Hybrid employees struggle a lot—commuting 30 miles, taking early morning meetings, working late hours. Meanwhile, remote employees don’t face the same challenges—no commuting, no badge scans, fewer constraints. Honestly, remote employees should be considered first if workforce reductions are needed.
8 replies (most recent on top)
Wrong. I work longer hours because I'm remote and I'm expected to be available for calls more frequently and later in the evening than my in office counter parts.
nah...while I do think it's unfair that they get to stay remote just because they don't live near a hub, they are not the enemy. Blame the MC, not your coworkers.
I'm not remote, but don't take the bait people.
These changes, the geo cuts for remote, the unethical and mo--nic tracking for hybrid, they all su-k.
It's a troll posting people. The Op probably doesn't even work at USB.
OP - are you HR or one of the leadership bootlickers trying to sow division among WFH and RTO employees? Shame on you for blaming this on remote employees. If you must place blame at least have the guts to put it in the right place (executives).
@a2 remote people have been able to stay remote for close to a year and a half now with no issue, no one took a bigger pay cut than the people who have to pay all of these bs gas and parking fees to return to the micromanagement center. And some hybrids arent even getting a raise
I believe it’s not fair to anyone. Remote employees were moved to lower pay grades or told to come in or be severance out. I know people leaders who lost their employees and are now individual contributors.
Who's the real problem - remote workers or executives?