- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:29 am to RedRifle
Good for him.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:30 am to RedRifle
I don't care how late I am to this party, it is never going to not be funny to me how the cucks on this site root for the CEO.
You get paid for the value you bring to a company, not for where you live. If a company thought you were worth 250k in nyc, you are worth 250k anywhere.
You get paid for the value you bring to a company, not for where you live. If a company thought you were worth 250k in nyc, you are worth 250k anywhere.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:31 am to Mo Jeaux
Then surely someone as successful and intelligent as yourself can recognize that the majority of people who are paid for their time instead of their production are lying their arse off when they say they are just as useful at home? Which I would assume applies to most people who are having the decision whether to WFH or in the office made for them.
A lot of 3+ syllable words in there so let me know if you need help with anything.
A lot of 3+ syllable words in there so let me know if you need help with anything.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:31 am to RedRifle
The amount of entitlement in this thread is unreal.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:33 am to Team Vote
People need to be paid off their production. This is something I get into it with others on when comparing my role to the compliance tax people that just crank hours. my billing hours are likely lower than them but every engagement I touch smashes their revenue by some insane multiplier.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:34 am to Big4SALTbro
quote:
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.
Can’t disagree with any of this, hybrid seems like the win-win.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:37 am to Team Vote
For the hybrid to work though you have to have people buying in that the company is giving you flex work schedule, but your younger employees need you in to help them. The companies that have the right hungry people in sr roles can really vault up.
I think companies that go 100 percent back in are going to have fire sale employees leaving and that could really halt production.
Those fully remote will have huge gaps in the pipe between higher up and new hires.
its going to interesting watching it all unfold
I think companies that go 100 percent back in are going to have fire sale employees leaving and that could really halt production.
Those fully remote will have huge gaps in the pipe between higher up and new hires.
its going to interesting watching it all unfold
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:38 am to RedRifle
Precedent has been set. It absolutely too dangerous to work away from the safety of one’s home.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:39 am to dandyjohn
quote:
You get paid for the value you bring to a company, not for where you live.
While I don't disagree, you bring more value if they pay you less. If they can pay the other guy who lives in the cheaper area less, they will. It's also arguable that someone who is line of sight is going to work more efficiently than someone on their couch in their pajamas with their Netflix a click away.
The gauntlet is being thrown down and the question is only how will people respond.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:39 am to Vood
quote:Is working from home entitlement?
The amount of entitlement in this thread is unreal.
ETA: do you think a company is doing you a favor by giving you a job?
This post was edited on 6/16/21 at 11:40 am
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:42 am to Big4SALTbro
No doubt, I work for a very large private company that is going back 100% by the time school starts. I have no doubt that people are going to leave but I’m equally confident they will be replaced by the very large feeder school we have here in town. I’m not dumb enough to say what works one place will work everywhere. But anyone who has tried to buy a house in any southern city worth a shite in the last year will tell you everyone in the country working from home is not a good idea
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:54 am to Powerman
The banks aren’t recruiting those people.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:55 am to RedRifle
quote:
We do our work inside Morgan Stanley offices, and that’s where we teach
Where did you work and teach during the pandemic?
Posted on 6/16/21 at 11:58 am to Team Vote
I honestly think it will be a lose lose situation for both sides.
Employers who require everyone to come back and work in the office 100% of the time are flat out going to lose people. Some of them will be the highest performers who always have options and will be hard to replace.
On the other hand, as others have mentioned, employees who have a hard line on 100% remote work might leave those jobs in haste. They then might find out that it will be harder to find 100% remote work than they thought. The high performers will be okay but the non-high performers might just end up in another job that is 100% in the office or hybrid and they might even take a pay cut. Never mind the period of adjusting to a new company and not knowing if they'll like the company or not.
I think it will be incredibly important for both sides to work together. Both companies that are set on 100% in person and employees that are set on 100% remote work will end up hurt IMO. The best route is probably some sort of hybrid schedule (2 days in office, 3 days home. 3 days in office, 2 days home. Work from home but available to come in for meetings and other work functions as needed).
I will say I think it's going to be interesting to see if employees call the Morgan Stanley CEO's bluff. I think as long as you are performing well Remote Work/Work From Home should be allowed. I also have no problem with the company adjusting pay to your new location. I just wonder if the CEO will honor what he said to or if it's just a threat to try to get people back to NYC.
