Bob Iger Wants Disney Employees Back in Office
Disney’s recently-returned CEO Bob Iger sent a memo to employees requesting those currently with a hybrid work-from-home schedule spend four days a week in-office starting March 1, 2023. This post shares the memo plus our commentary about this move back to in-person work and its underlying motivations, whether it’s a layoff in disguise, and potential implications for Walt Disney World. (Updated February 17, 2023.)
In the memo to Walt Disney Company employees, Bob Iger asked employees currently working a hybrid schedule to spend four days a week on-site, targeting Monday through Thursday as in-person workdays. As justification, Iger emphasized his belief in the benefit of working together in person because “creativity is the heart and soul of who we are and what we do at Disney.”
Iger explained that in a creative business like Disney, “nothing can replace the ability to connect, observe, and create with peers that comes from being physically together, nor the opportunity to grow professionally by learning from leaders and mentors. It is my belief that working together more in-person will benefit the Company’s creativity, culture, and our employees’ careers.”
February 17, 2023 Update: Corporate employees at the Walt Disney Company are pushing back against the new return-to-office (RTO) mandate that will require employees to appear in office four days per week starting in March. According to the Washington Post, more than 2,300 employees have signed an internal petition asking CEO Bob Iger to reconsider the mandate.
This sets up a clash between employees and the corporation over the RTO mandate, which ranks among the strictest for big companies in the post-pandemic era. Disney employees argue that the mandate is “likely to have unintended consequences that cause long-term harm to the company.” The petition signees include corporate employees at ABC, 20th Century Fox, Marvel Studios, Hulu, Pixar, FX, and other divisions.
Disney’s employees argue in the petition that the RTO mandate will lead to “forced resignations among some of our most hard-to-replace talent and vulnerable communities” and also dramatically reducing productivity, output, and efficiency. “This policy will slow, or even reverse, our post-COVID recovery and growth by creating critical resource shortages and causing irreplaceable institutional knowledge loss,” employees wrote in the petition.
There has been no response from Disney about the petition since it was submitted to upper management last week. In other corporate standoffs over RTO mandates, employees have left for different job opportunities or ignored the mandate entirely. However, much of that occurred during a different jobs market, and one where employees enjoyed considerable leverage. Already in 2023, the tides have turned on that and layoffs are becoming more common among white collar workers.
In fact, Disney just announced the company would eliminate 7,000 jobs, which will almost certainly impact its corporate office workers to a disproportionate degree as it’s unlikely to impact frontline theme park Cast Members.
In our prior analysis of the RTO mandate (see below), we contended that it was most likely a layoff in disguise. That was our position before Disney actually announced layoffs, and that news only reinforced our belief. As such, it’s doubtful that the petition signatories will have much success. Threatening to do precisely what the company wants them to do isn’t going to yield favorable results. It might be a different story if this RTO mandate were happening last year and Disney feared losing employees over it, but it’s not and they don’t.
This is one of several big organizational and structural changes that Bob Iger is expected to implement. Upon returning to the Walt Disney Company shortly before Thanksgiving, Bob Iger wasted no time in reshaping the company. His first memo to division leadership days after returning announced restructuring would begin “in the coming weeks.”
As part of that, Kareem Daniel, chairman of Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution and protege of Bob Chapek, was fired. In his memo to DMED, Iger said: “Over the coming weeks, we will begin implementing organizational and operating changes within the company. It is my intention to restructure things in a way that honors and respects creativity as the heart and soul of who we are. As you know, this is a time of enormous change and challenges in our industry, and our work will also focus on creating a more efficient and cost-effective structure.”
This follows Bob Chapek’s memo to executives back in November that “tough and uncomfortable” cost-cutting decisions would be made, including a hiring freeze, layoffs, and other austerity measures. That decision was met with intense internal backlash in Burbank, both for the substance of the news and the way it blindsided many leaders who were not given a heads up about the decision.
Shortly after returning to the helm, Bob Iger held a Cast Member Town Hall and was asked about that hiring freeze. “It felt like it was a wise thing to do in terms of the challenges, and at the moment, I don’t have any plans to change it,” Iger said at the time of the hiring freeze.
We’ll circle back to why this is significant in the commentary. First, here’s Bob Iger’s memo to Disney employees:
Dear Fellow Employees,
Happy New Year! I hope you all found time to rest and recharge during the holidays.
Since returning to Disney, I’ve been busy catching up on the many exciting projects underway across all our businesses, and I have been inspired by your boundless creativity and the remarkable success of so many of your recent endeavors.
