deddog said:

---

The CEOs are trying to target folks that are inefficient or moonlighting. A significant number of folks (especially from Asian countries) work multiple jobs while WFH
I have a family member who worked 3 full time jobs at a time.
That's who the CEOs are trying to target.

---

OK, so when the CEO can make obscene millions, much of which they didn't deserve (Dimon did not create JPMorgan) that he can never spend in his entire life, why can't someone else who cannot get by in his expensive city for 100k, and is trying to do 3 full time jobs to keep up, what is the problem as long as the employee does his job well (which should be the only criteria)?

It seems like you are arguing in favor of the employee keeping the employee perpetually poor so that they can be controlled like a slave.

bmks270 said:

---

HoustonAg9999 said:

---

Dan Scott said:

---

WFH/remote work is so bad they say, but then corporations are laying off Americans and hiring Indians.

That makes no sense.

---

its the old school boomers who think you are not in your seat by 5am you are not working see it all the time

---

boomer executives complaining about work from home are the same ones who spent the last 3 decades replacing an office work force with an offshore one.

---

Right.

So never trust these clowns. There was a time when I admired them. Until I realize how crooked and sociopathic these criminals are.

What I find more shocking is how people on this board who are neck-deep in debt, who are not given fair raises and bonuses, laid off because the CEO needs to make his bonus still sing the praises of the CEO just because "it is the conservative way of thinking" and they have this little hope that one day they will also become CEO (ha!).

Hungry said:

---

JPM's stock price has more than tripled from its COVID low and they have posted record results nearly every quarter since then. Some of that was in a fully remote environment. All of it was in a hybrid environment. I'm sure there are folks that abuse WFH but to act like it's been a disaster for the bank seems untrue…

---

Why won't Dimon talk about people who abuse RTO?

I used to work with one fellow who told me that he spent 8 hours in the office "socializing" and building connections. Then he did 3-4 hours of work from home in the evening. I though the was full of crap, but he was right. He spent office time sitting at people's desks and chatting. That is what is needed at these big companies. He is still there and I am told doing well.

Like I said earlier, CEOs are full of crap and are hypocrites. Stop licking their boots just because they are rich. You can become rich and be a good moral person (unlike these CEOs). When you die some day, you will not take a cent of your ill-gotten stolen money with you.

Hah, old boomer here. You're not gonna make it!

infinity ag said:

---

just because "it is the conservative way of thinking"

---

You must be new around here. Wait until you see the other things people believe because they think it's the conservative way.

[No need for the vulgarity. Continue and draw a ban. There's your warning -- Staff]

[Enough trolling the board. Step back from the edge -- Staff]

infinity ag said:

---

deddog said:

---

The CEOs are trying to target folks that are inefficient or moonlighting. A significant number of folks (especially from Asian countries) work multiple jobs while WFH
I have a family member who worked 3 full time jobs at a time.
That's who the CEOs are trying to target.

---

OK, so when the CEO can make obscene millions, much of which they didn't deserve (Dimon did not create JPMorgan) that he can never spend in his entire life, why can't someone else who cannot get by in his expensive city for 100k, and is trying to do 3 full time jobs to keep up, what is the problem as long as the employee does his job well (which should be the only criteria)?

It seems like you are arguing in favor of the employee keeping the employee perpetually poor so that they can be controlled like a slave.

---

Hey Barack! Didn't know you posted here.

This argument is really simple and it always surprises me that it takes several pages to sort through. If you want to work from home and your company wants you to come in. Quit and find a job that suits your interests.

If you're a CEO who wants work from office then go out and recruit those people.

OverSeas AG said:

---

I am pretty conservative, but when Management offshores work, and then claims how great that is, and that it works (and it does) but then tells the locals to get their ass in the office to take advantage of the synergies of being co-located you know they are full of *****


Management hates the lack of control, and hate the empty RE even more.

Yes colocation is very beneficial, but we live in a world of multinationals where operational work, initiatives and op models have people from across the world working on the same value streams everyday.

I could respect someone at least saying - we hate the lack of control and the empty RE, unless there are cost reasons to not be colocated, get your ass in here. You may know they are maniacal control freaks that cant figure out that they lower costs by getting rid of unused RE, but at least they admitted it. Instead they lie, and expect their "team" to buy it.

Smh.


The US is so full of snowflakes - they are either lying, buying it or afraid to push back.

