"...As part of our continued evolution, we’ve reviewed how our office spaces in the US are used. While in-person collaboration remains important, our current offices aren’t meeting those needs...
Effective July 21, Office Flex employees who were previously required to go into the Mason, Farmington Hills or Boston offices are no longer required to do so."
@1f8 Very mature - if that's how the "un-educated" working in so-called "education" companies, then you are just proving that Trump is right (as he is about almost everything.
Are you a citizen? Because we can help you out with that if you aren't.
I worked for Cengage for years and left long ago. It was full of people that wanted to coast for a living. I continue to thrive and am in successful for type type of business our President would be proud of. Have fun!!! ;-)
@2tn Cr-ppy leadership? Just a guess.
@2f0 In FH, it was 100% facilities. They would walk down the aisles and note on a piece of paper who was at their desk and who wasn't. They claimed they were trying to figure out which desks were being used, but that obviously had nothing to do with it. If that were the case, they could have done it once and been done with it, but they did it repeatedly. I still don't understand what the point was. We were allowed to work at home once a week, and people could be on vacation or in a meeting or in the bathroom. It was odd.
@29j No, it was an IT manager who took it upon himself to compile a list over months and bring it to the Leadership Team.
He was let go not long after that, but he took quite a few down.
@1wx It was facilities that checked who was working in the office every day.
@1r0 Years ago there was a certain inside sales rep that had tallies for our whole team on her desk in the KY office. I thought she was counting us walking by so to test it we got up about 30 times in the span of an hour and every time we did we would see her make a mark
@1r0, for a while, they had a head of IT who would walk around and make a list of people who were working from home on Fridays.
Management doesn't care about the products coming out of these buildings, so its an easy cost cut. The sycophants can post on LinkedIn about MH and Cengage being such a PROGRESSIVE employer that is amazing to work for.
@1p4 I can name three specific former Cengagers who would monitor look out the window and note what time people arrived in morning, left in afternoon or God forbid left in the middle of they day.
@1pq fire Cengage before it fires you, because it will happen…
It is much easier to lay people off when they are already at home.
The big downside to this will be the collaboration and change that is effected by having a modern hip workspace, where an executive can chat with an intern and brainstorm, and where meetings take place without borders, so that resources who may be walking by can overhear something and offer a comment.
Two in a box was an unmitigated success, but our urban play centers were not offices; they were vibrant idea factories that transformed how business got done.
How do we recreate this virtually? I hope the Leadership Team offers workshops and training sessions on this.
@1mh So will the official company mailing address still be in Mason, or will it change to a post office box?
@1jr They are closing. Folks won’t have an office to go to.
So, I’m confused. Are these 3 offices closing? Or are people just not required to come in? And the spaces will be downsized? Isn’t Cengage’s headquarters in the Boston office.
Greetings,
Let me be clear, the only reason the merger was denied was because of the implicit bias of the Drumph Administration against ed-tech companies. The backward group of illegaly "elected" misfits loves the poorly educated and loathes anything to do with moving society forward.
If the orange dotard knew 1/1000th about business as MH, KC, etc. he wouldn't have been bankrupt and convicted.
@14x Look at the history. Apollo Partners bought McGraw in 2013. In 2015, they attempted an IPO with McGraw and failed. In 2019, they attempted a merger between McGraw and Cengage. Ultimately, the Dept of Justice blocked that merger over anti trust concerns. But the proposed merger process put Cengage in Apollo's scopes. In 2021, Apollo sold McGraw to Platinum Equity. In 2023, they invested in Cengage.
The Dept of Justice may have blocked the merger over anti trust concerns, but Apollo has been in the mix for years working these two companies and this market to secure their own profits. They failed with their IPO on McGraw in 2015, attempted the merger with Cengage and failed at that, but saw that they could secure a quick buck from McGraw's sale to Platinum Equity, so they could then move on to pillage Cengage to greater profit margins.
TLDR: I wouldn't say either company has "won." Both have suffered to further the profits of private equity investors who are in this business for a payout. Platinum Equity is getting that payout with the McGraw IPO, but it remains to be seen if the company (in it's post-private equity structure) can be successful under the pressures of being publicly traded. That's not an easy thing to do, and the volatility of the market is working against them. McGraw may have a slight edge because so much of their business is in K12 (a market that cannot fully disappear so long as public education systems exist), whereas Cengage is focused more in Higher Ed (in a nation that is increasingly suspicious of value of post-secondary education). But no one is winning in this market because the market is shrinking. And an IPO now is not the answer to that issue anymore than a private equity buyout was in 2013 or 2021. As for Cengage, same troubles, different timeline, and as previously stated, slightly different primary market. As to who is winning in Higher Ed, that's Norton and Sage. Respectively, employee-owned and trust-owned organizations that answer to their markets (i.e.: instructors and students) rather than private equity investors or shareholders.
Cengage should crawl in a hole and regroup. McGraw won.
@vt FB is the CEO at Risepoint. Is it part of the Cengage ratline?
Mason is a cheap location, especially for sub-standard midwestern "talent" with very little competition.
When you're based in SF, Boston, or NYC, talent is less likely to deal with the nonsense because it's easy to leave.
Those beautiful new office spaces in San Francisco and Boston were worth the investment.
SF needed to be shuttered after the entire workforce was laid off. The vanity project that was the new Boston office cost a fortune because we broke the lease for the old building, then broke a lease for the new building. Between these two, and the ridiculous and pricey NYC office, we've blown millions. IIRC, Clifton Park was also sub-leased for pennies on the dollar.
I remember moving into that office. We moved the weekend after 9-11. At one point there was serious discussion of leasing the entire bldg and for a while used the 3rd floor on the other side. Different times for sure.
"Does this mean Cengage is about to be acquired?"
No buyers, lol. This ownership group is the bottom of the barrel.
The Mason office is a big boys club. Good riddance. Maybe now those guys will do some work.
I remember when Gale had so many employees that we had to rent a massive space in the building next door to fit customer service and sales operations. Now the whole company probably wouldn't take up a floor of the old building. Their workforce has been completely gutted.
Greetings,
The quarterly report will take a hit for the lease buyouts. If past filings are any indication, operational restructurings will offset these one-time costs.
Full Stop!
Huh?
Does this mean Cengage is about to be acquired?