CEO Carl Pei says remote work “is not compatible” with the company.
That headline is rather confusing. Then I realised that “Nothing” is a fricking company.
Also branding his stuff as Nothing phone/OS/ear is hilarious. Hilariously bad.
‘This is a company for grown ups’
And yet you don’t trust your employees to get their work done unless directly before your watchful eye? Get real, chump.
“People can’t communicate as well remotely,” the CEO, projecting their personal lack of communication skills on everyone else.
Nothing CEO Carl Pei suggested that those unable to transition from remote working should leave the company and “find an environment where you thrive.”
Get completely fucked you dismissive shitbag.
Pei said in the email, telling employees who are worried about flexibility that “this is a company for grown ups.”
I’ll say it again. Get completely…
I typically cheer device makers because I want competition to force my preferred device maker to compete on innovation. I had been on the side of Nothing. I now want it to fail. I want this dickfaced asshole executive to find out he ran his company into the ground by pissing off the talented people below him.
Most likely his company will slowly crumble over the coming decades as his top talent leaves due to mistreatment while he wonders helplessly and obliviously how it all went wrong
“I know this is a controversial decision that may not be a fit for everyone, and there are definitely companies out there that thrive in remote or hybrid setups,” he added. “But that’s not right for our type of business, and won’t help us fully realize our potential as a company.”
By comparison, Nothing’s demand for five-day office attendance may sting for employees who helped shape the company while embracing its founding work-from-home environment.
Besides calling people who want flexibility children, the company was founded as work from home even though that wasn’t right for the type of company. Sounds like the CEO doesn’t know how the company works.
how to get rid of your best and most talented workers
I’ve seen that theory a lot, but I just don’t think it’s actually all that common. Layoffs are layoffs, but the common thing about layoffs is they are usually calculated to cut the worst performing employees and go up from there.
A forced RTO policy is going to be unpredictable in who stays and who goes
The thing is, these decisions are made at a level that doesn’t much care for the distinction. Mid-level managers know who the good workers are, and in regular layoffs they’d be making decisions about who to lay off. But even before that happens, top-level executives have decided how many to lay off, and it’s not much of a concern to them who specifically goes.
Same with RTO constructive layoffs. They estimate a certain percentage will quit, reducing their cost base. There’s not much more thought than that.