Tech firms including Microsoft, Apple, and SpaceX lose senior staff over return-to-office mandates, claims study

midian182

Posts: 11,726   +177
Staff member
A hot potato: We tend to think of return-to-office mandates as something that only really affects rank-and-file workers, with managers pushing for the in-person status quo. But a new study has found that many senior employees, including those at Microsoft, Apple, and SpaceX, left their positions after their companies implemented RTO rules.

Researchers from the University of Michigan and the University of Chicago carried out the study by analyzing 260 million resumes from People Data Labs, looking for the impact that forced RTO policies had on workers.

A correlation was discovered between the departures of senior-level employees and the implementation of RTO mandates. Some left several months sooner than they might have without the policies, and many of them went to work for direct competitors, usually those that still allowed full-time remote work.

Now Read: Are return-to-office mandates actually masquerading as "quiet firing"?

Microsoft's RTO order came into effect during April 2022, requiring workers to spend at least three days per week in the office. It led to the share of senior employees as a portion of the company's overall workforce declining by more than 5%.

At Apple, which required workers to come in just one day per week, that figure fell by 4%. SpaceX, meanwhile, abolished remote work altogether, causing the share of senior employees to drop 15%.

We've heard CEOs argue on numerous occasions that in-person work means a more productive and therefore more financially successful company. But the study suggests this might not be the case.

"Senior employees and those that have been at a company for a long time possess invaluable human capital and tend to have elevated productivity levels, which they take with them when leaving the company," wrote Austin Wright, an assistant professor of public policy at the University of Chicago who co-authored the study. "They also represent a significant investment in terms of hiring and training costs."

Microsoft, Apple, and SpaceX were not only among the first tech giants to end the work-from-home policies implemented during the lockdowns, but they also represent more than 2% of the overall tech workforce and 30% of the industry's revenue.

Microsoft told The Washington Post that its internal data does not align with the study's findings, adding that calling its hybrid work policy an RTO mandate was "inaccurate." Apple said the study drew "inaccurate conclusions," while SpaceX never responded to a request for comment.

Back in January, a study claimed that it was controlling, narcissistic bosses driving RTO policies, and that companies weren't showing an increase in productivity after implementing them.

According to a recent survey of over 8,400 workers, 63% of US employees would take a pay cut to work remotely, 17% of whom said they'd sacrifice up to 20% of their paycheck to do so

Permalink to story:

 
They want you in the office because the commercial real estate market is so badly inflated. None of that property maintains value if people dont use it, and so many companies would be deep underwater in that case, which would spook the lenders.

So, return to office mandates it is.
A spoiled culture... as it must be very nice being able to quit your job just because they are asking you to work at the very same place you originally agreed to work from.

In other words they didn't want to work.
A lot of people are just over the rat race. The QOL for those who can manage their WFH lifestlye is WAY higher. Nobody wants to do 1+ hour commutes or live in crime ridden cities just to get a decent job.
 
There will just be others to replace those that leave. You are not special and that is the problem with so many people these days, they think they are. You're not. You can be replaced at a workplace.
 
They want you in the office because the commercial real estate market is so badly inflated. None of that property maintains value if people dont use it, and so many companies would be deep underwater in that case, which would spook the lenders.

So, return to office mandates it is.
A lot of people are just over the rat race. The QOL for those who can manage their WFH lifestlye is WAY higher. Nobody wants to do 1+ hour commutes or live in crime ridden cities just to get a decent job.
As I said:

it must be very nice being able to quit your job just because you don't want to work from the very same place you ORIGINALLY SIGNED to work from.

A totally spoiled culture.
 
The important piece here is studies repeatedly showing, time and time again, that remote work has basically no impact to productivity but most of these companies saying 'Our internal data is different' without actually making said data public.

Sorry if I don't take 'Just trust me bro' from millionaire executives that as it's been implied, likely have interests beyond just productivity like justifying their now rendered mostly useless management positions along with higher ups being invested in the real estate side of having office space to begin with.

Also people really like to blame de pandemic but I had been working remote for 4 years before the pandemic ever started and remote positions were already becoming commonplace for many positions at least, that's something that these executives never speak to: people were already considering if not leaving for other positions offering remote, the only thing the pandemic did was demonstrate pretty much without doubt, why almost all office jobs were no longer necessary to do 'in office' by forcing everyone into remote and productivity basically staying the same.

Now a lot more people know they never actually needed to spend a quarter of their lives stuck in traffic that's the only difference.
 
A spoiled culture... as it must be very nice being able to quit your job just because they are asking you to work at the very same place you originally agreed to work from.

In other words they didn't want to work.

No, it's just tilting the equilibrium backs towards the workers a smidge. The majority of Fortune 500s or any business really have ZERO qualms about **** canning 1,000 people the week before Christmas or similar because a spreadsheet algorithm told them to. ZEEERO. Employers, by and large, are only beholden to the next dollar. That's it. If an employee can do the same..more power to them.

