re: Morgan Stanley CEO to bankers: If you want NYC salary, you need to be in NYC

Fwiw, my company is going to a hybrid schedule which will be... interesting. You will only have to come in 2-3 days of the week into the office and WFH the other days. I guess that’s a concession?

quote:

---

NYC salary isn’t enough to deal with NYC shenanigans. A lot of people are realizing that getting 75% of the salary/benefits is worth it when you deal with only 10% of the bullshite.

---

i dont think he is taking about only a 25% reduction....more like 60%

quote:

---

But the general trend I see is that the folks who say “I don’t need to be at the office to do my job” are disenchanted/jaded with their jobs in general or are the type who severely overestimate their capabilities/value/work ethic.

---

The majority of the people in my department who might say that would be lying their asses off, no two ways about it. For every person who is as productive at home, there are five going 50% capacity or worse. The outsourcing comment was spot on too. If you can do a job in NY from Nashville, someone from Delhi or Manila can do it for even less. Nobody is irreplaceable.

ETA my expectation is that majority WFH culture, like every other proposed huge paradigm shift we’ve had during covid, is going to frick us all with unintended consequences. Especially those advocating the loudest for it.

quote:

---

ETA my expectation is that majority WFH culture, like every other proposed huge paradigm shift we’ve had during covid, is going to frick us all with unintended consequences. Especially those advocating the loudest for it.

---

Translation:

quote:

---

I'm a middle office manager who doesn't really produce anything meaningful in my job, and I'm scared that if most people WFH and their productivity can be monitored by other means, I will be out of a job.

---

quote:

---

Everything is black and white with you isn’t it. No shade of gray, no nuance.

---

My post was commensurate with the post to which I was responding. That other post just happened to be something with which you agree, so you don't want to call that one out.

I would like to see a little more working from offices vs WFH. However, I admit it is purely for selfish reasons because I am retired and want less weekday congestion.

I actually disagree here.

If im in the office I spend a good bit of time building relationships, taking pop in questions and such but also work stuff.

If im at home, I'm shaving an hour or so off my drive, I check emails earlier, work earlier and longer hours even after hours. If I'm in the office when I leave unless its something important im not getting back on at home.

The answer here is a hybrid schedule. I feel like 3-4 days in the office with a floating remote day is a good balance.

The old crotched CEO is correct on the new person needing to be in the office and for them to really learn you need the next level and up to be in as well. Its a balancing act though, you let your upper level people time coming in with the new hires, you still get them trained and you still give them flexibility.

I think any company that does 100 remote or in office is making a big mistake, the winner will be firms with hybrid models. Its hard to put the cat back in the bag.

I wouldn't want 100 percent remote unless I was a partner just because I feel like that freezes movement.

quote:

---

Translation of your translation

quote:
I’ve been jerking off and playing video games for the last 15 months and I don’t want to have to leave my house. If some people are able to perform their role at home, that means everyone in the US is.

---

I'm on pace for 2200 billable hours this year. I had over 2000 billable hours last year. My realization for this year is likely going to be my best ever.

Nice try though. You're probably the type of person that I need to take care of my admin tasks, so it probably is better that you're in the office.

I would venture to guess the average American spends 40 hours a month commuting and getting ready for work if they have to come in. you lose a quarter of possible production by having to go in every single day. If you stayed remote you get more time back even if people don't spend every minute working.

I'm interested to see how 100 percent back in company places handle the initial wave of people leaving for hybrid and remote spots. If operations grind to so much of a halt that big customers leave they will have to fix it.

I wouldn't want someone in India dealing with my account. they don't do things in a timely fashion and the miss easy shite.

Sure maybe some things can be, but financial and accounting probably is much better staying in house.

I also didn't say we should train people remote. New hires and training or best learned in person. Its a balancing act for a company, your older vets can probably stay home and cruise, but you lose the pipeline when you have to hire new people. I would probably be like half as good at my job if I had to start full remote vs my learning in office.

I look at this as a chance for those that are selfless to move up quick because if you can be in and help the young people it really lets you show off.

The main issue though with off shoring for accounting and the Big 4 and every other firm has ran into this is the off shoring company can not do it as well as in house. Its such a gulp in quality that I wouldn't trust them with any client worth a frick.

FWIW I firmly believe every one is actually replaceable at a company, some easier than others. Some people may take longer if they leave vs us others.

I'm hugely on the hybrid wagon because I like being in office and building relationships, careers are always made after 5:00 pm in the office vs working from home. I also understand that for me to be the head of what I do I need a pipeline under me and they won't be as good fully remote. so I sacrifice and come in to make sure they are up to speed and get what I got.