---

This is also the absolute truth. JPM has some of the most premier real estate in NYC. They are building a 1,300 ft tall building as their new HQ.

Of course work from home grinds Dimon's gears. He just forked over crazy money for new offices.

I'm curious to see how this looks 5 years from now when most leases will likely be up. RTO makes financial sense right now when companies are trying to justify their CRE space as has already been mentioned.

But I know of several situations first hand where companies are either not renewing their lease or seeking to downsize. We'll see more and more of this, and despite rhetoric like in the OP are companies really going to renew their leases as is?

Teslag said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Gilligan said:

---

One of my son's friends has his MHA from A&M and in 3+ years has been to the office once and that was to receive a TB shot.

He's never met a coworker in person.

He's not learning interpersonal skills. I don't see how he could advance in that scenario.

Kids aren't learning how to interact professionally.

---

But don't you understand? Your son's friend is 1000% more efficient than those old boomers in the office! And the world is all digital these days! Personal interaction is overrated!

---

You joke but this is all mostly true

---

In my business personal interaction is what keeps you from being just a number to your clients. Personal interaction is what allows us to connect with regulators and convince them to push our requests when they're trapped in the governmental bureaucracy. Sure as hell isn't overrated.

I work from the office and the only time when I'm not available is when I'm teaching one of my young subordinates or discussing work with my boss. The people who work from home? Ehh, its a toss-up whether they're green or yellow .

I'm no boomer, but I am 49, and I'm magnitudes more efficient than most younger or older employees in our office. IMO, efficiency stems more from personal traits and habits rather than location or tools. Tools are only efficient as their user.

WFH doesn't make people more efficient at work, it just allows them to work in shorts and a t-shirt and not have to deal with traffic.

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Gilligan said:

---

One of my son's friends has his MHA from A&M and in 3+ years has been to the office once and that was to receive a TB shot.

He's never met a coworker in person.

He's not learning interpersonal skills. I don't see how he could advance in that scenario.

Kids aren't learning how to interact professionally.

---

But don't you understand? Your son's friend is 1000% more efficient than those old boomers in the office! And the world is all digital these days! Personal interaction is overrated!

---

You joke but this is all mostly true

---

In my business personal interaction is what keeps you from being just a number to your clients. Personal interaction is what allows us to connect with regulators and convince them to push our requests when they're trapped in the governmental bureaucracy. Sure as hell isn't overrated.

I work from the office and the only time when I'm not available is when I'm teaching one of my young subordinates or discussing work with my boss. The people who work from home? Ehh, its a toss-up whether they're green or yellow .

I'm no boomer, but I am 49, and I'm magnitudes more efficient than most younger or older employees in our office. IMO, efficiency stems more from personal traits and habits rather than location or tools. Tools are only efficient as their user.

WFH doesn't make people more efficient at work, it just allows them to work in shorts and a t-shirt and not have to deal with traffic.

---

I don't think a single boomer in my office knows how to do control + F. They spend 10 minutes looking through a document for a figure.

Just one example.

Pivot tables are a foreign language.

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

In my business personal interaction is what keeps you from being just a number to your clients. Personal interaction is what allows us to connect with regulators and convince them to push our requests when they're trapped in the governmental bureaucracy. Sure as hell isn't overrated.

I work from the office and the only time when I'm not available is when I'm teaching one of my young subordinates or discussing work with my boss. The people who work from home? Ehh, its a toss-up whether they're green or yellow .

I'm no boomer, but I am 49, and I'm magnitudes more efficient than most younger or older employees in our office. IMO, efficiency stems more from personal traits and habits rather than location or tools. Tools are only efficient as their user.

WFH doesn't make people more efficient at work, it just allows them to work in shorts and a t-shirt and not have to deal with traffic.

---

I don't think a single boomer in my office knows how to do control + F. They spend 10 minutes looking through a document for a figure.

Just one example.

Pivot tables are a foreign language.

---

60 YO here and well-versed in those and other basic technology needed to succeed in today's modern world.

Yeah I see some grey hairs that can't do basic tech stuff; their days are numbered.

I also see a lot of youngsters who over-rely on techy stuff and think the whole world operates on email, text, instagram, whatsapp, Teams, Zoom.... you name it.