I thought I would mention a few:
For the 7th consecutive year, Walt Disney Studios was the number-one studio at the box office, and last week, Avatar: The Way of Water became the 7th highest grossing film of all time, and its success is only continuing to grow. The Lion King celebrated its 25th anniversary on Broadway in November — one of just three productions in history to achieve this incredible milestone. Disney General Entertainment shows received an industry-leading number of mentions across year-end “Best of” lists, including seven of the top 15 most critically acclaimed television shows of the year.
Disney Parks, Experiences and Products finished the year strong as guests celebrated their holiday traditions and rang in the new year at Disney destinations around the world, and Walt Disney Imagineering marked 70 years of groundbreaking innovation and storytelling. And I would be remiss not to mention how the ESPN team expertly handled Damar Hamlin’s tragic injury, showing grace under pressure, and presenting the facts to viewers with utter respect and sensitivity. Accomplishments like these remind me of how special our Company is.
I also wanted to let you know that, as I’ve been meeting with teams throughout the Company over the past few months, I’ve been reminded of the tremendous value in being together with the people you work with. As you’ve heard me say many times, creativity is the heart and soul of who we are and what we do at Disney. And in a creative business like ours, nothing can replace the ability to connect, observe, and create with peers that comes from being physically together, nor the opportunity to grow professionally by learning from leaders and mentors. It is my belief that working together more in-person will benefit the Company’s creativity, culture, and our employees’ careers.
Starting March 1, employees currently working in a hybrid fashion will be asked to spend four days a week on-site, targeting Monday through Thursday as in-person workdays. Stay tuned for additional details.
As we embark on a new year, Disney’s historic 100th anniversary, and all the opportunities before us, we have so many reasons to be excited about the future. Certainly, this is a moment of tremendous change — for our Company, for our industry, and for the global economy — but despite the challenges, at my core I remain an optimist.
Thank you. It’s an honor to be able to work alongside you.
Best,
Bob
When it comes to commentary, this will almost certainly add further fuel to the fire about work-from-home versus on-site offices. That offers a lot to unpack, including the future of employment, whether the pandemic represented a paradigm shift or temporary blip, arguably antiquated beliefs about in-person work and oversight, older v. younger generations of leaders, and so much more.
All of that is incredibly fascinating. Despite having worked remotely for the most part since college (and exclusively since 2014), I have a huge interest in this. It seems like there’s a new article in The Atlantic about WFH on a near-weekly basis, and I’ve read almost all of them. It’s an interesting topic and one that’ll undoubtedly shape the future of work-life balances, parenting, real estate, and so much more.
It’s definitely worth discussing, but not here, since that’s almost certainly not the impetus driving this decision.
Admittedly, this blog has skewed “pro-Iger” since his return to Disney in late November. (Definitely more so than prior to his departure, but part of that was seeing how much worse the alternative was!) With that said, we also have not taken his words at face value, and will not start doing so today.
Bob Iger can attempt to offer as much spin as he’d like about creativity and the benefits of meeting face-to-face or connecting in person. While I don’t doubt that some of that is sincere, I’m also highly skeptical that someone with the leadership chops and vision of Bog Iger actually buys what he’s selling here.
Much more likely is that this is about Chapek’s prior decision to make “tough and uncomfortable” cost-cutting decisions including a hiring freeze and layoffs. While there may not seem to be an ostensible nexus between the two, they are absolutely connected.
Many companies opted for work-from-home or hybrid work models during the pandemic for obvious reasons. Some corporations suggested that this would be permanent–and many employees surmised as much, assuming it was an accelerant to trends already set in motion. Consequently, many employees relocated to areas with cheaper cost-of-living or became accustomed to the lifestyles afforded by remote work.
As things started getting back to normal in late 2021 and early 2022, many companies began looking to bring back staff to offices and return to a more “normal” work environment. By and large, this failed. Workers revolted and threatened to change jobs (or did), and it became exceedingly easy for companies that were all-remote to poach talent from those pushing for in-office work. This resulted in many companies walking back their in-office demands. (Probably no need to over-explain all of this, as it’s been better and more comprehensively covered elsewhere.)
The salient point is that white collar workers who enjoyed the benefits of work-from-home would not return to the office for a variety of reasons. If backed into a corner with an ultimatum, many or most would find new jobs instead.
The key distinction between then and now is that many companies are not overly fixated on losing employees. To the contrary, several major U.S. corporations have announced hiring freezes or layoffs in anticipation of an economic downturn or recession. Many tech firms, including Meta/Facebook, Twitter, Netflix, Amazon, Salesforce, and others have culled their workforces to cut costs. This is being drive by persistent inflation, interest rate hikes, overhiring, and normalizing demand from the height of the pandemic. It has now spilled out beyond the high-growth tech industry, with other companies (Goldman Sachs did so just today) announcing layoffs.
