Meta updates RTO policy with stricter mandate, saying workers may lose their jobs if they don’t show up 3 days a week::Meta, formerly known as Facebook, told employees that its new RTO policy would be enforced by management.

8 points

This is the best summary I could come up with:


“As with other company policies, repeated violations may result in disciplinary action, up to and including a performance rating drop and, ultimately, termination if not addressed.”

Meta first informed employees of its RTO efforts in June, saying that beginning after the Labor Day holiday, people who were hired to work in an office should return for at least part of the week.

In a March memo announcing a layoff of 10,000 employees, he wrote that a company analysis found that “engineers earlier in their career perform better on average when they work in-person with teammates at least three days a week.”

Being fully remote means Meta will not maintain desk space for such workers, who should not come to an office “more than 4 days every 2 months,” Goler’s memo said,

From: Lori GolerDistributed work updatesTL;DR:• We shared in June that beginning September 5, people assigned to an office will need to spend at least 3 days per week in person to foster healthy relationships and strong collaboration.• Managers will hold their teams accountable to the In-Person Time Policy on a monthly basis.

To help teams build predictable collaboration practices, we’re asking remote workers not to visit the office more than 4 days every 2 months- unless there’s a clear business reason (team onsite, required in- person meetings) or to attend Meta-sponsored events like Company All Hands, Metamate Meetups, or Hackathons.• Managers will review this monthly, subject to local law and works council requirements, and remote workers who consistently exceed the threshold will be required to transfer to an office and meet the minimum 3 days/week in-person requirement.Remote applications:• We’re moving to a monthly review cycle for remote work applications by org leaders so they can fully assess and understand the impact of these requests on their organizations and sites as they implement their org-specific location strategy.


The original article contains 1,469 words, the summary contains 307 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

permalink
report
reply
54 points

Lets see how that will work out…

permalink
report
reply
25 points

Maybe this is his plan all along? It will help cut down the workforce without having to do a layoff and pay severance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

It also filters out those who don’t put up with exploitation

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Being fully remote means Meta will not maintain desk space for such workers, who should not come to an office “more than 4 days every 2 months,” Goler’s memo said,

That’s actually just as dumb, it means that if that remote worker comes to the Home Office they can’t stay a full week. Even saying “more than 5 days every 3 months” makes more sense.

permalink
report
reply
12 points
*

I don’t have a problem with this. My office made this rule too, basically you chose hybrid, in person, or full remote. I went full remote. I don’t have a desk at the office, but I’m not required to come in. When I go in there’s hoteling offices, meaning I get an office to work, and theoretically if I went in for a week, I can leave my stuff there, but after that week, I take my stuff and go home.

4 days every two month is WAY too low to maintain an office for a person. Heck even 2 days a week is borderline. Companies want to reduce their floorplans, and that’s reasonable if they allow full remote, as long as full remote means full remote. (not required to come in)

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

No, I have no problem with not maintaining an office for remote workers. But they are telling remote workers they can’t be on site for more than 4 days in a span. That’s the dumb part. It should have been 5 days, so that remote worker can get a whole working week at the company’s office if they need it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Oh I totally misunderstood/misread that. Sorry.

That’s fucking dumb as shit, agreed. Then again that gives me an excuse to go home ASAP.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Oof I feel bad 😳

I barely go in to mine once a month, yet have my own desk and stuff

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Don’t worry as long as your company isn’t making you worry about it. I just personally chose full remote, but the people who chose hybrid have probably done as you say or less. And even when they do come in for “Collaboration days”, they sit with us in a conference room.

I’m not going to make it an issue, but you’d fit in at my company. Then again we haven’t (And may never have) a mandatory RTO.

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

Given how bad this company is tanking, I wouldn’t be surprised if this was deliberately done to cut payroll.

permalink
report
reply
20 points
*

Absolutely, this return to office stuff has been an absolute gift for CEOs wanting to downsize, it’s the perfect fluffy PR way to turn the thumbscrews. Factor in the popular idea that you’re a slacker if you don’t work hard all the time and you basically have public support too.

I’m sure plenty of people will just suck it up and view the past few years as a very extended break from office nonsense and commuting hassle, but enough will jump ship to fill quotas

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Office space costs a lot of money. Desktop computers cost a lot of money. The inability of their co-workers to immediately wake up and solve some emergency costs a lot of money.

