Blizzard developers say return-to-office policy 'cost us some amazing people'

https://www.pcgamer.com/blizzard-developers-say-mandatory-return-to-office-policy-has-cost-us-some-amazing-people/

by ahiknsr • 3 years ago

284 348 3 years ago

pcgamer.com

ungawatkt• 3 years ago

Just read the Kotaku article it links to, PC gamer isn't adding anything that I see.

https://kotaku.com/blizzard-diablo-iv-world-warcraft-remote-...

gumballindie3• 3 years ago

Any manager asking for return to office should be sacked. Usually thats a sign of incompetence.

lisasays4• 3 years ago

No, they should be educated. Heaven forbid you or I should be fired for the occasional mistake, or lopsided opinion.

dymk8• 3 years ago

Executives aren’t making these decisions, from the very top, uneducated about what they’re doing

ilyt3• 3 years ago

They should start with educating them how to manage remote/hybrid environment, because that's the most likely reason for their opinion.

I've worked in all ranges from fully on-site to fully remote and it's all in organization and workflow and I can absolutely see some manager seeing drop in productivity when trying to pretend no changes are needed to be made for remote work.

gumballindie3• 3 years ago

This is one of those types of “mistakes” that cost people’s mental health, family life, damage the environment and cost their employer talent.

_cenw• 3 years ago

As usual, extrovert/control freak manager egos triumph over supposedly ideal market forces.

draw_down• 3 years ago

DE&I also means diversity of thought, especially when it's backed by data and financials.

No it doesn’t. Don’t get me wrong, that would be nice and all, but that isn’t the point of DEI.

gnicholas3• 3 years ago

Where is this quote from? I don't see it in the article, or in other comments here.

SketchySeaBeast4• 3 years ago

It's funny to see this considering that, for WoW at least, it seems that pandemic and WFH helped them create the best expansion since 2016. The last two expansions had worse design and systems than their latest. I personally think the only reason WoW hasn't caught on again is that BfA / Shadowlands killed enthusiasm for the game.

blibble• 3 years ago

I personally think the only reason WoW hasn't caught on again is that BfA / Shadowlands killed enthusiasm for the game.

as a former WoW player (since beta!)

we're all wise to the situation that if Blizzard gets its userbase back it will return to its previous abusive ways

its reputation is unsalvageable

SketchySeaBeast4• 3 years ago

I too have played since beta. But yeah, I'm wary of that and ready to head for the door if that happens, but I just resubbed a bit to enjoy 10.1. I'll play for a month and then disappear until new content drops again. It's not going to my forever game anymore, but when it's good it'll get a month or two out of me.

jandrese• 3 years ago

I personally think Blizzard's fate was sealed when they were bought by Activision. Big corporate overlords can never keep their mitts off of successful subsidiaries for too long.

foobarian• 3 years ago

Come to think of it Diablo 4 too is shaping up to be the best Diablo since D2 days.

adra2• 3 years ago

There was only one game in between. The number of viable titles in this genre are looking almost as bad as RTS which has also taken a big tumblr on popularity over the years. The question will stand if D4 will be able to engage the hardcores more than POE and still be able to attract normals enough to stick around and spend the big money. Time will tell.

cragfar• 3 years ago

WFH also had their first delayed expansion (understandable since Covid) and easily the worst content patch cycle it's ever seen.

SketchySeaBeast4• 3 years ago

True, but I don't know if that actually disproves my point. They stumbled at first but after a few years of WFH they are backing firing on all cylinders, better than they were before COVID. They proved it could work.

pierat3• 3 years ago

It's worth noting that the mandatory office attendance doesn't apply to ABK's executives. Recently hired execs like Chief Administrative Officer Brian Bulatao, and Chief Communications Officer Lulu Cheng Meservey, have full-time remote status.

Basically, if we want these rights of remote work, we're going to have to unionize and fight for them.

The elites already have this right.

The lines are being drawn. Fight or acquiesce.

vasco6• 3 years ago

Or you know, you can quit and go to a full-remote company. Good companies need good people so this would fix itself. If most of my colleagues and the owners of the company I work for decide they prefer to work in an office, why would I enforce my will upon them, instead of finding people that agree with me? I quit my last job to work fully remote and my boss knows I'd quit the day we'd remove that.

ausbah2• 3 years ago

If most of my colleagues and the owners of the company I work for decide they prefer to work in an office, why would I enforce my will upon them

but this isn't the case, it's management making BS decisions no one really likes. the market is in favor of capital & management in the current market climate so collective action is the only way to push back imo

dymk8• 3 years ago

A tragedy of the commons has never been solved without centralized organization, and the “but the market will fix it!” responses are frankly just boring now

cratermoon• 3 years ago

go to a full-remote company

How many stories have we seen now where employers have reneged on their fully remote forever policies?

surgical_fire3• 3 years ago

Why not both?

user68858788• 3 years ago

Blizzard took surveys that showed the majority want permanent remote.

darth_avocado2• 3 years ago

At this point it’s almost sad that we can say “the market will fix itself” and give up any conversations about improving situations. Market only fixes itself if the power dynamics are the same on both sides, which are not. “Go to a full remote company” only works for you ironically is because not enough people are doing it. Say only 20 jobs in the market offered remote work and there were 2000 people looking for remote work, would you say “just quit if you don’t like it” work as you’re suggesting? Because remember, companies can hire a replacement but you can’t find another job.

Ironically, quit if you don’t like it only works at scale if there is collective action. And collective action is hard if you’re doing it on your own, separately from everyone else.

TheSoftwareGuy• 3 years ago

Quitting simply has much higher frictional costs as an employee than as an employer. As a result employers will always have more leverage, including your next employer.

yamtaddle• 3 years ago

Could do that, or could unionize.

If most of my colleagues and the owners of the company I work for decide they prefer to work in an office

If most of your colleagues prefer the office, I assume your union wouldn't push for mandatory WFH.

As for the owners—well, reducing the effect of their preferences on the experience of workers is the point of a union.

monero-xmr• 3 years ago

Just in case mass unionization of the tech industry fails, you can always find a new job.

rabuse• 3 years ago

Employees are part of the market dynamics. We choose where to work, and we vote with our employers.

ausbah2• 3 years ago

this assumes there's always an alternative employer who offers remote work as an option. tech is pretty privileged as a field bc demand > supply for a very long time affording many benefits other fields don't have. now that demand has decreased, companies can affront more control. could easily see remote work become incredibly scared as middle / small companies following signals of larger companies mandating rto

toxik• 3 years ago

In theory yes, in practice, the market produces ugly effects all the time. Child labor, for example. But I suppose you vote with your wallet or something.

asynchronous• 3 years ago

Thank you for pointing out that this whole RTO movement still doesn’t apply to the elites.

hef19898• 3 years ago

One of the benfits of some union-negotiated frame agreememts in Germany, which applies also to non-Union and covers saleries up to low six-figuers, is stuff like 2 days of work-from-home per week.

lnsru• 3 years ago

I work for fully unionized company in Germany. Even salary comes from union’s table. You vote, elect your representatives. And you know, the bosses come, have meeting with union representatives and layoff happens. Apparently both sides agree, that this measure was needed to keep business running. The there is another meeting and full return to the office happens. There is no miracle in an union.

krainboltgreene8• 3 years ago

Yes but a union allows you to come back later and point to the lack of improvement or change as a reason to return to WFH.

A non-union workforce has no such bargaining chip.

pydry2• 3 years ago

Sounds like a company union.

ipaddr2• 3 years ago

A German union would behave differently from a North American one. Less co-operation, more hostile.

vasco6• 3 years ago

What sometimes is forgotten is that when someone says "power to the people", they actually just mean, "power to this other person", because end of the day, not all workers are walking into a room and shouting, so your biggest power as an individual is always going to be who you choose to work for and what crap you choose to take before you walk out.

fnordpiglet2• 3 years ago

It’s a market for both corporate success and talent. My wager is that companies that optimize for how people want to work and letting them work best will be structurally advantaged in both profit and talent acquisition and retention. Once the emotions die down and boards realize they can boost EPS by reducing real estate and their competitors with open working arrangements are eating their lunch in their markets the corporate provided management mandated human hamster wheel warehouses will be shut down.

CamperBob2• 3 years ago

Yes, let me give up even MORE personal and professional autonomy. I'm sure that joining a union will help me accomplish my career goals as a remote developer.

ribosometronome• 3 years ago

unionize

Interestingly, the people you name specifically don't want you to do that. For example, Lulu Cheng Meservey: https://kotaku.com/call-duty-mwii-activision-union-busting-l...

granshaw• 3 years ago

Wow mandating RTO while the very top executives still fulltime WFH is French-revolution-era-monarchy-levels “asking for it”

sirmike_• 3 years ago

No thanks. Remote work is not a life or death working issue to galvanize the need for a union. It would be interesting to see what a "perfect Storm' would look like to make a technology workers union make sense in the real world (in the US).

On paper a union kinda makes sense until you see your union dues going to support batshit candidates for office. Here in the US virtually all unions support left leaning policies and the democrat party. Time and again the democrat party claims one thing and does another. Like the backstabbing the Biden administration did to Railroad workers. They did not settle that in workers best interests. They solved it to prevent economic disruption.

I would rather negotiate my own salary needs than leave it to a union.

Technology workers make tremendous amounts of money once you hit middle to senior level career stages. Even more so if you have a specialty. No way would folks given up that level of autonomy.

It is simple enough that the remote work issue is settled through the job market. If a company advertises for only onsite work, they have that choice. Likewise me as a worker can exclusively look for remote work. Despite this economy, the technology worker still dictates the terms. For now. I am sure it will go in cycles like everything else.

ghusto2• 3 years ago

They hinted that this was a way to downsize, and it doesn't seem implausible. There's no severance pay if you quit.

ncallaway• 3 years ago

The problem is taking away benefits as a way to downside ensures that the people _most able_ to secure those benefits from other companies will leave.

If your goal is to ensure that you're getting rid of your top talent, it's a fine strategy.

ikiris• 3 years ago

They're the ones that usually cost money so it can often be the target audience.

ilyt3• 3 years ago

But it's super effective, the people that cost you the most leave without severance!

tomtheelder3• 3 years ago

taking away benefits

It’s not that simple. For folks who prefer remote, remote is a benefit. For folks who prefer an in office work style, remote being an option is an “anti” benefit since it totally kills the value of in person work.

You’re going to lose top talent either way. The last org I worked at went remote and lost a bunch of high performers to places that were in office.

I ended up leaving for unrelated reasons. It seems like things ended up totally stabilizing and now they are in a happy state of remote culture, but it absolutely cost them along the way.

shagie• 3 years ago

ensures that the people _most able_ to secure those benefits from other companies will leave

This is the start of the Dead Sea Effect as described in http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/11/the-wetware-crisis-the-d...