What the Walt Disney Company is doing here is almost certainly aimed at reducing headcount, trimming its number of employees without the unpleasantness of layoffs. It wouldn’t be the first time in recent history–Imagineering’s (supposed) relocation to Lake Nona would be different means to the same end.
In fact, just as layoffs began in the tech industry and have spread to other companies, so too has this practice. Return-to-office mandates have been issued under the guise of greater efficiency, but really are disguised attempts to reduce staffing without layoffs. Employees who refuse to comply are treated as having quit, which allows a company to trim employee ranks without the negative headlines or cost of job cuts.
Given that Disney had a more flexible remote work policy than this for some positions before March 2020 alone suggests it’s not all about creativity, etc. The ultimate “tell” will be whether Disney grants exceptions to this policy–just as it did for the Imagineering relocation–for positions that are more difficult to fill and where employees have greater leverage. If those with more bargaining power are given exceptions, it’ll demonstrate that this is less about corporate culture, and more about evolving realities of the labor market and broader economy.
As for what this means for Walt Disney World visitors…probably not much at all. This also might come as a surprise. If you’ve read even a few posts here over the last two years, you’ve likely heard us blame this or that on staffing shortages. They’re the reason characters have been slow to return, restaurants still aren’t offering all meal services, and so much more. Staffing shortages have become something of a boogeyman (except real) for which we’ve blamed many if not most of Walt Disney World’s operational shortcomings.
While improving tremendously, staffing shortages remain a key impediment to fully normal operations at Walt Disney World. The company has had tremendous difficulty filling certain key roles, and turnover is incredibly high–even as Disney hires aggressively, it has been losing employees almost as quickly as it can onboard them. As a result of this, Disney has left money on the table–because it has literally been able to fill tables at restaurants, offer a full slate of upcharge offerings, etc.
Here, two things can be true at once. The Walt Disney Company wants to reduce its white collar employee headcount and Walt Disney World has a shortage of certain Cast Members in more guest-facing positions.
This in-office mandate will likely apply to employees at Team Disney Orlando (and Anaheim), but it’s not relevant to frontline Cast Members. That much should be obvious, since the waiters at ‘Ohana, ride operators during After Hours at Magic Kingdom, princesses at Akershus–and so forth–never could do any part of their jobs remotely.
Ultimately, it’s possible that Walt Disney World will also slow down the hiring of frontline Cast Members, weary of a shift from pent-up demand to a slowing economy. However, that is not what’s happening here–and it has yet to occur with frontline Cast Members. As of right now, Walt Disney World still has a full slate of open positions it’s trying to fill, including some with hiring bonuses, and has job fairs every Wednesday in January 2023.
Planning a Walt Disney World trip? Learn about hotels on our Walt Disney World Hotels Reviews page. For where to eat, read our Walt Disney World Restaurant Reviews. To save money on tickets or determine which type to buy, read our Tips for Saving Money on Walt Disney World Tickets post. Our What to Pack for Disney Trips post takes a unique look at clever items to take. For what to do and when to do it, our Walt Disney World Ride Guides will help. For comprehensive advice, the best place to start is our Walt Disney World Trip Planning Guide for everything you need to know!
YOUR THOUGHTS
What do you think about the Iger’s memo asking hybrid employees to return to the office? What about Iger’s supposed belief in the benefit of working together in person because creativity is the heart and soul of Disney? Thoughts on this being a layoff in disguise? Are you bullish or bearish about the company’s future as the Walt Disney Company enters its 100th year? Think things will get better or worse throughout 2023? Do you agree or disagree with our assessment? Any questions we can help you answer? Hearing your feedback–even when you disagree with us–is both interesting to us and helpful to other readers, so please share your thoughts below in the comments!
Cost of renting in Orlando is 1400 a month but a cast member makes $16 an hour which means they do not qualify for a rental with the 3X the limit rule landlord’s impose wages should be $26 an hour and if these employees aren’t making this I’m not sure how they are not homeless.
I support good if not great pay for CMs, but there is a limit to what can be done. My experience working for the Mouse was in the DCP, so not quite the same as regular hourly CMs. Some things are the same everywhere. Just like most anyone working an hourly job, they will have to have roommates.
While I think that the cost-cutting (or staff cutting) can’t be removed from the executive calculus here, I think that you’re not giving the other motivation its fair valuation. The ensemble/team arts (movies, stage, design, writing etc.) are particularly reliant on spontaneous interaction for inspiration. While the younger generations are more apt to find this in virtual interaction than we geezers, it’s still no substitute for the in person creative process. There’s a reason for the existence of the “writer’s room”, and it’s not just to keep all of the inmates in one cell. As good as remote meetings software has become, it still can’t substitute for the real thing when bouncing ideas of the wall, especially for comedic writing. Think of all of the vintage stock footage that Disney loves to bring out where there is one person hunched over a sketch pad or piano and a collaborative partner is leaning over their shoulder and pointing something out. Granted, most of the actual photos may be largely staged, but that sort of in person work is still a pillar of the creative ensemble process. With a disproportionate number of recent creative failures from the studios, this may be an important step in returning those branches of the company to maximum effectiveness (and maybe slightly better efficiency). We certainly can’t blame all of the studio flops on remote work, but increasing face to face group collaboration can only improve the overall results.