To the post above yours, there's still a lot of real world stuff that gets resolved in person. It's why I travel half the time and why companies still spend considerable dollars on travel. While a lot of people are still frustrated that others haven't responded to their emails timely (or at all), I've already met with customers, regulators, allies, etc. and got stuff done while they're still fiddling with their computers.

The techy stuff is good for simple, basic communications. Stuff that is complicated, sensitive, or likely to involve conflict is usually much better handled in person. And face it, a lot of the things we deal with at work is complicated, sensitive and involves conflict. It's why they need us humans to manage it. If it's simple and basic, it will be automated if it hasn't been already.

Those who know how to blend technology and personal skills together to accomplish their objectives will be the winners of tomorrow. Those who rely on only one or the other will be left behind.

Quote:

---

I don't think a single boomer in my office knows how to do control + F.

---

That would be me.

Glad I'm retired.

Oh, and btw, both Jamie Dimon and Sheila Bair should be in jail.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

In my business personal interaction is what keeps you from being just a number to your clients. Personal interaction is what allows us to connect with regulators and convince them to push our requests when they're trapped in the governmental bureaucracy. Sure as hell isn't overrated.

I work from the office and the only time when I'm not available is when I'm teaching one of my young subordinates or discussing work with my boss. The people who work from home? Ehh, its a toss-up whether they're green or yellow .

I'm no boomer, but I am 49, and I'm magnitudes more efficient than most younger or older employees in our office. IMO, efficiency stems more from personal traits and habits rather than location or tools. Tools are only efficient as their user.

WFH doesn't make people more efficient at work, it just allows them to work in shorts and a t-shirt and not have to deal with traffic.

---

I don't think a single boomer in my office knows how to do control + F. They spend 10 minutes looking through a document for a figure.

Just one example.

Pivot tables are a foreign language.

---

60 YO here and well-versed in those and other basic technology needed to succeed in today's modern world.

Yeah I see some grey hairs that can't do basic tech stuff; their days are numbered.

I also see a lot of youngsters who over-rely on techy stuff and think the whole world operates on email, text, instagram, whatsapp, Teams, Zoom.... you name it.

To the post above yours, there's still a lot of real world stuff that gets resolved in person. It's why I travel half the time and why companies still spend considerable dollars on travel. While a lot of people are still frustrated that others haven't responded to their emails timely (or at all), I've already met with customers, regulators, allies, etc. and got stuff done while they're still fiddling with their computers.

The techy stuff is good for simple, basic communications. Stuff that is complicated, sensitive, or likely to involve conflict is usually much better handled in person. And face it, a lot of the things we deal with at work is complicated, sensitive and involves conflict. It's why they need us humans to manage it. If it's simple and basic, it will be automated if it hasn't been already.

Those who know how to blend technology and personal skills together to accomplish their objectives will be the winners of tomorrow. Those who rely on only one or the other will be left behind.

---

Sounds like you are talking about mostly communication related tasks. Which certainly does have merit. In person presentations will always be more valuable than something over Zoom. That being said, you need to know how to turn on your camera, turn on your mic and screen share. A lot of olds don't.

For analysis, putting reports together, etc, you need to be sophisticated with tech. Or you are going to be left behind. That's why I laugh when I hear the 80s were more productive.

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Gilligan said:

---

One of my son's friends has his MHA from A&M and in 3+ years has been to the office once and that was to receive a TB shot.

He's never met a coworker in person.

He's not learning interpersonal skills. I don't see how he could advance in that scenario.

Kids aren't learning how to interact professionally.

---

But don't you understand? Your son's friend is 1000% more efficient than those old boomers in the office! And the world is all digital these days! Personal interaction is overrated!

---

You joke but this is all mostly true

---

In my business personal interaction is what keeps you from being just a number to your clients. Personal interaction is what allows us to connect with regulators and convince them to push our requests when they're trapped in the governmental bureaucracy. Sure as hell isn't overrated.

I work from the office and the only time when I'm not available is when I'm teaching one of my young subordinates or discussing work with my boss. The people who work from home? Ehh, its a toss-up whether they're green or yellow .

I'm no boomer, but I am 49, and I'm magnitudes more efficient than most younger or older employees in our office. IMO, efficiency stems more from personal traits and habits rather than location or tools. Tools are only efficient as their user.

WFH doesn't make people more efficient at work, it just allows them to work in shorts and a t-shirt and not have to deal with traffic.