(posted many times) https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=brucefwebster.com

The most interesting discussion is likely https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23166786 from May 13, 2020 with 127 points and 128 comments)

onlyrealcuzzo2• 3 years ago

If your goal is to ensure that you're getting rid of your top talent, it's a fine strategy.

Usually, you're not going to fire your top talent over corporate policy for the plebs. You're going to bend the rules.

If the company isn't bending for you, you might not be top talent - and more like just slightly above average talent - in which case, yeah, the company doesn't really care about you.

And if you really are top talent, you're not concerned if your company doesn't bend. You can go anywhere. Who cares?

hablog2• 3 years ago

Can't you just count a change like this as constructive termination and demand severance anyway?

sosodev2• 3 years ago

If you say "I refuse to return to the office but will keep working from home" are you quitting or is the company firing you?

intrasight• 3 years ago

That is the key question. I expect that the EEOC and the courts will have the final say.

vanviegen3• 3 years ago

I guess that depends on what it says in your contract. If you were hired pre-covid, you can probably be expected to show up at the office.

Jare• 3 years ago

That can probably be described as gross misconduct or insubordination, and be used as a valid reason for immediate dismissal with no benefits. Then you'd have to argue that the company's demand was not reasonable, and then it sounds like you're pretty much in the same place as if you argued constructive dismissal to begin with. I have no idea if they're legally or practically equivalent.

unity10012• 3 years ago

That would be dumb - now not only they are losing talent, but they are also marking themselves as 'no go' for such talent by shutting off remote work. In future they could have to work as hard as Microsoft to change that reputation like how Microsoft had to work hard to change their reputation about Open Source software. (and still couldnt actually manage to do that).

krainboltgreene8• 3 years ago

This is like pruning a forest by firing a flare deep in the center. It's an uncontrolled burn.

neovialogistics• 3 years ago

Long term staff retention really seems to pay off in the entertainment industry. Nintendo, Valve, FX, NBC, off the top of my head. Not sure how viable it is for smaller companies.

foota• 3 years ago

Small indie companies can't be expected to retain employees :-)

lisasays4• 3 years ago

That's the stereotype. Fortunately counterexamples abound, and they are some of the best companies to work for.

consumer451• 3 years ago

It now seems a bit obvious that this type of policy will lead to the best performers flying the coup, as they are the ones most likely to be in a position to dictate the terms of their employment.

tomtheelder3• 3 years ago

The last org I worked at went remote during the pandemic, and lost a big chunk of top performers because of it. They went to companies with the sort of vibrant office that my org had prior to the pandemic.

It’s a lose-lose. And hybrid isn’t a solution at all; it’s a bad outcome for both sides.

Over time things are just going to settle into remote orgs and in person orgs, and all that’s happening now is that companies are deciding which side of the fence to come down on. Either choice hurts in the short term.

Suppafly3• 3 years ago

You've repeated a few times that the top performers left because of WFH, but I don't believe you. Unless you're in some weird industry where top performers love vibrant offices (which don't really exist) this seems made up.

ilyt3• 3 years ago

At this point MS/Actiblizzard falling thru would be a blessing in disguise for MS

andrewdubinsky• 3 years ago

RTO has simply become a structural disadvantage. Companies that cannot manage remote teams simply won't be able to attract top talent.

Even if 80% of companies RTO the remaining 20% that recruit remote-only jobs will create massive disruption in top performers. HR has their head in the sand because so many companies are either freezing hiring or reducing headcount, but there's a real issue here. Talented people just don't need to consider onsite work, period.

The only way you work onsite is you are inexperienced or you don't have another job. Maybe you want a big name on your resume. Either way those are jobs that will need to be filled again.

In this article, they state openly that Blizzard is managing a crisis to ship multiple products. The cost of a failed product release outstrips their lease cost by orders of magnitude. I don't get the play here. What's the outlook on the next release cycle without talent?

xiphias2• 3 years ago

Case-by-case (what Google / OpenAI does) where top talent is identified and allowed WFH may outcompete both full-remote and both no-wfh companies (no-wfh is over at this point).

It's a nice dream to have everyone wfh, but most people may not have that leverage / experience.

dymk8• 3 years ago

That’s what a union is for

ecshafer• 3 years ago

Case by case wfh doesn't work as well as all remote. Missing out on key decisions because you weren't there is a big risk, as is falling behind on camaraderie.

johndhi• 3 years ago

So everyone knows you aren't "top talent" when they see you in person? Ouch.

makestuff• 3 years ago

I have a feeling that will produce some discrimination lawsuits.

AzzieElbab4• 3 years ago

It is not just about teams and people. It is political - cities are struggling when people do not come to work, and it is financial - many companies have taken loans putting the real estate they own as collateral; if commercial real estate devalues, these companies are facing margin calls.

rocgf2• 3 years ago

Yes, but this is like the opposite of a tragedy of the commons scenario. Are you saying the companies do this in order to save the cities and real estate prices? That's likely not even a small factor at the bottom of the list.

harshalizee• 3 years ago

Real estate is an investment. All investment vehicles comes with a potential for profit and risk of loss. They should have done their homework.

dv_dt2• 3 years ago

My experience is that companies almost never own their own buildings - at most they may have a long term lease, and even then long term is maybe 5 years.

akomtu• 3 years ago

I bet that many of the execs and board members have ties to commerce around offices: the overpriced rental complexes, restaurants, cafes and so on. Who wouldn't want to pay employees and simultaneously set the rent prices where those employees have to live?

