He complained about his long commute, uprooting his family, a full parking lot, no car…typical Ginger stuff. But he didn’t mention the bonus part. Yes, bonuses of over 100% multiplier for many departments. Oh…we can’t mention good news. Yes, there will be change. It su-ks. Get a grip. There are other places to work. You can just quit. No one is forcing you to work for Walgreens. With no car you should have a nice savings built up.
5 replies (most recent on top)
@dv Might want to hire an accountant? 40% tax on a short-term cash incentive. At a minimum you should have had 15% taken out for your 401K. Bonuses are not taxed at a higher rate. The withholding maybe higher, but you will get that back. If the bonus puts you in a higher tax bracket, then yes. The highest tax bracket is 37% and you need to make $625k or more. So if you are on here complaining making that money and your bonus was $5K you have other problems.
@ck Stop with the buzzwords. This isn’t a Ted talk. This is about profit. It’s business 101. Your choice on where you choose to live has no bearing on what your company should or shouldn’t do with their resources and capital. It didn’t in 1950, 1990, 2010 and it doesn’t in 2025. It’s either find a new job or find a new home. Whining about constructive dialogue, collaboration….it’s about profit. Really you should be complaining about the decision to build out OPO in the first place, selling the Deerfield offices (and buying them back for more), and all the other companies we bought (and sold for a loss). These decisions lead us to where we are now. But funny I don’t see your posts complaining about those poor decisions. Only the one decision on RTO that impacts your commute and personal time.
Essentially you are complaining about what you as a person calls “fairness” when really it’s because “you” (as a city-based employee) feel are being singled out by a corporation. If they closed Deerfield you wouldn’t be here complaining at all. You do realize this has happened all over the Chicago area to multiple companies in the last few years and not just one move. Fortune Brands consolidated from multiple city and suburban offices to suburban one. Caterpillar moved from Peoria 8 years ago to Deerfield only to move to Texas last year. Imagine relocating twice in ten years? Beam Suntory has moved from Deerfield to the city. Or Citadel employees just moved from IL to FL. The list goes on. This is just from people I know who were personally impacted. If they wanted to keep their job, they just made the change. It’s called being mature.
As far as RTO, yes you are correct. And?….It’s called business. Your job is to adapt. Walgreens and Sycamore aren’t the only companies to do it. And Sycamore didn’t do it, Walgreens did it. Walgreens also went hybrid back in 2015. Maybe that was the wrong decision and RTO is the right one even though you don’t like that choice? Ever thought that one through? Maybe they learned like many companies that employees work less remotely even though they claim they work more until you run a simple keystroke program…..
“Of course I don’t mind commuting five hours round trip from Chicago to Deerfield, four days a week. After all, that $5,000 bonus I received back in November, taxed at 40%, more than makes the whole thing worthwhile.” Said no carless Chicago commuter, ever.
Hey! It’s me - the OPO complainer!
I want to address a few points here. First, you assumed I’m a man, which isn’t the case - that kind of assumption is telling in itself.
Second, my comments weren’t about wanting sympathy or a bonus; they were about fairness and the reality of what this RTO decision means for city-based employees. It’s not simply “inconvenience” - it’s 3+ hours a day of unpaid time, in harsher conditions than a suburban car commute, and that does have consequences for retention, morale, and productivity.
Also, to believe leadership is mandating four days in-office solely for “collaboration” is, frankly, naive. It is abundantly clear that this policy is intended to encourage voluntary attrition ahead of the planned 40% workforce reductions (layoffs), thereby reducing severance obligations. To me, that seems fairly obvious.
Dismissing legitimate concerns with “just quit” oversimplifies the issue. Many of us want to continue contributing at a high level here - but that requires leadership to acknowledge differences in circumstance, not minimize them. Constructive dialogue is how companies improve; shutting it down with sarcasm isn’t productive.
The bonus will be so great this year because they will never give you another one again. Something to keep the remaining 60 percent of employees happy for 3 years until they realize it's too late to leave as they lack the fire in their soul after being beaten down