Employers who require everyone to come back and work in the office 100% of the time are flat out going to lose people. Some of them will be the highest performers who always have options and will be hard to replace.
On the other hand, as others have mentioned, employees who have a hard line on 100% remote work might leave those jobs in haste. They then might find out that it will be harder to find 100% remote work than they thought. The high performers will be okay but the non-high performers might just end up in another job that is 100% in the office or hybrid and they might even take a pay cut. Never mind the period of adjusting to a new company and not knowing if they'll like the company or not.
I think it will be incredibly important for both sides to work together. Both companies that are set on 100% in person and employees that are set on 100% remote work will end up hurt IMO. The best route is probably some sort of hybrid schedule (2 days in office, 3 days home. 3 days in office, 2 days home. Work from home but available to come in for meetings and other work functions as needed).
I will say I think it's going to be interesting to see if employees call the Morgan Stanley CEO's bluff. I think as long as you are performing well Remote Work/Work From Home should be allowed. I also have no problem with the company adjusting pay to your new location. I just wonder if the CEO will honor what he said to or if it's just a threat to try to get people back to NYC.
This post was edited on 6/16/21 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 6/16/21 at 12:00 pm to Team Vote
quote:
hybrid seems like the win-win.
Completely agree
Posted on 6/16/21 at 12:11 pm to 75247
quote:
Employers who require everyone to come back and work in the office 100% of the time are flat out going to lose people. Some of them will be the highest performers who always have options and will be hard to replace.
I disagree based on the fact that high performers are going to get What they want or they’ll find a job that does. That’s nothing new or unique to this situation. If you’re a top hand, you’re gonna get
Job offers. And your employer will match/beat those offers or you’ll walk. If you don’t walk, your reasons for staying aren’t work related and WFH is moot.
The employees are going to lose on this cause so many of them think they are entitled to what the high performers or higher ups get. And that simply isn’t true in most cases. They’ve been thrust into an anomaly and now think it’s normal. Their refusal to acknowledge the anomaly will cause them to insist on maintaining the status quo and they’re gonna be canned. It’s gonna be a day of reckoning for a workforce that thinks it’s far more valuable than it really is.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 12:12 pm to 75247
quote:
I will say I think it's going to be interesting to see if employees call the Morgan Stanley CEO's bluff. I think as long as you are performing well Remote Work/Work From Home should be allowed. I also have no problem with the company adjusting pay to your new location. I just wonder if the CEO will honor what he said to or if it's just a threat to try to get people back to NYC.
It would be surprising to me if these major Wall Street firms had much trouble filling holes with people who are ok being in the office 100% of the time. But less prestigious companies could certainly put themselves in a bind if they are too rigid.
This post was edited on 6/16/21 at 12:14 pm
Posted on 6/16/21 at 12:16 pm to Team Vote
quote:It's right tail risk for every company; the only people who are in jeopardy of leaving are the highest performing employees with the most leverage. The fewer concessions you make, the lower the average quality of employee. The prestige and competition for jobs can make it less of an issue for some than others, but there are still a ton of people willing to tell the MS, GS, BAMLs of the world to frick off.
It would be surprising to me if these major Wall Street firms had much trouble filling holes with people who are ok being in the office 100% of the time. But less prestigious companies would certainly put themselves in a bind if they are too rigid.
XOM just lost 2 huge blocks of their highest margin traders, bc they were offering fewer benefits + flexibility than others. They won't be able to backfill those with comparable talent.
This post was edited on 6/16/21 at 12:18 pm
Posted on 6/16/21 at 12:20 pm to Team Vote
I think what will hurt them is yes they might have a feeder school but we all know being great in school isn't the same as having real live work experience. If enough high earners leave then a company is really hurt because the pipe line could have a massive gap.
When your pipeline has a massive gap you either have to pay above normal pay to get the holes filled or try to promote people faster, which you still up somewhat thin.
The other problem with having to fill too many spots with overpaid experience workers is then you risk losing your top performers if they get wind what someone is making. So you could give your top people raises and the flex stuff.
I think you start hybrid and you pull the right away from low performers.
When your pipeline has a massive gap you either have to pay above normal pay to get the holes filled or try to promote people faster, which you still up somewhat thin.
The other problem with having to fill too many spots with overpaid experience workers is then you risk losing your top performers if they get wind what someone is making. So you could give your top people raises and the flex stuff.
I think you start hybrid and you pull the right away from low performers.
Page 11 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News