JohnMakin2• 3 years ago

The only way you work onsite is you are inexperienced or you don't have another job.

Or you are in the subset of people that prefer working in-office. They aren't nonexistent, although that's frequently assumed on this site.

slipperlobster2• 3 years ago

I assume the statement was geared towards those who do not prefer working in-office. No need to force RTO for those willing to (or already did) return to the office.

nkellenicki• 3 years ago

They're not non-existent, I work with a few myself. But generally I've found that they're single, live by themselves, and enjoy the social interactions of meeting coworkers in person. (Of course, there will be exceptions to this).

tivert2• 3 years ago

Or you are in the subset of people that prefer working in-office. They aren't nonexistent, although that's frequently assumed on this site.

And who don't work for an employer who, simultaneous with RTO, is working to make in-office work a shit experience.

Hot-desking* in an open-office space, while you Zoom with your remote teammates based in a different office? WHO WOULDN'T WANT THAT?

* Now euphemized as "hoteling."

I actually like working in-office, but FFS, at least give me a cube with some storage, open desktop space, 3 or 4 walls that are taller than I am when sitting (and preferably when standing) that's in the same building with my team.

jvanderbot• 3 years ago

I love working on site. I wish my preferred employers would pick up and move to my comfortable suburb near my family and friends. They won't. Why did we ever allow that to become choice and why did we ever create a culture where the "obvious" answer was to move away for decades?

I'm glad I left to get world class experience, and I'm glad I'm back to stay.

So I expect young people will do what I did and move on site.

manuelabeledo2• 3 years ago

They aren't nonexistent, although that's frequently assumed on this site.

It seems to me that those who want to return to offices are a bit like the target market for the iPhone Mini: a very vocal minority.

And they are a minority indeed [0]. In fact, if the average HN poster was a white male, the RTO crowd would be overrepresented and thus it would explain that, in each one of these debates, there is always a good bunch claiming that in person office work is great.

[0] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-post-pandemic-offic...

kodah• 3 years ago

I actually like working in an office sometimes, but if you mandate it to me I'll never show up and eventually quit.

pmarreck2• 3 years ago

I'm one of those who are most certainly more productive in-office (learned the hard way and the soft way via various work experiences). The reasons don't matter, but we are a significant minority.

The problem is that you can't have a discriminatory work policy. If for example you make a rule that "if you are considered productive, you can work more days from home; if you are considered to be becoming less productive, then you must come to the office more," then a few things happen, first and foremost being that people who are visibly in the office more are perceived as slackers, which can be a self-fulfilling belief, and the people who are out of the office more are "primadonnas" or "boss bootlickers". All of this creating more tension, as the "productive mostly from-home'ers" are also less likely to get promoted, etc. Basically there are a bunch of knock-on effects from treating employees differently in this capacity.

I have a friend who had hard data showing he was more productive when he was WFH and he still ended up having to RTO after covid lockdowns. I'm sure this wasn't a decision made lightly by management.

There's always the option of finding a 100% WFH company where they basically don't hire (or end up retaining) anyone with any ADHD =) and where those highly self-disciplined folks can go to thrive. But a large company like Blizzard won't be it.

I almost want to apologize to the people who are more productive when 100% WFH for having to comply with RTO policies for the sake of people like me. People like me are grateful for your sacrifice.

mellosouls• 3 years ago

Yeah that line was a bit of a daft generalisation not helping the rest of the argument. Different strokes for different folks, and there are definitely strengths to on site that full time remote can't match (remote has its own strengths), especially team cohesion - or we might as well all be off shore contractors.

felipellrocha• 3 years ago

Thank you. It feels like nowadays everyone assumes that remote work is a worker's right, when I couldn't think of a worst future for myself.

birdyrooster• 3 years ago

Yeah I liked the office when I actually had an office but during Covid they got us out of our offices and when we returned put us in cube farms. It sucks ass.

BluePen7• 3 years ago

I actually kinda liked it.

The issue is the cost of getting to work, and even to live near work.

Just getting to work is a significant expense, parking, having a vehicle that's good enough to commute in, insured for commuting, and always repaired before the next weekday, it adds up.

When the pandemic kicked off WFH, I suddenly found myself with an extra $10,000 or so in my pocket each year.

Then I moved away from work, which allowed me to go from renter to homeowner (with rental income that helped me get approved). My monthly COL is lower, and between paying my mortgage and home appreciation, I've accumulated $300,000-$400,000 in equity over 4 years.

Back in town, I'd still be a renter hopelessly saving up for an apartment with maybe 10-20% of my current net worth.

tldr: My office was actually pretty nice, but not having to physically live near or get to it, has put me in a dramatically higher socio-economic class.

krainboltgreene8• 3 years ago

HR has their head in the sand

I promise you no one in HR wants this once people told them that. This is entirely pursued by majority shareholders and C-level.

Suppafly3• 3 years ago

I don't know, I work tangentially with a lot of HR people and they always seem to get excited about projects that the regular workers are guaranteed to hate. I think HR people are just wired differently.

ninjagoo• 3 years ago

Second. Our HR recruiters told me they could fill my open positions yesterday if it wasn't for the RTO requirement.

shmatt• 3 years ago

There might be a slight disadvantage in the "Got RSUs in the early 2010's" group but for everyone else money still talks.