Long story short: While the cynical interpretation of the announcement may be the most accurate representation of strategic intent, you haven’t assigned proper value to in person collaboration in specific reference to the creative arts. Every scrap of brand value that Disney has is ultimately derived through the creative process, which is not something that can be cobbled together by a committee of M.B.A’s. They have to get the creative side of the company firing on all cylinders again. You can’t sell Moana toys without first making a good Moana movie.
Not that I know a ton of creatives at Disney, but the ones I do know have been back on-site (in both Florida and California) for a while. Some for more than a full year at this point.
Most Disney employees work in non-creative roles.
“Imagineering’s (supposed) relocation to Lake Nona”
There was some third-party talk from the developers of the property about a month ago that Disney is still planning on moving (some) jobs to Lake Nova, so this definitely feels like more of the same, with the same exceptions made for jobs in tight labor markets.
“Given that Disney had a more flexible remote work policy than this for some positions before March 2020 alone suggests it’s not all about creativity.”
Yes. A widespread announcement like this instead of a workplace-by-workplace guidance (there’s a LOT of differences within Disney divisions, let alone across them) makes it clear that this is meant to encourage quits and retirements.
I agree with Mr. Iger on this one — whatever reason an employee wants to work from home is exactly why the employer doesn’t want that employee working from home. We trade time and talent for money and while the office environment isn’t perfect, it’s usually the best option to optimize that trade. It has gotten to the point where we can usually tell if a vendor representative is working from home or from an office and, from the customer side, the most efficient and helpful interactions have been with those who are in the office. Working from home requires a level of self-discipline and integrity that many folks lack. I’m hoping that as Disney guests we do feel positive effects from the change — both from a reinvigorated team and better efficiency. Disney has suffered from departments not communicating well with each other and with guests and this seems like a good step to try and improve that.
I disagree. I am currently in a hybrid office and everyone is more productive when they are home. A bit part of the day in the office is spent chit chatting. My employees spend more time actually working when they are home. They also lose valuable time commuting to and from. There will always be exceptions but don’t make the assumption that most have no self discipline. I have experienced the opposite.
This whole thing of remote is better than office or other way around or hybrid is better, it’s too much sometimes. If someone doesn’t want to work from office or wants to do hybrid or wants to be in office all the time, Let the employer decide what suits the business.
Everyone is independent to do make their own decisions. If the employers don’t find anyone to come to office they will change and allow remote work. At the same time they might send the jobs to India. It’s not that easy but I have heard that rationale from management too.
Many things cannot be outsourced. Call centers, sure. Programming, maybe. But creative roles or design need to be here. Things like architecture and engineering (my realm) or Imagineering need to be based in these USA. While India is an amazing place with a rich and diverse culture, it might not always translate well to the Disney brand or American consumerism. While they still have a pretty rigid caste system in their society, we can’t decide which bathroom to use and still try to argue that a ride is racist because of some absurdly tenuous link to an old movie and must thusly be ruined with a completely ridiculous concept.
Imagineering probably needs in-person time. That’s what a lot of people are thinking about when they read something like this from Iger. Unfortunately that isn’t most jobs at Disney. For most jobs, this argument is stupid and illogical, and makes him look too old to be in his position. Like you said, probably a way to drop headcount as sad as that is.
I’ve worked from home for about 8 years, and it was a dramatic improvement in quality of life. Short of a risk of destitution I wouldn’t go back. Depending on the commute, I doubt I’d go back to an office even for a 50% or more pay bump. It just wastes so much time and productivity and makes any kind of work-life balance super hard.
For many companies, when they ask people back, what they really mean is they are paternalistic, don’t trust you to do your job, and think everyone is steeling their (inflated) money. When in reality people are just working more efficiently than they ever did in the office… especially so if it was one of those productivity-killing open offices *shudder*
“That’s what a lot of people are thinking about when they read something like this from Iger. Unfortunately that isn’t most jobs at Disney.”
I think there’s this desire among fans to assume that every job at Disney is exciting, creative, and pushing the bounds on innovation and storytelling.
That’s not true for like 95% of roles, though. TWDC definitely has creative DNA and that still shows in much of its output, but Disney is run far less like a “hungry” startup and far more like a corporate bureaucracy. Many people I know who work at Disney (but not as on-site Cast Members) could make lateral moves to GE, Coca-Cola, Hilton, etc. In other words, they do jobs that are not unique to entertainment, but are boring ole white collar jobs in corporate America.
