this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
167 points (80.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
869 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Some things that would make me consider it:
If every single one of these things were implemented I would then still probably leave the place for another WFH job if we didn't use our new ownership powers to revert back to WFH immediately.
Youd give up ownership of the company and extremely employee focused culture, guaranteed favourable yearly increases, as well as the company paying for you to get personal stuff done professionally in order to stay working from home?
This sounds incredibly reactionary and illogical.
I say at the end that we'd probably immediately use those powers to revert back to better working conditions (WFH).
I can't see any scenario where this doesn't happen immediately and was mostly just riffing at the absurdity of thinking companies would implement these things (outside of maybe free lunches) in order to empower labor (to the company's shareholders' detriment) willingly.