A box full of cash will convince many to come to the office a couple of times a week. It's still very hard to get FAANG expensive-city level compensation with a true promise that you will still be fully remote 1 year from now.

For the companies trying to pay startup wages plus demand in office, that will end badly

RangerScience• 3 years ago

IANAL / California-centric -

There's a legal employment concept called "quit for cause", it's kind of the inverse of "fire for cause". In CA (and very much IANAL), if your contract is for remote work and you are required to RTO, that'd qualify as "cause". AFAICT you can tie this to other things, like "I can quit and keep the signing bonus", "I can quit and get my first year's stock", things like that - at least on a legal level. Negotiating that in (and enforcing it) are other questions.

keneda7• 3 years ago

>In this article, they state openly that Blizzard is managing a crisis to ship multiple products. The cost of a failed product release outstrips their lease cost by orders of magnitude. I don't get the play here. What's the outlook on the next release cycle without talent?

One employee (who does not want to work in the office) claims return to work is the cause without providing any evidence. I would be very wary of drawing the conclusions you are. For all we know they are in crisis because their employees are producing 10x less when working from home versus when they are in the office.

Animats4• 3 years ago

>In this article, they state openly that Blizzard is managing a crisis to ship multiple products.

Blizzard's chief operating officer, the person whose job is to avoid such crises, quit/was fired when Microsoft acquired Blizzard. He went to Yuga Labs, the Bored Ape Yacht Club people. That may be part of why Blizzard is in trouble.

etempleton• 3 years ago

I have to agree.

Remote introduces some challenges to be sure, but you gain access to such a wider pool of talent and it is such an employee benefit.

If you want the best talent you probably need to offer remote work or be ready to pay double because it is worth that much to most people. I would not hate the idea of working in an office a few days a week again, but the only way I am even going to consider relocating is for, at minimum, double my current salary and some kind of contract with guarantees.

Reason0773• 3 years ago

"I don't get the play here. What's the outlook on the next release cycle without talent?"

Devil's advocate: maybe it's a low-cost way to avoid layoffs? As in "we'd like to reduce headcount, but layoffs are expensive and look bad. If we enforce RTO, a certain percentage of our less-dedicated employees will quit and we won't have to pay out severance etc..."

rfreiberger• 3 years ago

I believe this is the way many companies are going, even if they don't need to reduce the headcount, they can scoop up hungry workers cycling them out for average performers.

I keep sharing that many companies have not defined the remote policy. It's up in the air and they simply haven't said anything about not working remote. My fear is it will all end in two weeks, asking all non-dedicated full time remote workers to be in the office.

bb88• 3 years ago

Okay sure.

Now what happens when your company's processes require high performing people with experience that can't be hired just of the street? Or need several months to years worth of recruiting to replace?

Suppafly3• 3 years ago

I feel like vaccine mandates did something similar for companies, it helped them to remove the less intelligent employees. Sometimes it's better to convince the trash to take itself out.

imwillofficial• 3 years ago

This assumes RTO is a top motivator for the best.

I’ve seen no data to support that.

mortenjorck2• 3 years ago

RTO is fast becoming my last hope for employment. I used to imagine myself to be a member of that pool of “top talent,” but several grueling months of unsuccessful job searching have roundly dispelled any pretensions I might have had.

I hate to say it, but I have to recognize when I’m without leverage. I’ll absolutely go back to the office if it means I have a job.

tayo42• 3 years ago

If your judgement of your job finding ability and work quality is based off the last few months, I wouldn't be to hard on your self. It's tough for everyone right now.

brailsafe• 3 years ago

Gotta do what you gotta do, though the hiring game has been a farce for years and absolutely grueling. Getting a job is luck, and it's the most unlucky time to need one. I got laid off last month from a remote job and don't even believe there's a chance at even landing an in-office job anywhere for any company right now in tech. Might call up some moving companies and start doing that or random temp jobs for cash to pay bills.

Clubber2• 3 years ago

I hate to say it, but I have to recognize when I’m without leverage. I’ll absolutely go back to the office if it means I have a job.

I think this might be part of the strategy of the current layoffs, to kinda push the issue with economic force. Who knows?

several grueling months of unsuccessful job searching

Do you not have a network of people you can ask for work?

jdm2212• 3 years ago

RTO is a real disadvantage in hiring all the people who are posting on HN in the middle of the workday about RTO instead of, y'know, working.

throw9away62• 3 years ago

Those people are in The office butts in chairs

HeyLaughingBoy• 3 years ago

You honestly believe that we wouldn't be doing that if we were in the office?

RestlessMind6• 3 years ago

Companies that cannot manage remote teams simply won't be able to attract top talent.
The only way you work onsite is you are inexperienced or you don't have another job.

Speak for yourself. Among the engineers I know who are "top talent", many of them prefer hybrid while small fractions prefer either fully-remote or fully-office setup.

kayson• 3 years ago

What is their policy? Full time in-office?

gautamdivgi• 3 years ago

Is RTO being driven by the government? There suddenly seems to be huge push this year and not much in 2022. Allegedly commercial real estate is something that many banks have exposure to and will not be solved unless RTO is implemented. This is just my hypothesis and obviously correlation isn't causation.

hemloc_io• 3 years ago

I don't think it's totally driven by the govt, but it's driven by the companies that want to preserve certain benefits and influence in the govt.

Their interests just happen to be against, literally everyone else in terms of a full reversion.

mym1990• 3 years ago

There is certainly worry that as lease contracts expire, the combination of higher interest rates and vacant offices will create huge losses for real estate developers, and these can cause a cascading domino effect of further losses.

How the communication flows from the government or RE developers to executives is beyond my understanding, but it looks like there is not much willingness to rethink how corporate office space can be used in other ways, and more willingness to just go back to the status quo.

sosodev2• 3 years ago

That's a silly reach. There are many factors but I doubt any of them is the government.

AbrahamParangi2• 3 years ago

This is a really interesting question to me because one can’t help but notice there are entities which are going to suffer immense pain if remote work continues.

Specifically, anyone holding the bag of commercial real estate - particularly in high CoL cities.

Edit: I strongly suspect there is a story here because if you happened to be holding that bag you would lobby, lie, cheat, steal, whatever you needed to do to try and get out from under that impending doom.

sitkack• 3 years ago

I have seen RTO being driven by the muni. There is an immediate risk for urban decay as all the secondary effects of thousands of people coming to place for 9+ hours a day disappear.

Lots of city tax revenue vanished when people stopped coming into work.

system16• 3 years ago

In Canada's capital Ottawa, this has been pushed for by the municipal government. Office workers downtown were what kept most of the overpriced, mediocre, restaurants, franchises and coffee shops afloat. These places are often the only convenient option for office workers. Nobody would ever go to these by choice - they are only ever open 9-5 Monday to Friday - so they needed the government to step in and force their customers back to the office.

chankstein382• 3 years ago

I don't know the way I see it some big companies decide to try it and every C-level that sees the article follows. Seems like that's more likely in my mind at least. There was a game about this for Amiga written in 1991.

jredwards2• 3 years ago

I think this is what's happening. It's just follow-the-leader. "Apple and Google are doing it, it must be a good idea." I've had no official internal justification.

snvzz• 3 years ago

There was a game about this for Amiga written in 1991.

Lots of games released that year. Link Hall Of Light[0] for the game?

0. http://hol.abime.net/

iamleppert• 3 years ago

Is he seriously tweeting about this? Basically that is insubordination and grounds for termination. If this manager doesn't agree with the company policy, and isn't willing to pick up the slack of workers who are leaving or who have left and maintain the release date of the product, he's going to be shown the door too. Spending time creating a map of who left isn't a good move either and is not going to give any excuses as to why work can't get done, especially if it wasn't asked for by senior leadership.

Every one is replaceable, including this manager who is questioning senior leadership. Complaining about it on Twitter isn't going to change anyone's mind who has made these decisions, it's just going to result in your own dismissal. It's a lot better to quiet quit and look for a new job if you feel your job has become impossible.

fnordpiglet2• 3 years ago

The only thing worse than overbearing nanny leadership that insists on controlling how and where people work is thin skinned leadership who can’t take “insubordination.”

I don’t think they’re intending to change their leaderships mind. But maybe the mind of other leaders less feckless.

int0x2e• 3 years ago

You're absolutely correct.

I really wish you weren't though - it makes me somewhat sad to see how often the more motivated and passionate a person is about what they do and even the success of their company, the more likely they are to eventually cross some political or etiquette boundary and end up paying for it.

carpet_wheel• 3 years ago

The rub for me is how you are expected to show all the signs of motivation/passion throughout your career to anyone above you in the hierarchy who asks, but are then (as you describe) inevitably punished for it if you accidentally take any of that motivation/passion to heart.

Motivation and passion are for the little people. They would do well to remember not to let their passions trick them into speaking out of turn.

NoMoreNicksLeft3• 3 years ago

Sometimes some people aren't replaceable. This is inconvenient. That it is inconvenient isn't the same thing as it being false. Claiming that everyone is replaceable won't make it true.

Companies that punish employees by termination not for insufficient productivity, but rather for differing opinions on how to run the company well eventually discover how bad of a mistake that turns out to be, even if they're no longer capable of recognizing said discovery.

borbulon• 3 years ago

if you can't figure out how to manage remote-only teams, then the problem isn't the workers, it's you.

redm• 3 years ago

I don't think this is a one-size fits all.

I've been WFM for 7 years now. I don't think RTO is a bad thing, but its all situational. How silo'd are projects and how much inter-team coordination do you need? How long is your commute? What kind of person are you (some people just work better in office environments)? Do you need physical access to equipment? The list goes on.

Being fully remote has allowed flexibility for team members to relocate without being forced to leave and thats been the biggest advantage. Going from a FTO to WFO or RTO is a big transition that requires re-defining workflows and communication mechanisms. Products like Zoom and Slack have made that far easier, but the bigger the organization, the harder the transition.

Personally, I miss having an office. I've lost human connection by being isolated at home that isn't replaced with normal social interactions. Maybe thats just older men not making time, but office space traditionally filled that role for me.

calvinmorrison• 3 years ago

I just don't see how people can be more productive at home, maybe if they work in isolation. But my experience is that a culture of very interactive programming with team members solves problems fast and you can make light year jumps. Taking a project from a week into a day with two hands on it. That kind of thing works great in person. And it doesn't just benefit junior devs, but also srs who collaborate better.

I think people are afraid of pair programming and it's very weird, as I love it. I do it a lot on zoom but it's not as good as in person.

markus_zhang2• 3 years ago

You can do pair programming on zoom too. Also maybe not everyone enjoys dealing with other people, especially nerds?

