pull down to refresh

So you wanted a job with Amazon, or some other big company. You finally got the job and then a scamdemic unfolds and you get to work at the house. You still buy groceries, go to Home Depot and buy mulch, have friends over, go to the bank, go to the bar and get hammered and you've even figured out how to pretend to work as long as you use the talking points of ESG to get paid. Now that pesky business wants you to return to the office and get things done more efficiently because the boss isn't stupid.

CNBC WRITES:
Amazon CEO Andy Jassy denied speculation that the company's five-day in-office mandate was made to further reduce head count or appease city officials.
"A number of people I've seen theorize that the reason we were doing this is a backdoor layoff or we made some sort of deal with the city, or cities, and that's why we were having people come back and be together more often," Jassy said at an all-hands meeting Tuesday, according to remarks obtained by CNBC. "I can tell you both of those are not true."
this territory is moderated
Did you know that a sizable portion of Federal employees work from home? (I've heard up to 20%).
One of the ways they are thinking engage in Federal "Workforce Reduction" is simply to declare that everyone needs appear to office for normal workday.
reply
ERS's and NIFA's workforce size and productivity temporarily declined following the agencies' 2019 relocation from offices in Washington, D.C., to Kansas City, Missouri. Coinciding with the loss of staff in fiscal years 2019 and 2020
decline in the number of employees in certain protected groups persisted. For example, the proportion of Black or African American staff at NIFA declined from 47 percent to 19 percent.
reply
Definitely, one of the best suggestions of draining the swamp would simply to move agency HQs out of DC.
I think this would also have the salutory effect of attracting less people who are in it for the power and prestige (and thus want to be in DC, near power brokers), and attract more people who are actually competent and want to do the job.
See also: #756327
reply
You know that in our profession there's a pretty strong correlation between status obsession and technical competence. My guess is that there would be a permanent reduction in competence.
Who cares, though? It's not like most of that work is valuable.
reply
Good point. At the lower levels, recent grad and early/mid career levels, I would definitely agree. Not as sure about leadership levels though.
reply
I only know a few older government economists and their competence level is frankly an embarrassment to the profession.
reply
I'm just catching back up here.
A government economists seems like an oxymoron and I'm sure it is.
I think the best government employees are Park Rangers. And guess where they have to work?
reply
Most economists work for the government. It's not ideal.
This would be very difficult to do and the government would be on the hook for the relocation costs of everyone who doesn't live near the office.
You're probably right that the savings from people quitting would more than make up for that extra cost, though.
reply
50 sats \ 2 replies \ @freetx 9 Nov
government would be on the hook for the relocation costs
Good point. Maybe just make them sit on permanent Zoom call all day with each other. Absences from webcam for more than 20 mins is a write-up.
reply
Best of both worlds
reply
Rubber rooms like the ones they have for NYC public school teachers who are suspended with pay
reply
paying for relocation cost is still worth it
reply