• circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    A recruiter reached out to me about two weeks ago. The role was interesting but said “hybrid to start, then on-site after 3 months” – in spite of being listed as “Remote” in the title. I told the recruiter it was a hard pass. They proceeded to tell me that I really should be “more flexible” because they’re seeing fewer and fewer remote roles.

    I told them to simply remove me from any lists in the future and that I would not respond to any other recruitment requests from their company.

    I have worked remotely since far before covid. It’s been nearly 10 years. I am seeing some companies scramble for RTO, and in almost all cases, it’s companies with demonstrable investment in real estate or contractual obligations to office space. Obviously it has also been used in some cases to force resignations so the company doesn’t need as many lay-offs (specifically for those which overhired during covid). That’s it. As far as I’m concerned, there is absolutely no benefit to RTO in terms of worker performance, efficiency, or happiness.

    Companies are very likely to lose top talent with RTO. They’re also extremely unlikely to be able to attract that talent in the first place. It’s effectively a brain drain. Remote-first companies stand to continue to gain, which isn’t a bad thing at all.