Every day they are not continuing remote work practices is another day they are bleeding money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

The company I work for is still fully committed to remote first. They have closed multiple office locations including the entire headquarters campus. They can’t stop gushing about how much money they’re saving.

Thing is though that often, real estate deals are made over long periods of time. I think a lot of RTO stuff is happening because companies can’t just get out of their leases. They spent years and millions of dollars actually building offices and by god they want to see them get used.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I suspect that these big corporations were advised by banks and the government to scale back work from home policies to avoid triggering a real estate market collapse in cities by vacating expensive office space en masse. This could cause defaults by landlords and a housing crisis as workers no longer need to pay premiums to live near offices. An exodus from cities would crater housing markets, which would severely damage the overall economy. Thus corporations are only half-heartedly pushing for office returns to avert an economic crisis, despite the cost savings of remote work

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

“How bad this company is tanking.”

Y’all are ridiculous. Meta isn’t anywhere near tanking. I don’t know why some of you parrots keep saying this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

They lost ~$10b in net income in Q4 '22 and Q1 '23 so definitely a company in some level of distress, but Q2 saw them ~$7.5b in the black.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

What? They make billions in profit every quarter and have been for a long time. Meta isn’t anywhere near being in trouble.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Meta net income

  • Q4 2023: USD 4.652Bn.

  • Q1 2023: USD 5.709Bn.

  • Q2 2023: USD 7.788Bn.

  • Q4 2022: Facebook monthly active users (MAUs) – MAUs were 2.96 billion as of December 31, 2022, an increase of 2% year-over-year.

  • Q1 2023: Facebook monthly active users (MAUs) – MAUs were 2.99 billion as of March 31, 2023, an increase of 2% year-over-year.

  • Q2 2023: Facebook monthly active users (MAUs) – MAUs were 3.03 billion as of June 30, 2023, an increase of 3% year-over-year.

User stigmata is correct and neither Meta nor Facebook are sinking, despite what we might want to believe.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Sorry should have been more clear. Facebook is tanking. Obviously meta as an org is fine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

At first I thought, Jesus! Who will work for such a shitty company and then I realized people will do anything for money. Capahtahleezum baby!!

permalink
report
reply
8 points

I mean these guys are generally pulling 300 to 700k a year so… I’d return to office for that easily.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Lol true. If I am the director or any executive, i’ll do a lot more exploitation for less.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I mean being asked to go to an office isn’t exactly exploitation. It is fucked to ask after promising remote and terminating folks when they say no I’m not moving my entire family. But that’s why tech companies are usually younger folks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Either I’ve been getting royally screwed at the places I’ve worked, or it’s only pretty senior people who are making over 300k.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Also depends on where you live. Masters graduates get 200+ starting in SF Bay and Seattle. Senior can be 500+, Staff/Principal can get 700. That’s not the average but it’s attainable. levels.fyi is not perfect but it’s accurate enough.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

In the Bay Area, it’s been pretty easy to snag a 300k+ offer from one of these companies in the past 3-4 years with only 2+ years of experience. Just play the leetcode game.

Hiring has slowed though and the compensation is based on stocks, which have been more volatile.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Depends on the role but most of the impacted folk are engineers. E4 is around 286k a year (now after much of the reset from post covid). E5 (senior software dev equiv so like 5 or so yoe) is 400k a year.

Most of the payment is in RSUs granted.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Had a friend who worked there because he needed their health insurance to cover his sick kid. That is so screwed, in the rest of the world that’s not even a consideration.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The messed up thing is that for the wealthy, the US healthcare system is great. I’d be willing to guess that when you’re wealthy here, your experience is better than what you get standing in line with everyone else in a socialized system. I’d still rather have a socialized system here, but you probably don’t need to pity this man.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

If I could get hired at Meta I’d be making $200k-$300k more than I do now.

You read that right. Not $200k total. $200k above what I currently make. Which is substantial.

So yeah. Money with a capital M.

There are other things, too. I’ve been to their HQ and it is packed with top-of-their-class young people all smart as hell. There is a definite energy to the place, and they have a certain reality distortion field that makes them believe they’re doing good work.

Plus Meta is a strong company to have on your resume. Everyone knows their hiring standards are high and with Meta on your resume, second and third tier companies will look at you like a god and pay you a lot for stupid work.

I don’t justify any of this. I’m just reporting the way it is.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 16K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 551K

    Comments