---

I don't think a single boomer in my office knows how to do control + F. They spend 10 minutes looking through a document for a figure.

Just one example.

Pivot tables are a foreign language.

---

I was sharing my screen with a coworker the other day. It was a very mundane task that required looking up part numbers on a long list in the web. When I Ctrl+ F I blew his mind

infinity ag said:

---

Hungry said:

---

JPM's stock price has more than tripled from its COVID low and they have posted record results nearly every quarter since then. Some of that was in a fully remote environment. All of it was in a hybrid environment. I'm sure there are folks that abuse WFH but to act like it's been a disaster for the bank seems untrue…

---

Why won't Dimon talk about people who abuse RTO?

I used to work with one fellow who told me that he spent 8 hours in the office "socializing" and building connections. Then he did 3-4 hours of work from home in the evening. I though the was full of crap, but he was right. He spent office time sitting at people's desks and chatting. That is what is needed at these big companies. He is still there and I am told doing well.

Like I said earlier, CEOs are full of crap and are hypocrites. Stop licking their boots just because they are rich. You can become rich and be a good moral person (unlike these CEOs). When you die some day, you will not take a cent of your ill-gotten stolen money with you.

---

I laughed when I heard his ran. The stuff he *****ed about can easily apply to in office too. People just don't waste time differently in office.

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

[
I'm no boomer, but I am 49, and I'm magnitudes more efficient than most younger or older employees in our office. IMO, efficiency stems more from personal traits and habits rather than location or tools. Tools are only efficient as their user.

---

You are vastly underselling the abilities of computers. There are many tools out there that can completely automate slow, terrible processes. If I've learned how to use those while you just focused on getting better at the current process, I don't care if you're a hyper motivated speed demon on Adderall, I'm going to be faster and more efficient.

I used to work at a bank and there was a guy who had to execute this awful monthly data loading process that required him to manually copy and paste a couple hundred cells from two dozen excel sheets into a new sheet. He handed it off to me and I spent a few hours writing python code that would dig around all the excel sheets and do the copying and pasting for me. It reduced his 6-8 hour task to 10-15 minutes.

I don't care what your personal traits and habits are, if you're not adopting this stuff you are leaving so much efficiency on the table. Bill Gates famously said he wanted to hire people who were a little lazy because they'd figure out the fastest ways to do their tasks.

WFH works for the high performers, but they would be high performers regardless in office or remote. Unfortunately, at most companies only about 10-20% of their employees are high performers, the rest of their employees are just average or below average, and these types typically suffer in WFH environments. They need to be in the office to be productive, they get too distracted at home.

I worked remote for 7 years and loved it. I ended up getting laid off 2 years ago, and found an in office job that pays me significantly more. I'm happy at this job but I'd switch back to remote in a heartbeat if I could lol. There are some benefits for working in office, I think it's much easier to get laid off when you're working from home and not in the office everyday. I worked two remote jobs and got laid off from both of them, the employees that didn't get laid off from were the ones working in the corporate office or in the plants.

I think things have generally changed too much to support a fully in the office schedule.
1. Families have 2 parents working. Yet school generally starts right when work starts and then ends an hour or two before work ends.
2. There is no break from work. Like how cyber bullying made bullying way worse the inability to ever unplug from work because at any time you could get an email or text of phone call asking you to do something. Modern executives are AWFUL at setting work boundaries because they never want to say no.
3. The company has no loyalty for an employee. You are just a number.
4. Most non-upper managers do their work solo. You could argue they do most of the actual value add work. Yeah coming in to the office a few times a week will establish connections but it isn't necessary for day to day functions.
5. Outsourcing. India for IT, Mexico for accountants, and South America for call centers. If those functions can be fully remote why do their stateside department workers have to come in every day?

Ultimately the RTO can only be partially justified because of managers who judge the quality of an employee by how hard they are seen working. That is a dumb model. Now you might say but but bad employees misuse work from home. Well get rid of them then. Poorly set expectations is a managerial failure.

I attended a high level technical meeting at National Instruments/Emerson in Austin a few weeks ago. The entire campus was vacant. It felt like I was in a dead mall video on YouTube.

BoydCrowder13 said:

---

OverSeas AG said:

---

I am pretty conservative, but when Management offshores work, and then claims how great that is, and that it works (and it does) but then tells the locals to get their ass in the office to take advantage of the synergies of being co-located you know they are full of *****


Management hates the lack of control, and hate the empty RE even more.

