JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon delivers a stern warning to remote workers::undefined

163 points

“I will not allow you to wreck my portfolio by causing a massive drop in demand for office space in the cities which will devalue my real estate assets and cause landlords to default en masse on the loans I made them.”

Why doesn’t he just say what he means ?

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Capitalists gonna capitalize!

permalink
report
parent
reply
104 points

“I completely understand why someone doesn’t want to commute an hour and a half every day. Totally get it… Doesn’t mean they have to have a job here either.”

Then why hire people living 90 minutes away?

Sure limit yourself to workers living close by. But don’t give me any of that labor shortage bullshit then.

permalink
report
reply
62 points
*

There is a shortage of people willing to work for the wage you’re offering at the terms you’re offering. There are millions of people choosing not to work for many, many employers right now. It will only get larger.

Depending on how old you are, understand, for the rest of your life, there will always be more jobs than employees, act like it and be brutal with your employers about it. The boomers were accelerating into retirement and then COVID exploded lots of employment norms, for good reasons.

Employers have been used to, for decades, lobbying to hire, fire and treat you disposable on a whim. Demand a lot, there are far fewer of you than there are of their boring companies to burn your life hours.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-73 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

That idea has all kinds of problems. There’s a substantial amount of investment in education necessary and even then, immigration still doesn’t counteract population ageing/shrinking. If you can read or have any well developed skill, you have no business falling victim to fake fears like this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

No, they aren’t. If you’re so easily replaceable then you’re worthless anyway.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

From what I am seeing does not seems true.

What I am seeing is that the more “intelligent” employer use the great replacement to get rid of unwanted people and WFH to attract good people that they could not normally have for a miriad of reasons.
(I am from Europe btw)

permalink
report
parent
reply
65 points
*

Jamie Dimon is a dipshit who brings practically nothing to the table. He shows up to the building, terrifies the people around him, pisses people off, shits in a waste basket and hires college interns to provide fresh blood infusions to treat his wrinkles.

Executives rarely bring genuine, functional value to a company, and that definitely includes Dimon. What a notorious fuckwit. JPMC is one example where the head could be cut off and the company would actually benefit from it.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Sounds like you worked there or know someone who does.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

You are correct.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I worked at JP Morgan and DB

The people who run these companies are completely horrible assholes.

They also make sure every layer of superfluous management below them consists of immense, puckering assholes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

You can put a turd in an expensive suit, but in the end it’s still just Jamie Dimon.

permalink
report
reply
27 points

“Old guy still doesn’t understand how anyone could be working if he can’t physically see them working”

Fully remote is the way of the future, in tech anyway. Use the money you saved on not renting office space to fly teams to the same area for a week or so a few times a year, there’s definite value in meeting, working together in person and going out for a beer afterwards. For short stints.

Otherwise, the lack of commute and the ability to focus uninterrupted for longer periods is massive advantage for remote work

permalink
report
reply
11 points

Fully remote is the way of the future, in tech anyway. Use the money you saved on not renting office space to fly teams to the same area for a week or so a few times a year, there’s definite value in meeting, working together in person and going out for a beer afterwards

But make it optional and don’t penalize folks for not showing up. The last thing I want to do is meet up with my coworkers and go for drinks especially given the fact that I do not drink alcohol nor enjoy social outings in general.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Fully remote is the way of the future, in tech anyway. Use the money you saved on not renting office space to fly teams to the same area for a week or so a few times a year, there’s definite value in meeting, working together in person and going out for a beer afterwards. For short stints.

Fully remote is one of the ways of the future. A more reasonable approch is a mixed way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

If by a “mixed way” you mean 1-2 days in office, that would never work for a lot of people for the reasons below.

  1. You have to commute those days.
  2. You have to find child care but it’s not consistent so your possibly paying more per day for the few days vs. getting a good rate for weekly.
  3. You have to carry all your equipment with you. (I personally have to carry my laptop plus the equipment I support which takes like 2 trips from the car to my desk plus time to set everything up.)
  4. Not all of team comes in the same day/same location, so your still on virtual meetings anyway.

To be fair a lot of this is my personal experience and other companies may work differently but for me, I’m staying fully remote. Good companies/teams make it work. If your company/team can’t work like there are other issues at fault.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

If by a “mixed way” you mean 1-2 days in office, that would never work for a lot of people for the reasons below.

I was thinking more “when I need/want to go to the office” than a fixed schedule.

All your points are valid, but I can make counter-points for a full remote solution, if I want. One example is that for a full remote position you need to have an home office or, at least, a place where you can work without interference. Not everyone has it.

You have to carry all your equipment with you. (I personally have to carry my laptop plus the equipment I support which takes like 2 trips from the car to my desk plus time to set everything up.)

I suppose that depends on the work you do. Of course in some cases a “full remote” or a “full office” solution is better than a mixed approach. For example, I personally have not to carry anything going to the office since I have a work laptop at home and a desktop at the office. I understand I am been lucky btw.

Not all of team comes in the same day/same location, so your still on virtual meetings anyway.

That is just an organizational problem.

To be fair a lot of this is my personal experience and other companies may work differently but for me, I’m staying fully remote. Good companies/teams make it work. If your company/team can’t work like there are other issues at fault.

That’s the point. Every way (full remote, full office, mixed and so on) are good for someone and bad for other.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 555K

    Comments