Thread regarding SAP layoffs

RTO: Office space and pre-Covid hire agreements

While it seems there is some momentum in the RTO mandate (except living more than 40 miles/64km from an office) there are some things that SAP can’t address without significant financial investment and/or major legal issues.

Issue 1: Those who were hired, pre-Covid, by SAP in a WFH-when-not-traveling-scenario are not “returning” to the office. In 12+ years, I’ve never had a desk. I was hired in 2012 for a sales role and the local office was 100% AGS/support. A sales person in what was essentially a call/ticket management center provides no value to anyone. I moved nearly 2K miles away while in this role, still with no expectation to be in any office. There is no legal or operationally-sustainable route for SAP to make people who have never worked in an office — in my case, over a decade — start coming to an office. A huge number of people fall into this scenario, and if SAP were to try to force this, sales and internal operations would simply halt.

Issue 2: Real estate/office space. Many SAP offices have been closed in recent years, even before Covid. There used to be two offices in my closest major city (Denver). One closed around 2013/2014, and the other closed 2020/2021. There is a small hybrid office in Boulder, but it cannot accommodate the hundreds of colleagues that live in the area. Many other major cities have closed/consolidated offices also. For this RTO policy to have any semblance of reality, SAP would need to buy/lease new real estate to physically create space for people. Doing so would counter any “cost savings” intended by office closures and RIFs. Unless, say, SAP is going to fire everyone within 40 miles of the Boulder office (which it couldn’t and still expect revenue generation and operational function), this simply won’t work.

Issue 3: Well before Covid normalized WFH, SAP culture has been that there are no boundaries to working hours. This might be different for German and other regional colleagues, but in NA, there truly are no boundaries. If people have to add 2+ hours of driving time (remember, most of NA does not have public transportation) to the days they go into the office, you can guarantee folks will not work more than 8 hours/day, will not take calls at 5am to accommodate EMEA and APJ time zones, and will not work nights and weekends. Productivity will diminish as morale and available time to work diminish. I’m more than 40 miles from an office, but if I wasn’t, I’d decline every meeting that was not between 8am and 5pm, I’d fly only between these hours, and I’d set other appropriate time boundaries.

Issue 4: For those whose roles involve frequent travel SAP would need to choose whether it wants to pay for travel to customer sites 3 days/week or maintain what has become increasing restrictions to travel. In NA, travel usually means flying. In the US West, territories are geographically huge. Historically, I’ve had weeks where I’ve gone to four cities — each with flights between — in a single week. In recent years we’ve been asked to curtail travel. This is a “you can’t have your cake and eat it, too” scenario. Travel restrictions would need to be lifted to accommodate being with customers 3 days/week.

I don’t underestimate the huge impact this policy has for many people. This said, this seems to be more of a threat than an enforceable policy. Above are just a few reasons why this won’t work. I’d like to believe that the raised issues were discussed and understood to be roadblocks but, frankly, at this stage I wouldn’t be surprised if the overpaid, under-qualified, out-of-touch individuals at the helm didn’t consider issues like this. This is utter stupidity on all levels and only brings question to whether SAP’s “leadership” has any viable leadership capability.

by
| 1971 views | | 7 replies (last January 26, 2024) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1qIVbOFE

7 replies (most recent on top)

Here is the thing.
When you get hired, you always have an office location. But there are employees who cannot be in an office because they are in sales or in consulting. They have to visit customers almost every week. SAP HR uses a flag in the system to identify such employees. The RTO policy would not apply to them.
There are many employees that do not fall under the above categories. But they always worked from home or were in locations quite far from the office. Maybe they had an arrangement with their managers. Maybe they just never disclosed it. They are the one who would be impacted. If a manager approved it, then they needed to change the flag in HR system. If they did not, good luck. If you moved more than 40 miles away from the office because of the flex policy and thought that you could do that forever, then you needed to get the flag changed. I lost my desk because I traveled extensively for work. SAP checked my badge access and saw that I was not in the office often. I was asked to clean out my desk and my boss asked me to work from home when I was not traveling. I did that for years but technically I was still an office-based employee and the system was never updated. I could move to Bu-------k and no one would have known or cared. My boss did not care and my customers did not care either. But I stayed put.
I know an employee that worked in Palo Alto and had a pretty high salary because of her location. She then moved to a low cost state. Her manager said she could do it since she was traveling frequently. Her office location flag was not changed. Eventually her job changed where she doesn't travel anymore. Her salary was never adjusted because SAP thought she was still Palo Alto based. It existed like that for over a decade. There are thousands of such employees. People always take advantage of the loopholes.
Many that played by the book had their compensations reduced when they moved from high cost to low cost locations. Many people in my team had that happen to them because they were honest.
If you live within 40 miles, go to the office 3 times/wk. If you live outside of 40 miles, I don't know if the flag would be set to identify them as such. Maybe. Maybe not.
What is known is that there will be an evaluation process for all employees living outside of 40 miles who were not originally hired as a home office employee as mentioned earlier. If anyone is deemed essential for SAP's business, they will remain. The rest will go for policy non-compliance and they will not qualify for severance. Maybe they will fall under the job retraining/skills improvement category and SAP will require office presence. If they can't, then they will be let go.
There are product marketing people that work from home 100% of the time. They all live within 40 miles of the office, but never went to the office. It was not sanctioned. It was just assumed that they were not expected to be in the office. Wrong assumption.
Recently, some product marketing people were told by their managers that they do not have to comply with RTO policy. They are not tagged as home office employees. It's just that their managers said that they don't have to go. This will blow up in a nasty way. I am sure the managers will not lose their jobs. The employees will.
Do not take this lightly.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3ary+1qIVbOFE

As said before on this site, RTO will be one of the biggest, if not the biggest, divisionary policies SAP, or more specifically CK, ever promulgated.

There is not a question in my mind, that there will be some Board Areas and some internal teams who will have to adhere to this policy. And in plain sight of everyone, there will be many other teams who will continue to WFH and disregard this mandate.

Without equal enforcement this will take the poor morale to new depths. CK should have offered something else to the employees to make this more acceptable to "everyone", like establishing a 4 day workweek, like other companies are doing.

By mid summer this will prove to be a very resentful issue for those who are being held to RTO.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ihx+1qIVbOFE

They can track office entries through badging, this has been a thing for more than two decades now. Sure there is talk of maybe somebody does "group badging", but that assumes to put everyone on the group badging at risk of termination for the one individual mis-using the credentials, and for all the people not really well for not keeping custody of their own badge.

The threat is there, if they actually track badging, who knows. My guess at this point is that actual badge tracking is a legal nightmare with European Privacy law/German Culture and that there will be have and have-nots (managers that overlook people not being in three days a week, versus those who force it). Others have pointed out that office downsizing during COVID would make everyone within proximity of many of the larger offices completely impractical.

However, the forced RTO is a stick to make people leave voluntarily to cut raw layoff numbers. People who leave because WFH 100% has a huge amount of value to them don't get included in "SAP lays off X,X-X employees" and don't receive severance payouts...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jiz+1qIVbOFE

Same. Never had a desk, never needed a desk, and the office moved to a new location that is way too small.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lud+1qIVbOFE

I’m less than 40 miles from the San Ramon office but there is no reasonable traffic scenario to get there.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dbh+1qIVbOFE

It does seem like a veiled threat.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @klg+1qIVbOFE

What is radiation level in your area,
Mate?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ulg+1qIVbOFE

Post a reply

: