@StockMKTNewz

Elon Musk just said this in an email to Twitter employees - Platformer "Anyone who can actually write software, please report to the 10th floor at 2pm today. Before doing so, please email me a bullet point summary of what your code commits have achieved in the past 6 months"

Well, this and the report that everyone is locked out until Monday can’t possibly both be true. So one of them is fake. Guessing it’s the report that everyone was being locked out as there would be plenty of confirmation of that by now.

The Platformer has been pretty reliable to date.

Yeah, the “lock everyone out” thing seemed a bit fishy. This would seem to confirm that.

Or not. Didn’t realize the person reporting that was also from Platformer. According to her, employees are now really confused since they were told they could not access the buildings.

Should be interesting how this plays out. I guess if you’re ExTReMe enough you find a way up to the 10th floor.

 

[Juxtatarot]

StockMKTNewz - Evan
@StockMKTNewz

Elon Musk just said this in an email to Twitter employees - Platformer "Anyone who can actually write software, please report to the 10th floor at 2pm today. Before doing so, please email me a bullet point summary of what your code commits have achieved in the past 6 months"

Well, this and the report that everyone is locked out until Monday can’t possibly both be true. So one of them is fake. Guessing it’s the report that everyone was being locked out as there would be plenty of confirmation of that by now.

Or Musk changed his mind. Or he told employees something that wasn’t true.

 

[Desert_Power]

StockMKTNewz - Evan
@StockMKTNewz

Elon Musk just said this in an email to Twitter employees - Platformer "Anyone who can actually write software, please report to the 10th floor at 2pm today. Before doing so, please email me a bullet point summary of what your code commits have achieved in the past 6 months"

Well, this and the report that everyone is locked out until Monday can’t possibly both be true. So one of them is fake. Guessing it’s the report that everyone was being locked out as there would be plenty of confirmation of that by now.

The Platformer has been pretty reliable to date.

Yeah, the “lock everyone out” thing seemed a bit fishy. This would seem to confirm that.

Or not. Didn’t realize the person reporting that was also from Platformer. According to her, employees are now really confused since they were told they could not access the buildings.

Should be interesting how this plays out. I guess if you’re ExTReMe enough you find a way up to the 10th floor.

The fog of war of this is going to be elevated because a) Twitter/Musk do not have an actual comms team and b) it is playing out on a social media platform instead of behind closed doors.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I guess if you’re ExTReMe enough you find a way up to the 10th floor.

Live look at Twitter HQ.

 

[BlackCrowes]

I still remember my BASIC. Might apply.

 

[massraider]

I guess if you’re ExTReMe enough you find a way up to the 10th floor.

Base jump from Golden Gate Bridge?