Yes colocation is very beneficial, but we live in a world of multinationals where operational work, initiatives and op models have people from across the world working on the same value streams everyday.

I could respect someone at least saying - we hate the lack of control and the empty RE, unless there are cost reasons to not be colocated, get your ass in here. You may know they are maniacal control freaks that cant figure out that they lower costs by getting rid of unused RE, but at least they admitted it. Instead they lie, and expect their "team" to buy it.

Smh.


The US is so full of snowflakes - they are either lying, buying it or afraid to push back.

---

This is also the absolute truth. JPM has some of the most premier real estate in NYC. They are building a 1,300 ft tall building as their new HQ.

Of course work from home grinds Dimon's gears. He just forked over crazy money for new offices.

---

Well, to this 53 yr old who used to work in the office even when I was able to WFH, during my 20 yrs in IT, he sounds like a ****ing tard in today's tech workplace. He should be replaced with someone smarter.

Now, as to WFH vs RTO, I see benefits to a hybrid of the two, depending on job category and quality of workforce in question. My team, when I was in IT, absolutely could hale WFH either in hybrid or 100% format. Most of the 20-somethings I either work with now, or know? Absolutely not.

A lot of Boomers were dealing with personal computers before there was a mouse. We know all the keyboard shortcuts. I seldom take my hand off the keyboard to perform an action.

I know you generalized, but by the same token, I know a lot of younger folks who know absolutely no keyboard shortcuts.

aggiehawg said:

---

This guy gets it and is laying down the law. WARNING language.

👀
In leaked audio, Jamie Dimon takes his employees, especially the younger ones, to the woodshed over their desire to keep “working” remotely.
🔥 pic.twitter.com/X7lcwxUlz4

— John Ziegler (@Zigmanfreud) February 14, 2025

---

That's FIRE

How hard would it be disable the WFH functionality and enable during off hours or bad weather days?

It is really funny when you work for an IT or network or telecom company who is in the business of providing remote and universal any time anywhere connectivity and they go back to reporting into the office every day.

It's even worse when the office network pipe kind of sucks and they refuse to upgrade it, and you spend a lot of time working on virtual machines and they're too cheap to buy more spin-up capacity to keep us from having to wait on stuff to run or update constantly. You can't do design work well when your virtual machine is lagging or thinking all the time.

The VPN is literally faster and more responsive l, but IT refuses to believe out real world experiences.

For what it is worth, we connect commercial spaces and residences, so I guess it evens out in the big picture but the aggregate network demand would be roughly the same.

In fact, you'd think that the employers would have been happy as their employees had been personally subsidizing internet capacity and power usage working from home.

infinity ag said:

---

deddog said:

---

The CEOs are trying to target folks that are inefficient or moonlighting. A significant number of folks (especially from Asian countries) work multiple jobs while WFH
I have a family member who worked 3 full time jobs at a time.
That's who the CEOs are trying to target.

---

OK, so when the CEO can make obscene millions, much of which they didn't deserve (Dimon did not create JPMorgan) that he can never spend in his entire life, why can't someone else who cannot get by in his expensive city for 100k, and is trying to do 3 full time jobs to keep up, what is the problem as long as the employee does his job well (which should be the only criteria)?

It seems like you are arguing in favor of the employee keeping the employee perpetually poor so that they can be controlled like a slave.

---

I dont have a dog in the fight.
But that is absolutely who the CEOs are going after.
Folks that are working multiple jobs, and folks that sit home and srent productive most of the day.
It can be extremely inefficient for folks who actually WFH and are productive,

What percentage of WFH's that claim greater productivity do not actually deliver on that claim?

It has to be less than the 100% that claim it.

In a big corporation it's not necessarily the best people that move up, it's the people that network and are their own advocates. It's easier to do that in the office.

If you don't have those aspirations, then WFH and do the minimum possible that doesn't get you fired or cut. At some point you'll reach a cap where no matter how hard you work, you won't get a raise or promotion. That usually happens I your 40s though. If you're in your 20s and want to move up at the same company then go in unless you know you're not staying long. These corps don't care about you so don't care about them. WFH and day trade or work on your side hustle especially after you've been capped.

infinity ag said:

---

Jamie Dimon is an out of touch "let them have cake" type of moron.