For me WFH is definitely more productive. For a start, I don't have to commune for 90 mins into office. If I RTO I'll politely remove all meetings from other time zones out of 9-5 because I need to catch a train or drive a car.

Also, by WFH I don't have people who happens to enjoy a lot of chatting and "collaboration in person" to suddenly appear in front of me and request a talk! God finally I can work.

reassembled• 3 years ago

My manager and I have been doing some pair programming in VSCode’s “multiplayer” mode (can’t remember what it’s called). The implementation is pretty well done.

yukinon• 3 years ago

I've done pair programming on specific projects throughout the years and I find it to be utterly exhausting. I would resign if my job required it.

I find myself more productive at home because there's often way too much office chit-chat between meetings that does nothing but serve to distract. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but there's an understanding among my hybrid team that if we need to get something done, we'll be WFH those days. Not to mention, I'm senior enough to always be in meetings and never program anymore, and for that I can do anywhere especially when the people I meet are in different parts of the world.

Corrado2• 3 years ago

I've been WFO for the last 3 years and I love it. However, one of my favorite work times was being in the office when I was younger. I think the difference might be that we had lots of stuff to do in the office. They had a great cafeteria and a pond to take walks around at lunch. There was free food (sometimes) and free soda (all the time) and they even had a parade every couple of weeks.

Some of my best memories, and most productive times, were when me and a couple of co-workers would walk down 5 flights of stairs to get some Dr. Pepper at 3:00 in the afternoon. It helped break up the day and get your brain juices flowing again. And the caffeine didn't hurt. It's kinda hard to get that when you WFH.

markus_zhang2• 3 years ago

My company is also forcing people to RTO even when there are multi hundreds of open opposition (and probably a thousand more silent opposition).

As the article suggests, top performers can pick jobs anywhere and anytime. Even a depression as bad as 1929 still maintains about 60% employment. RTO will just drive away two kinds of people: top performers who prefer remote work, and people who are OE. Even for the second group, they are still good performers as they can handle two jobs without being noticed.

Either way, only those inexperienced and coasting are going to stay. Good luck pushing out projects then.

elforce002• 3 years ago

I'd take a pay cut just to work from home.

cephei• 3 years ago

This may be more palatable for the company rather than calling the extra money for being in the office a "commute stipend", even though they are effectively the same.

chankstein382• 3 years ago

I'd love to see someone that C-levels would actually read write about this. None of them are checking PCGamer but this is a real problem, they read about trends and just follow them and I'd love to see some of them actually see what this is causing instead of just that everyone is doing it.

thr-nrg• 3 years ago

C level of a mid sized start up. Depends on the team. If you're doing js maintenance then I don't really care where you are. If you are developing new features I want you in an office at least two days a week with the rest of the team. Going off pointless tangents because you didn't understand the spec is something I'm seeing constantly regardless of seniority.

returnInfinity• 3 years ago

Startups that are born remote can disrupt existing businesses

That being said, I don't think its possible to start a remote manufacturing business/factory.

myth2018• 3 years ago

Bad for the companies which are not managing to make WFH to work.

It's surely not easy, though. It requires a number of skills on communication, organization (time management, adequate environment), and a good amount of discipline, both from managers and "managees". But I don't see companies trying to develop such critical competencies deliberately. They simply send people home and dream with the resulting cuts in costs -- at least that's my experience.

I've seen WFH working amazingly well in some places; working terribly in others; or even working well at the beginning and deteriorating after some time; and, in the cases where WFH worked well, that happened essentially out of luck.

Animats4• 3 years ago

Are the numbers of people in offices actually going up much? The company that runs cloud-based security gate systems said a few months back that the number of people badging in was below 50% of pre-pandemic levels. The commercial real estate market is tanking.[1]

We've passed "peak office". Between work from home and better AI, there's just no real need for about half of the US's office space. Tearing down suburban office buildings to build housing is now a thing. The office building itself now has negative value.[2]

It's even worse in retail. Shoppers are not returning to malls.

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/10/business/commercial-real-esta...

[2] https://www.loopnet.com/learn/deal-of-the-month-22m-office-t...

bombcar8• 3 years ago

Shoppers are not returning to malls.

About the only thing that malls had left going for them was trying on clothes; and a bunch of stores shuttered their dressing rooms during Covid and never re-opened them.

So why bother? Order online and return what don't fit, and stay away from the ghastly creepy malls.

kortex• 3 years ago

As a (former) mall rat in the lovely upstate NY, malls are great. You could go there and hang out with friends, maybe shop but usually not, socialize, people-watch, get a bite to eat. They are basically the "walkable town center" that suburban USA sorely lacks, and in the dead winter or scorching summer, are pretty awesome.

Hamuko2• 3 years ago

Order online and return what don't fit

I've seen speculation that free returns might not be as abundant as they have been in the past.

I personally dislike returning goods, so I'd rather go fit stuff at a mall when it's something that needs a good fit. Especially jeans, I apparently have a strange pelvis because I find it very hard to find comfortable jeans. But stuff like T-shirts and socks are pretty easy to order online.

AlexandrB2• 3 years ago

a bunch of stores shuttered their dressing rooms during Covid and never re-opened them.

