Many Amazon offices won't be ready for returning workers until September

[midian182]

Facepalm: Amazon's rush to get all its employees back in the office means some of its buildings won't be ready until months after the RTO deadline. It's a situation other companies, including Tesla, have faced as they try to return to the working status quo.

Amazon wants the entirety of its office staff back in their buildings for at least three days per week in May. But many of the offices won't be ready to support that many employees until months later.

Insider obtained an internal Amazon document titled 'Building Readiness Dates' that reveals the dates its office buildings will be ready to accommodate all the returning staff. It states that five out of the six corporate Amazon offices in New York City and four of the six locations in Austin aren't expected to be ready until September 1, 2023.

It's the same story for the offices in Cupertino and East Palo Alto, which also won't be ready for a full complement of employees until September, four months after the return-to-work mandate's deadline. Atlanta and Tempe fare slightly better with a July 1 readiness date. Offices in Boston, Irvine, and Chicago have yet to set a date.

Amazon Corporate Headquarters in Seattle is one office ready for returning workers

The report states that other Amazon office locations will be ready to welcome everyone back, including those around its Seattle headquarters and second HQ in Arlington, VA.

Some of the readiness factors include ensuring networks, Wi-Fi access, desktop equipment, conference room setups, and other amenities can support the capacity and demands of all returning workers.

Like other companies that prefer its employees in the office, such as Apple, Amazon boss Andy Jassy believes in-person work makes collaborating easier and more effective. And, as was also the case with Cupertino, it led to a mass petition from employees demanding Amazon execs reconsider the mandate. Amazon's head of HR rejected the demands.

It's somewhat surprising that many Amazon offices aren't ready for the returning workers, given that the tech giant is letting go of 27,000 people. It was originally 18,000, announced last year, but Jassy said in March that an extra 9,000 employees would be losing their jobs.

We've seen the consequences of rushed return-to-work mandates before. Elon Musk told Tesla and SpaceX staff last year that they could either return to the office for a minimum of 40 hours per week or quit. So many Tesla workers rushed back to the Fremont, California, plant that it caused a lack of desks, inadequate seating, overloaded WiFi, and not enough parking spaces. The shortages were still posing a problem months later.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/98268-many-amazon-offices-wont-ready-returning-workers-until.html

 

[Uncle Al]

Once again, they don't seem to know what they are doing ....

 

[mgwerner]

"This is what happens when you rush things"
Nope, this is what happens when you hide under the covers from the fake plague, then use it as an excuse to stay in your jammies in mommy's basement.

 

[dangh]

"This is what happens when you rush things"
Nope, this is what happens when you hide under the covers from the fake plague, then use it as an excuse to stay in your jammies in mommy's basement.

Yeah, I'm fine to stay in my jammies if I can avoid unnecessary commute and do my job better saving money, sleep, better productivity and a happy family. I know it sounds awful for some
But hey... it was nearly same in my company (top 50) before 2020, so... hmmm, maybe it is just people who can't stand that other people don't have to be miserable in a traffic jam getting jealous and dreaming about a basement? No, it can't be! ;D

 

[waclark]

Yeah, I'm fine to stay in my jammies if I can avoid unnecessary commute and do my job better saving money, sleep, better productivity and a happy family. I know it sounds awful for some
But hey... it was nearly same in my company (top 50) before 2020, so... hmmm, maybe it is just people who can't stand that other people don't have to be miserable in a traffic jam getting jealous and dreaming about a basement? No, it can't be! ;D

I think it's a bit of both. First, while many people can maintain a productive work environment at home, not everyone can. Also, being home 100% of the time is no guarantee of happiness. I have been working at home for many years and while it is highly beneficial to me, I do need to get out of the house or it just feels like I'm always at work. For some people having an office is a good thing because they can get away from the distractions of WFH.

But I disagree with the article's premise that this is what happens when you rush things. Asking people to come back to work is not "rushing" things.

 

[waclark]

it caused a lack of desks, inadequate seating, overloaded WiFi, and not enough parking spaces.