Absolutely nothing wrong with that, but I think it ‘ruins the illusion’ for many fans.
I see all sides of this argument. Personally,I feel that having employees in the office together may not solve every issue every day but it does promote the think tank. Newer employees observe the more seasoned. The younger generation help move the company forward bringing the knowledge of what they learned with them. There is a level of disconnect with zoom. I also feel that I like to leave my job at the office. When I am home – my family gets my full attention. But I am also a firm believer of the family dinner with no devises. We take that time to “unplug”. I don’t like the feeling of “on the clock” when I am in my home. 2020 was the worst.
Together time in the office, or lab, or shop, etc is the only way to have and keep a corporate culture alive, something incredibly important for a company like Disney. Not meetings though… Remember the old motivational poster with a picture of a conference table and the motto “None of us is as dumb as all of us” on it?
I do have to laugh at and be saddened by all of the comments of this making Iger (or anyone else) look old and curmudgeonly. Especially when the folks support too-old, decrepit politicians right after saying it’s time to get rid of the old men… But I digress. Ageism is indeed alive and well. We hired a registered architect from Florida who had applied to 148 jobs before we hired him. Yes, he is 68, but he has vast knowledge, shows up and does his job. These comments reveal youthful ignorance which seems to be common in millennials (not the rule, just common).
Mr. Nico: I totally agree. Basically, my company has an unwritten rule that if you are over 50, you will not get promoted. I am middle management and just over 50, and have been basically told that my age will hold me back from the executive ranks (even though I have held executive positions previously at other firms). I love my company and my compensation (have a very nice pension plan which are becoming a relic of the past) so I really can’t make a move.
I have a slightly alternate perspective. I work for an electric utility in the Mid-Atlantic, and much like Disney we have operations folks who must be onsite at our power stations and other folks in engineering, IT, finance, HR etc. who can work from anywhere. Coming out of the pandemic our company worked hard to get folks back into the office at least most of the time. This wasn’t because remote work was ineffective, it was because remote work is seen as such a huge benefit by the operations side of the house that it set up resentment between the different parts of the company and caused a huge headache for management. Retention on the operations side became harder as there was a net flow from jobs that can’t be done remotely to those that can. I sympathize with management on this one a bit, it can be a tough puzzle to solve.
I’m (sadly) right in the middle of the 30-50 group and I currently work a hybrid office job, married to a 70 hour a week restaurant manager. I have left a job that stopped being flexible in the past for the simple reason of I just can’t work 40 hours and commute 45 minutes each way. My position now likes us to go to the office 2x a week, which I try to do, but some days it’s pointless since I have to been in 5-6 hours of meetings and we have an open air office. So I can’t actually DO my job efficiently with background “team building” if you will. I once went to the office in the summer and was the only person there. But I checked te box of going in. I’m of the mindset that I am an adult, and I get my job done and also work for a fantastic small company. I base my schedule off of what works best for my work week and home life, but if my flexibility were to be taken away, I’d look. But anytime they have return to office mandates, they are trying to weed out people.
Hopefully, this means some that new content coming out will seem more cohesive and not like there was an email that said “cut 10 minutes off the run time and resume the basic character traits from the last movie, it’s good enough for Disney plus”. I won’t name shows or movies, since it’s my personal opinion and I don’t want to start fights!
Quick question, are you going to do Trip Reports again? Those are some of my favorite things to read and I think I have read each one 5-10 times. The Engagement one is till my favorite. I would love to see you get back to your roots and dive into one. If not no worries. It feels like you have moved on from them.
agreed
Thirded
At my office, even the older folks who generally struggle with technology seem just fine working from home. I’m guessing it’s because Covid forced them to learn how to do it, and now that they know how they like being able to skip lengthy commutes just like the rest of us. 🙂
I also think the whole divide is overblown (like most issues this day). I think the vast, *vast* majority of people just want a hybrid schedule, and absent strict guidance it would work out to pretty close to a 50/50 split. Sometimes you want to come into the office to focus (and probably have a better tech setup than at home), and sometimes you need to stay home to wait for the AC repair person but otherwise are still totally capable of working. I think the flexibility is definitely helpful for people with kids at home, but even then I know more than one person who has admitted to coming into the office just to get a break from their little angels.
Whoops, this was meant to be in reply to Adam’s comment. Maybe I’m the drunk uncle…
Personally, when I look back at my professional work life, I have benefitted tremendously from in-person work and for me, I would look for an employer where this is prioritized. My time in an office allowed me to build personal relationships and grow my knowledge. I was able to build strong network of colleagues, many who I would have never met over Teams/Zoom, since our work was not directly related. These relationships were crucial when I was just starting out as I was able to grow my knowledge quickly; I am confident I would not have my current job had I been fully remote the last 10 years.