That's interesting to hear. Places I shop in Canada have all re-opened their fitting rooms so maybe it's a regional decision?

toomuchtodo• 3 years ago

https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/5/15/23721410/return-to-...

no_wizard• 3 years ago

In the US there was a proposal that I saw that would have given tax credits to businesses that allowed WFH as the default if they were willing to allow their corporate real estate get turned into housing (which in addition to selling it would have netted another credit) and for builders to get some additional leverage to take over these estates and turning them homes and service businesses. It was projected in 3-5 years time not only would the labor market generally be more competitive it would alleviate a lot of housing issues (not all, but alot)

It was killed before it got to committee, and my second hand understanding is the Biden administration didn’t like it because it risked “possibly killing down towns across America”

We could’ve had it better, but we chose not to

Grit_Roller• 3 years ago

I’ve worked from home (WFH) since 2013. I’ve been a top performer so many different times I’ve lost count.

Each time I left an employer since I started- a basic requirement in my job search was -“remote”

Just as important as the job title and salary range.

I’ve managed remote teams myself and understand the unique challenges WFH can create - however, it is up to the company leadership to set clear expectations about what WFH looks like (and what it doesn’t).

Company’s mandating return to office failed in setting expectations and managing to them accordingly. Don’t blame the entire workforce- learn from what didn’t work for your company and adapt. Otherwise, you’ll be left behind by those who did.

dmix2• 3 years ago

I'd imagine game dev is a more collaborative sort of thing, at least at various stages. Where it'd help to be in office, at least to some degree.

Maybe they can have management require being in office during key parts of projects or for parts of the month. Rather than a mandatory 3 days a week thing across the board.

Pamar2• 3 years ago

Ok but... let's just pull a Pareto here and assume that times requiring the team to be together in the office are 20% of the total working time of any project.

You are now paying rent (and utilities) for a space that is severely underutilized for 80% of the time.

What about the food catering? The security? Parking space?

All these collaterals cannot be dynamically scaled up and down at will.

dmix2• 3 years ago

Sure but not all of the business are developers or highly optimized for remote style work. It’s going to vary and keeping the base office can still potentially make sense for larger orgs.

Plus you don’t need catering nor the total office size demands when you have 20% utilization at various times.

You can offer those perks through monthly stripends not via the office. You can also stripend traveling costs to the office for the allotted monthly group time.

Usage can also be coordinated and staggered virtually to manage demand.

It’s going to require adapting to a new reality not pigeonholing the old system into the new one just in case people might use the office all at once.

AlexandrB2• 3 years ago

The same employee also speculated that Blizzard is "tightening its belt right now and they want people to leave", which may affect Blizzard's plans for Diablo IV's post-release updates.

If true, talk about incompetent management. If you need to slim down, ideally you'd want to identify the people and groups that can be laid off with least overall damage and do it all in one shot. "Layoffs by RTO" is a great way to have your best, most-employable staff trickle out over a period of months - constantly reminding anyone left behind that they're stuck working under a bunch of ding-a-lings so they might decide to leave next.

How is Bobby still getting paid "the big bucks" to run ActivisionBlizzard this way?

jmoak3• 3 years ago

The worse a company is doing the more they have to pay the CEO to stick around. It’s a little strange but that’s where we end up.

For the benefit of all companies, we need to find a way to produce more people qualified to lead large organizations so that they’re easier to swap.

I support policies that make it easier for people to make organizations and remove roadblocks to achieve this. This will make existing companies leaner and produce more stock of qualified leaders.

shrimp_emoji• 3 years ago

He wanted to be bought by Microsoft, but he might not get off that easy. :p

Clubber2• 3 years ago

It's worth noting that the mandatory office attendance doesn't apply to ABK's executives. Recently hired execs like Chief Administrative Officer Brian Bulatao, and Chief Communications Officer Lulu Cheng Meservey, have full-time remote status.

So much for RTO being good for communication.

badrabbit• 3 years ago

Not just with this but other changes I am seeing, my strategy is to be in the top 20% talent and broaden my skillset so that I can have options. RTO is one thing but what if employment in tech itself becomes difficult. You already need lots of social networking and groveling as it is.

You know what I keep wondering, why don't these companies look at the numbers and say "if you want to WFH you will get a 20% paycut" instead? People who are good at their job and like the company might just stick around even then. They get to save on top expensive talent.

stjohnswarts• 3 years ago

I can't imagine Blizzard execs would be so stupid to think that they wouldn't lose great people to other companies. Those people didn't have a single issue finding a new position somewhere else that paid better would be my guess.

danielrpa• 3 years ago

We have the same discussion over and over. Let me summarize the comments: some people like working remote, others prefer hybrid and some love going to the office every day. Companies that force a single work style will necessarily lose workers.

The more interesting question, IMHO, is whether companies mandating a given work style will be more efficient than others that give people the choice. And among the ones mandating a style, whether one style in particular is more efficient in general.

Which company from the options below is more likely to beat their competitors in the long run due to higher efficiency, quality, time to market etc?

1) A company that can hire ANY 100 workers who will fully work from home. 2) A company that can hire ANY 100 workers who will fully work from the office. 3) A company that can hire ANY 100 workers and give them the choice.

matty22• 3 years ago

Maybe some of those employees don't want to return to Blizzard offices _in particular_ considering that's where many of them were outright sexually assaulted?

jredwards2• 3 years ago

My company is losing dozens of irreplaceable people due to forced RTO, and it may catastrophically undermine some of our products. Leadership does not care. It's shocking to me.

Blizzard developers say return-to-office policy 'cost us some amazing people'

Related Stories