If workers can work from home and can find employers willing to pay them to do so then yeah..they owe zero allegiance to their existing employer.

All the people whining on here who work jobs who can't WFH for some reason seem to just be butt hurt or something that they're not able to. I appreciate all the people out doing "work" in one way or another and if that's how you decided to make money / get ahead in life good for you, but if you're in IT and you spend 99% of your job working on **** in the "Cloud" with zero interaction with physical hardware and most of your comms is done via email, Slack / Teams / Zoom....anyway then it doesn't really matter where you work from.
 
After 4 years at my last job I decided to quit because they asked me to come 1 day per week in the office. To help build/consolidate the team and shlt. Contract was signed for full remote. Found another in weeks and now back full remote.

Yeah, they pulled a Darth Vader on you. "I Am Altering the Deal, Pray I Don't Alter It Any Further." So, not sure why we, as employees, can't do the same.
 
As I said:

it must be very nice being able to quit your job just because you don't want to work from the very same place you ORIGINALLY SIGNED to work from.

A totally spoiled culture.
Look at those slaves! They think that after many years they can desire other options instead of gulping our corporate mambo jambo! That is their fault! /s

Man, it is sad that someone can even think, that pursuing a better job is a spoiled culture. What a corposlave mindset could even come with that idea. Unless you still believe in slavery, then you should know that it is me who chose who I want to work for and what I want to do. It is up to the employer to evaluate my skills and then propose me a options which I can agree with or not. And if I agree for anything, this doesn't mean I can't change my mind if the situation changes. Otherwise I would never get a good salary increase, better position, and so on.

You work to live, not live to work. There is no need for you to do a work which you do not enjoy, even, if you agreed for something many years ago. If you continue to work on a position you dont enjoy, you are going to be a stressed, older guy who learn to hate everything around.

So yeah... It is actually VERY nice to be able to quit a stupid job where entitled bosses can't live without micromanagement and do not understand how other people do not prioritize corporation. it is VERY nice to use my experience in a position where I am appreciated, and where - after 8 hours of work - I simply turn off my PC and go down to a kitchen for a quick dinner and take kid for a few games of basketball, every effin day.
Am I spoiled? nah, it is you who is full of envy.
 
Sure, except they also tend to lose their best workers because they're the ones who can usually find jobs easier and know it. You may save money for the next quarters balance sheet, but your long term prospects kinda suck.
Sure, but the point is to show how much you've reduced labor costs and streamlined for the fiscal year, all while dodging layoffs. Long term effects are for the next year to deal with.
 
Companies wouldnt require workers to work in office if it literally didn't increase productivity. Theres no motivation to do so otherwise. Pretty sure companies would love to not have to pay for electricity and heating and cooling and leases on office buildings if they didnt have to. This isnt hard to think through vs just going right to "companies are evil"
 
A spoiled culture... as it must be very nice being able to quit your job just because they are asking you to work at the very same place you originally agreed to work from.

In other words they didn't want to work.
They are just flexing the "muscle" they built and earned. Good for them. Everyone should strive for a life where no one can tell you what you have to do.

No gratitude for giving someone else the chance to get rich if they learn to do a skill in demand?

Don't fight or be bitter about what we all actually want man!
 
Companies wouldnt require workers to work in office if it literally didn't increase productivity. Theres no motivation to do so otherwise. Pretty sure companies would love to not have to pay for electricity and heating and cooling and leases on office buildings if they didnt have to. This isnt hard to think through vs just going right to "companies are evil"

- A couple good points have already been forwarded: Real Estate, especially if the business owns the building; and stealth layoffs, getting people to leave while avoiding the bad publicity.

The companies that are avoiding RTO office mandates are the "virtual" ones: the ones that would be spending beu coup bucks on leasing real estate that they didn't own.
 
A spoiled culture... as it must be very nice being able to quit your job just because they are asking you to work at the very same place you originally agreed to work from.

In other words they didn't want to work.
They are about to take their retirement, so they don`t care. They already contributed to the machine... unlike someone your age that is literally jealous of other people able to tele-work.
 
There will just be others to replace those that leave. You are not special and that is the problem with so many people these days, they think they are. You're not. You can be replaced at a workplace.
Actually, extensive research as shown some people are special.

For instance, "star scientists" (academic literature term) create many more patents than the average scientist.

Yes, those jobs will be filled with others, BUT the replacements may not be as good.
 
A spoiled culture... as it must be very nice being able to quit your job just because they are asking you to work at the very same place you originally agreed to work from.

In other words they didn't want to work.
It's not spoiled to develop valuable skills.

Remote work is a benefit. Going to another company offering better pay and/or benefits for your valuable skills is smart. It's not like the first company deeply cares about you.
 
There's such a glut of IT staff looking for work after all the massive layoffs at Google, Dell, etc...that these "senior staffers" won't be missed at all if/when they leave. They'll be easily replaced by people who are willing to work in the office.
 
YOU are the employee...THEY are the employer.
THEY make the rules. If you don't like it...QUIT.
 
Back