I don't necessarily disagree with the RTO mandate, but this clueless boomer needs to realize that work in 2025 is international. In my previous job, we were asked to work from the office, but we all came in after 1.5 hours of commute only to get on calls all day with people in different parts of the US and the world. I never even talked to anyone in the office so what was the point of coming in? Everyone is on calls and shouting over each other. Meeting rooms were scarce as well.

I think he is on his way out anyway so he doesn't care. He's managed the company well for 20 years but he is now losing it. Does he think people can't waste time in the office? Dumbo.

Boomers like him who are stuck in the 70s need to be put to pasture.

---

Ok, I'll play...

Private industry (the income generating industry) should have flexibility of work location, no doubt. I enjoy my executive flexibility to work from where I choose, when I choose - but part of my job is being there for others and mentoring, so I show up. Our office has a lot of daily interaction, so it's not really feasible for us to all work remotely - especially the junior employees in the company.

Government (the non-income generating industry) should work at the office. We, the American taxpayer, afford their salaries. They are civil servants. I expect them to show up and work at their office. I'm generalizing, but government workers aren't known to be overly efficient or to have the strongest work ethic.

The least they can do is show up.

Boomers love their SS and kiddos that actually go to work, you know, leave the house and go to the corporate building.

One more thing, GO TO CHURCH, not online but an actual church and worship GOD. Younger generation is hell bound.

deddog said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

deddog said:

---

The CEOs are trying to target folks that are inefficient or moonlighting. A significant number of folks (especially from Asian countries) work multiple jobs while WFH
I have a family member who worked 3 full time jobs at a time.
That's who the CEOs are trying to target.

---

OK, so when the CEO can make obscene millions, much of which they didn't deserve (Dimon did not create JPMorgan) that he can never spend in his entire life, why can't someone else who cannot get by in his expensive city for 100k, and is trying to do 3 full time jobs to keep up, what is the problem as long as the employee does his job well (which should be the only criteria)?

It seems like you are arguing in favor of the employee keeping the employee perpetually poor so that they can be controlled like a slave.

---

I dont have a dog in the fight.
But that is absolutely who the CEOs are going after.
Folks that are working multiple jobs, and folks that sit home and srent productive most of the day.
It can be extremely inefficient for folks who actually WFH and are productive,

---

I disagree that CEOs are going after them. There is no way to accurately measure "productivity" in the modern world. In the old days you could say "Steve produced 10 widgets in an hour, Peter did only 8". It is not as clear cut today in the tech world. People pretend they can, but it is never possible.

If people waste time during WFH, they also waste time during RTO doing "water cooler talk" and flirting with the hot secretary.

The real reasons are what the CEO can actually measure.

1. He's paid for his new building and if it is used only 10%, he ends up looking like a fool for having paid for it.
2. The local politicians are calling him up and asking him to call his employees to office because local businesses are losing revenue (restaurants, shopping, cabs). If the local economy suffers, the politician loses the election so he threatens the CEO with whatever he can do like tax breaks or whatever.

The other thing is the CEO just feels good about it. Nothing to do with productivity. He likes to walk in and see people toiling away like they did in the old days of factories. Makes him survey the crowd, puff up his chest and say "I'm the boss of all these people".

There are others, but these come to mind.


Some jobs cannot be done effectively from home. Like Sales where a personal connection is needed. Tech work can be done remotely very easily. Dimon calling all his employees to the office shows how out of touch he is.

I am sure he carries his briefcase from the 70s to work every day.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

It is really funny when you work for an IT or network or telecom company who is in the business of providing remote and universal any time anywhere connectivity and they go back to reporting into the office every day.

---

Yep.

I worked, in IT, for a major telecom for almost 19 yrs, for the finance department and we provided connectivity, worldwide. Our building had several T-1s, even.

Our CFO was a tech illiterate moron. When I lived in Iowa, and flooded in 2008, we HAD to work from home. The bldg was closed. So, my team I ran all were working from home, meeting once week at a restaurant to keep our team juices flowing. We absolutely proved that WFH was not only possible, but we did just as much work as we did in-office.

Yet, as soon as the bldg was back up and running, WFH went back to the hybrid 4/1 office/WFH schedule. Because the CFO didn't think WFH was working, with zero proof.

Easy to tell here who the middle-low level WFH employees are.