• anon_8675309@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    100
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s part of it. Another part is middle management can’t function without seeing you. Finally, it’s not worth it to a company to maintain a lease on a building if nobody works there and it’s not easy getting out of those leases.

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What doesn’t make sense is why they’re not firing the useless middle managers.

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The lease is already paid, or the money is planned to be paid. You can’t recover this money anyway. But you can still save on energy and cleaning.

      Getting out of the lease is as easy as not renewing it.

      • isles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, it is that easy. Commercial leases are often in the 10-20 year range, however.

        • bouh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m skeptical a company would take that. They want to be able to shut down contracts with employee on a whim but somehow they would engage for a 20 years in a building? If it’s not a big industry I severely doubt it, and those are rarely I city centers for obvious reasons.

          • MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re right logically.

            I suspect the difference we see in reality is due to graft, bribery, money laundering and outright fraud that went into those contract negotiations.

    • triclops6@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with most of this except the lease is a sunk cost, making people come in based on a variable that won’t change is bad decision making, the discussion should be made independently of lease. I agree some managers think this way, it’s usually the ones who could benefit from remedial business finance classes.

      • Etterra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes and no. It’s more like a trap that the company is trapped in. It’s the corporate equivalent of having to keep renting an apartment you don’t live in anymore and can’t sub-let. The sunk cost fallacy applies, but also it’s a case of “we’re stuck with this and we’re going to USE it even if it kills our wage slaves.”

      • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The larger issue may be that companies occupying the buildings supports interests of the owning class, and so its influence is being applied accordingly to shape the larger social forces.