I have to ask, how can there be a lack of desks? Did they get rid of desks and chairs and why would WiFi be overloaded? Surely, they didn't remove the existing WiFi system in the office. If it worked before, why isn't it working now? Same with parking spaces, the only explanation I see there would be if the spaces and furniture were leased. If that's the case, why not just call up the leasing company and get it all back. I'm sure they are not overloaded with business right now, given the many layoffs that have been going on.

 

[paul1122]

It's what's called a crappy business. Know what you are doing before you do it. Why aren't they ready? They should have kept them ready. Plenty of people who would have done the up keep. I'm thinking more like low end managers making it impossible to come back by creating problems instead of fixing them.

 

[human7]

I have to ask, how can there be a lack of desks? Did they get rid of desks and chairs and why would WiFi be overloaded? Surely, they didn't remove the existing WiFi system in the office. If it worked before, why isn't it working now? Same with parking spaces, the only explanation I see there would be if the spaces and furniture were leased. If that's the case, why not just call up the leasing company and get it all back. I'm sure they are not overloaded with business right now, given the many layoffs that have been going on.

I don't know the statistic for Amazon or Tesla, but Meta grew its workforce by 93% between 2019 and 2022 per this article (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/face...s-amid-year-of-efficiency-push-132621375.html). Knowing that other companies like Amazon did the same, it's easy to see why offices that were adequate pre-pandemic may not be adequate now.

What I don't understand is the "everyone should work at least 3 days in the office" mantra, other than power over employees. The rationale that if the facilities aren't used they will be lost is not a reason to use them: it's evidence that you don't need those facilities in the first place. Let each team/org unit decide if they need to return to the office. If everyone on the team is physically located close together, working in person can be advantageous. If not, then even when they are in the office, they're still "working remote" when it comes to their other team members, which defeats the point.

At the end of the day, if you don't like your company's policies, leave the company. Not always easy to do, but sometimes necessary.

 

[brucek]

Bringing back the same number of people, doing the same jobs, configured in the same groups, to the same office, doesn't sound like it should be that hard. But I doubt that's what's happening.

On the other hand reconfiguring a space that was set up to support say 10,000 employees each with a dedicated desk/office, to instead support 20,000 employees each expected about half-time in a hotel-type configuration, with most days having many more group meetings than before because that's why they are the in-office days, sounds like a non-trivial change to do right.

Then there's the employees whose work needs go beyond a generic laptop and an internet connection. If whatever that extra equipment & infrastructure is was built out home-by-home, it may not be trivial to find proper accommodation for it at the office now. And the labs that stayed staffed onsite probably expanded into all that "empty" space over the past couple years and they may not want to give it back now either.

In any event it would be interesting to hear the details on this, I'm sure there's more than we'd guess at first glance, but of course there's not much reason for the companies to share the full details so I doubt we will.

 

[waclark]

I don't know the statistic for Amazon or Tesla, but Meta grew its workforce by 93% between 2019 and 2022 per this article (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/face...s-amid-year-of-efficiency-push-132621375.html). Knowing that other companies like Amazon did the same, it's easy to see why offices that were adequate pre-pandemic may not be adequate now.

What I don't understand is the "everyone should work at least 3 days in the office" mantra, other than power over employees. The rationale that if the facilities aren't used they will be lost is not a reason to use them: it's evidence that you don't need those facilities in the first place. Let each team/org unit decide if they need to return to the office. If everyone on the team is physically located close together, working in person can be advantageous. If not, then even when they are in the office, they're still "working remote" when it comes to their other team members, which defeats the point.

At the end of the day, if you don't like your company's policies, leave the company. Not always easy to do, but sometimes necessary.

I think Meta may be an outlier in regards to growth. I doubt Amazon grew it's office workforce by 93%, and the same for Google. I can see that some growth may have occurred and that this could be a factor.

I agree on the facilities comment, however, I do see some rationale for bringing people back to the office. For example, I have worked from home for many years now and the companies I worked for supplied me with gear like printers, scanners, laptops, monitors and other items needed to work from home (eg mics and cameras for video conferencing). If people are working in the office maybe you don't need 1 printer for every person, you don't have to spend $100/mo per person on Internet connections, you can have face to face meetings and don't need all the conferencing equipment. Some companies may have leases they cannot get out of and I can see why they might want to make use of the space instead of funding people to work at home. So, there can be a financial advantage to the company.