Thread regarding Bank of America layoffs

@2pqk+1r03ZAR9 - r u kidding??? Do you realize how many EMPTY 2nd, 3rd, 4th vacation homes, condos, and boats these so-called "leaders: have?!?!?

Gimme a break... "Let's Get Real."

@3kbq+1r03ZAR9 - THANK YOU!!! This is the first thing I've heard on the topic that actually makes any sense.

They're all about pocketing some coin.

@2nwu+1r03ZAR9 - we do all that in our local suburb/town. There are local businesses (cafe, dry clnrs, etc) and local services in other places besides downtown.

The only ones making a buck off me are gas/parking. All I add is pollution.

I bring my own lunch because my pay has not kept up with inflation, etc. and I can get Starbucks where I live.

There are local governments giving tax breaks to large employers that require their employees return to the office to help boost/revitalize local business post COVID.

I personally don't have a problem with some level of enforcement however they should count a day off entered in workday as an "office day" so we don't get reprimanded for using our paid time off. Other companies enforcing RTO count paid days off as being in the office.

The best reason I can think of is for MONEY VELOCITY...

People sitting at home aren't going to the coffee shop, the dry cleaner, the daycare, the work cafe, etc.

The lease money excuse makes me laugh. It makes no difference to the leasing expense whether the building is occupied or not!

Because even though we can prove we are more productive at home the reality is they are still paying overhead on buildings they are in contract on. Until the leases start to end we will have to come into office. They don’t want to pay for a house that no one lives in.

I don’t think they “have” to pay for layoffs. There’s no law requiring severance.

If I’m not mistaken, many companies have historically offered it in exchange for employees signing a document saying you won’t speak ill of the company. I heard that as of last year, companies can no longer ask you to sign that, so my guess is that companies may stop offering severance at some point in the future.

I’m not 100% sure I’m correct, but I recall reading something in the news about it.

@tnk+1r03ZAR9 - mandatory RTO is exactly on topic here, precisely because in the absence of any tangible bona fide reason for enforcement, everyone knows it's to increase misery to drive attrition, so they don't have to pay for.... LAYOFFS.

RTO + hiring freeze = passive aggressive ploy to drive voluntary head count reduction.

Save $$ + avoid bad press.

Big fat open secret, Not fooling anyone.

Forced attrition in lieu of layoffs seems right on topic.

thank you BM for keeping a close watch on these blogs and responding quickly, everyone know this blog is about layoffs, since there are no layoffs why do you care?

Here is yet another post about this. Can we stop? The reality is the reality. Complaining about it constantly is old. This is a blog about layoffs!