I completely understand that for many, WFH works very well, and can be a lifesaver when commutes are long and family responsibilities are paramount. I just wanted to say that for me, I am happier working in an in-person workplace, and feel it has provided me great benefits.
I think there are more people who want some kind of hybrid model than want fully remote work, which is kind of the best of both worlds. Of course I am biased, as I personally like a hybrid schedule. I got very antsy working from whole exclusively for most of 2020, but I also like having a day or two to stay home and work remotely while also tending to chores around the house.
I agree with you. I have found tremendous value on in working in office. In part because of the collaboration and building relationships with coworkers, in part to separate where I live and where I work, and in part because I am alone in a small apartment without a good work from home setup. I actually did the opposite of what many people did—I didn’t quit because they made me come back, I quit because I couldn’t take working from home another day! I found an in office job and have been much happier.
That said, I know work from home works for some, and I am fine with those who prefer it doing it.
“while also tending to chores around the house.” And that is a huge part of the issue. Many people basically blow off work when they are allegedly WFH. Many of us can be MORE productive at home with fewer interruptions other than the dogs wanting you to pat their head a few times.
Big open office areas are ridiculous and have always been a dumb idea. Even sharing an office with one person can be too distracting. Companies like USAA that are hot-bunking it and have these big spaces with no assigned desks are exactly the opposite of any place I’d work. If you don’t have your own personal space and storage, then why bother going in?
That said, creative endeavors like design firms or entertainment, etc NEED actual face time in the real world and we have to meet together to look at drawings and discuss concepts together. So a hybrid works for us, but my boss is a bit old fashioned about it. We have enough flexibility though that many of us can just WFH when we need to for the AC guy (except those of us who do all our own maintenance and just take care of it).
Tending to chores around the house is not the same thing as blowing off work. There’s a lot of times when you are working on a project and then hit a point where you need someone to give an approval, or provide extra information, etc. If you are in an office, you have to just kind of sit around twiddling your thumbs until you get the information/approval you need to continue. Working from home, you can throw in a load of laundry or something while waiting for the person you need to talk with to get out of their meeting and respond, or while they finish the higher priority project/email before getting to yours. This idea that people who aren’t being constantly supervised won’t do their job is a fallacy that is easily disproven by the entirety of 2020 where most companies managed to stay just as productive as they ever were.
@Jared W that is not always the case, and I wasn’t saying it is. It’s probably less than half who are just screwing off at home, but still significant. Yeah, we released people for doing this during the limited time we shut our office down in 2020 and all were working from home. The situation you describe is not as common. I can’t remember the last time I had only one project to work on and would be at a total stop if I had to wait for someone else.
What you describe, sch as throwing a load of laundry in, etc is like what many of us do from an office like internet shopping etc when you suddenly remember to look something up or need to buy a gift. Or in the old days, people would have to outside for a smoke break. I have no issues with that, and even did it myself. But there are a lot of people who do need constant supervision!
I agree that this is likely an attempt to thin the ranks. The company I work for has thrived with a remote model. We have increased our hiring across the US now instead of limiting ourselves to people who live in or want to relocate to our region. A large number of employees relocated throughout the US during the past few years including some C level and senior VP level employees. What has the result been? Our two highest perform.ing years were 2020 and 2021. And while the final numbers aren’t in for 2022 yet it is also looking like a very good year. 2023 will be a challenge for everyone but, so far, there hasn’t been a whisper of people coming back to the office. Remote work has opened up so much for us and until we were forced into it, it was never even considered. Yes, we still sometimes have on site meetinga but we are working extremely well remotely. In fact it’s leveled the playing field for our remote offices. I’m sure Disney understands this too but this is a low cost option to thin the ranks. Wonder how long it will be before they open things back up to remote.
I am curious if the money saved on the people that don’t return to the office will be used to further the hiring bonuses being offered to try to hire park staff and cast members. The shift over the last couple of years to remote workers has worked rather well for a number of entities. I somewhat agree that innovation comes with a certain element of human contact, but is not exclusive to it. Most of the time, corporate realignment has an alternative motive from what is given in the announcement of such. It will be interesting to see how this develops!
“I am curious if the money saved on the people that don’t return to the office will be used to further the hiring bonuses being offered to try to hire park staff and cast members.”
I doubt it.
The prevailing sentiment seems to be that what started in tech and has now spread to other corporate offices will hit blue-collar jobs at some point. Disney has held firm with these bonuses for the last year-plus (leaving money on the table in the process) and avoided locking in higher wages. My guess is they are waiting out the labor market and/or hoping to continue scaling-up the College and International Programs.
