10 out of the 11 board members are in favor of pressing these people back to work in the office. The CEO of the company has been resistant to this because he fears losing some key employees.
I'm the only board member who is ambivalent about it -- and even supportive of the resistant employees (so long as they are resistant for the right reasons). At our last board of directors meeting I made a very simple statement to explain myself to the other ten board members:
"All of you should have thought of this crap back in 2020 when you bought into the COVID hysteria and insisted on sending these employees to work from home. This is what I warned you about back in March of 2020 when we first met in that emergency meeting to discuss the company's COVID protocols."
At the time, I warned everyone on the board of directors that there would never be a "return to normal" if the employees ended up working from home for more than two weeks.
Interestingly, the subject hasn't come up in recent months since we had that last meeting.
“All of you should have thought of this crap back in 2020 when you bought into the COVID hysteria and insisted on sending these employees to work from home. This is what I warned you about back in March of 2020 when we first met in that emergency meeting to discuss the company’s COVID protocols.”
Covid lockdowns clearly accelerated the transition to remote work, but the movement was already under way and was going to continue increasing regardless. Too many advantages for employers and employees, if you have the right employees and the nature of the work allows it to be done remotely.
You know who the key employees are.
You need to keep every one of them—whatever it takes—don’t worry about the “rules”.
Some corporations have solved this problem by creating “teams” focused on solving tough problems—and let those teams work remotely if they wish.
The next question you should be asking is why you are keeping so many employees that are not pulling their weight.
The “remote work” issue is a great opportunity to be honest with yourselves—is it time to cut loose some of the less productive employees.
Yep.
re white collar work there are a few things that work better in person, and those things will vary by job, sector, even individual businesses and should be hand-tuned.
For nearly everything else, the office, the cubicle, and all that came with it were (are) overhead to both the company and especially to the employees in terms of both plain cash and time.
Correlating: imagine these WEF stooges actually trying to get all of everyone crammed into “15 minute cities.”
There are key employees that need to be retained , there are good employees that are worth keeping and there are dead wood employees that are best replaced.
The trick is to identify the key people and do what it takes to retain them at any cost.
Then do your best to keep the good people worth keeping
Then use this situation as an opportunity to get rid of the dead wood employees by allowing them to quit on their own initiative
Then have a proactive recruiting program in place to identify high quality workers, many of whom are on the job market because they quit their jobs and who now need to pay bills and are getting a reality check to replace the dead wood and the good employees who left the company.
There is a decent chance there may be a window of opportunity for an employers market to recruit good people at a reasonable pay scale in an orderly fashion if one is properly prepared.