I work for a large company (50,000 global employees) that is headquartered in a mid-size midwestern city. We are multi-generational and, pre-COVID, employees in their 20’s worked alongside employees in their 50’s — some of whom had spent their entire career at the company. From what I’ve observed, it is often younger employees (20’s and early 30’s) at our company who want to work more in the office. Many of them live within walking distance of the headquarters, and they are more likely to go out for a drink or dinner downtown after work. They also see working in the office as a quicker way to be promoted through building relationships. On the other hand, workers in their late 30’s through mid-50’s (like myself), have been pushing to work more from home. These employees are more settled in their career path and ascent up the corporate ladder. Many of us value the chance to pick up our kids after school, or get to evening sports activities with the family. So far, our company has been flexible for both groups, which has been appreciated. I guess it remains to be seen if these two ways of working can coexist.
Interesting insight–thanks for sharing!
Out of curiosity, what about workers in their 60s or above? Workers in their 50s today would’ve been in their 30s during the dot-com boom, and would (presumably) be more adept at and receptive to using technology. The 30s to 50s range is also more likely to have kids in the home, whereas 20s and 60s are not.
It’s funny but it seems to me that workers in their 60’s at my company are most empowered (of course, that describes people who probably have a pretty good nest egg and could probably retire for good without much hassle). There are some who seem to enjoy the rhythm of commuting and office life, perhaps they also enjoy mentoring younger workers 1:1, and those folks are in the office more often. But there are also some who feel free to set the terms of their employment. I asked one older colleague how often she was coming in to the office, and she said that she had told her team leader she would come in when she needed to meet with people face-to-face, or for team meetings, but otherwise would not be in the office. And her leader seemed OK with that. I know that doesn’t describe everyone’s working situation but, at our company at least, it still feels like the institutional knowledge side of the equation still weighs in favor of older employees.
I agree with you Tom, I think this is designed to cut headcount without doing layoffs, severance, etc., but the reason many of the tech giants pivoted last year (and generously granted exemptions from return to office) is because many of the best and brightest know the value of their time and do not want to waste 1h/day commuting because it makes the people at the top happy to see their butts in seats. Disney already pays below industry average and the nicer areas around its Burbank location are very expensive, so many people commute an hour each way.
If Iger really believes forcing people to come to the office 3+ days a week is going to get the best out of his people (which I doubt), then it’s a sign he’s too old and out of touch and needs to move on. As a working mother executive (who works from home and probably spent about 50k last year between Disney parks, resorts, and cruises…), this policy puts a bad taste in my mouth because it’s especially hard on working parents to force them to commute daily…not going to stop me from boarding a Disney cruise later this week though.
“Disney already pays below industry average and the nicer areas around its Burbank location are very expensive, so many people commute an hour each way.”
I assume Disney will grant exceptions to this for tech-adjacent workers, just as they did with the Lake Nona relocation for this exact reason. Disney doesn’t pay enough to compete with the major players in those industries.
Definitely different times. The creative talent were the type of people who lived and breathed their work, and years or decades ago lived closer to the office. Now, people seem busier, with more distractions, and those with kids an order of magnitude more so. When we were kids, we played outside and took care of ourselves a lot. Now, parents are paranoid about letting the kids go outside to take the trash out (and not entirely imagined fears either) and kids are coddled big-time. We didn’t have 47 different activities we expected our parents to shuttle us around for. We rode our bikes and played arcade games. When you watch the documentaries like The Imagineering Story and read about it, things were just different back then.
I can’t blame anyone for not wanting to waste hours of their life commuting. I’m done with it too! In Denver, I drove 34 miles each way in my own vehicle but that was back when gas was only around $1.75 a gallon like it still should be. Now, I’d laugh in their face over it. Ten miles is my limit. Riding the subway from JFK area into Manhattan before Christmas, I watched the commuters and saw the misery of some. Some read books or played on their phones, or even (foolishly) slept. We had finished our site visit the first day and were just going to see the 9/11 Memorial (awesome, but sobering place) and weren’t on a clock like they were so it wasn’t the same for us.
I’d have jumped at the opportunity to leave CA and move to FL and ditch the idiotic taxes (and more) there. I lived in Riverside and will never live in that state again. Lived in FL twice and would move there again, maybe. Wanted to be an astronaut as a kid, but no way will I ever live in Houston either! It’s good to have options…
As a Network Engineer, I have worked remotely for a while now. Since I function in the high tech arena, this is not an unusual arrangement. I do often chuckle when I hear people talk about the benefits of “collaboration “ and “face to face” exposure. Both are thinly-veiled euphemisms for inefficiency, wasted time and old-school thinking that should have died 20 years ago.
For some industries and segments, remote is not viable. For the ones that are, however, management needs to update its list of tired excuses for why it’s not a good idea.
Totally agree.
While I have zero firsthand experience with either, I would imagine that animation is far more collaborative and creative–and that whole process benefits from the in-person dynamic. On the other hand, building or maintaining the infrastructure for Disney+ and Hulu…probably not so much!
I’d be really curious to know how many people opt to find other work because they can’t or won’t return to the office. I don’t imagine we’ll ever get that info directly (after all, that would defeat the whole “trim payroll without layoffs” scheme), but I’m truly curious about it.
For what it’s worth, I think a decent portion of return to office mandates are about not wasting money on long term office building leases they signed before the pandemic and can’t get out of.
“For what it’s worth, I think a decent portion of return to office mandates are about not wasting money on long term office building leases they signed before the pandemic and can’t get out of.”
In general, you’re probably right in the short-term. Even if they don’t walk from those leases (and many companies have–just look at the high vacancy rates on commercial real estate in SF and NYC), shifting to more remote work still has benefits for companies in the long-term.
This will be a interesting thing to watch indeed. In my business which offices are primarily in California there is still requirements in our corporate campuses about social distancing with an influx of COVID in the counties our offices are in. So for Burbank and MISC other offices Disney has in California it will be interesting to see them force this new policy. Florida plays by different rules, so I could see this enforcement happen more so than CA. You are right about the policy being more of a mask for layoffs. Companies think their labor force are ignorant about their wordings. We all just saw 2 plus years of remote working work out just fine, and that is facts. There are so many technological tools in the world to bring people together without the lame driving in traffic commute. Work/life balance will only be a true statement if you allow employees to work comfortably instead of forcing medieval work policies. This is nothing more than to be able to get rid of labor, and yet people will take this as a win for “I told you remote work doesn’t work” crowd.
“This is nothing more than to be able to get rid of labor, and yet people will take this as a win for ‘I told you remote work doesn’t work’ crowd.”
Long-term, I still think corporate America views remote work as the future. I think many executives are simply using this as a convenient near-term excuse for disguised layoffs.
Just as it offers cost-savings now, it’ll offer long-term cost-savings in reducing costly commercial real estate leases, adjusting salaries downward to account for cost-of-living differences, and more. It’s one of those things that’s largely a win-win for employers and employees. Some CEOs resisting may be genuine in their beliefs, but I doubt most are.
The real estate angle is huge and will affect things for years to come. I think that’s exactly why we’ve seen the shift to those insipid open offices or hot-bunking it. No thanks to those! It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out, as large cities struggle to cope with the drop in tax revenues…
Totally agree with Iger. People need to be working together in an office environment. Socialization is important. Not sitting home in your pajamas all day. People don’t know how to communicate anymore. It’s all texting. You need to see people in person and talk to each other. I see his point and agree it’s time.
Drunk Uncle, is that you?! 😉
Joking aside, when I worked in an office, I was far less efficient than working from home. Socialization is absolutely essential for humans, but a lot of that in the workplace is unnecessary and counterproductive. Obviously YMMV.
Well, virtual conferences just do not work. We did some, and they sucked. The presenters seemed distant and half-interested and their presentations fell flat. Yes, being in the office wastes a lot of time, but we do need to meet together in a room periodically to discuss a lot of things. I support the hybrid model myself.
I totally disagree. Working in an office is highly overrated…though it is also admittedly highly subjective and depends on the industry and type of work being done.
I have been at my company for over 30 years, am in my mid-50’s now, and I honestly never thought I would have the discipline to work from home. Then along came Covid and, I not only had the discipline, I found I was happier, more productive, had MUCH less stress, was more well rested, and was overall more happy doing my job than ever before. My job does not require me to interact with anyone on a day-to-day basis to be successful and the possibility of that actually decreases my productivity. You know that person that just has to run down and knock on your door to ask a “quick question” and then ends up staying to chat for another 20 minutes even though I was right in the middle of something technical and now my concentration is shot? Yeah, I don’t have that problem when I work from home.
Also, I never worked all day in my pajamas, not from the very beginning. And the majority of my communication is done via e-mail whether I’m working at home or in the office.
My office started trying to have us back on a hybrid schedule 2-3 days a week last spring, but it just feels so pointless when I successfully worked from home for over 2 years. There are probably only 1-2 days a month that I truly need to be on-site. Now the stress and cost of commuting, not to mention decreased sleep and productivity, has me eyeing early retirement and/or finding a fully remote job.
I just wanted to point out that, barring those positions that are creative, collaborative, or hands-on, there are many of us that are successfully and happily working from home and are able to be better and more productive employees for it. Those 5% or less that “slack off” at home shouldn’t give the 95% of us that are doing our jobs and doing them well a bad name.