If you’re the CEO of a company that needs to turn things around, any real progress is going to require some strong supporters within the firm. And while Audi CEO Gernot Döllner might have that on some level, a recent report suggests plenty of internal critics due to a purportedly autocratic and occasionally hubristic leadership style.
Also in today’s Morning Dump, Ford has mandated almost all its employees return to office four days a week, and just about everyone’s unhappy with NHTSA ahead of a hearing. That’s a lot of bad news, so I’m rounding things off with something a little less tense. Mercedes-AMG’s four-cylinder engine is on its way out for a rather amusing reason.
Welcome back to The Morning Dump. Matt’s out today, but I’m here to assemble all the top little pieces of car industry news you’ll want to read. This one’s a little bit heavy, so grab a latte or perhaps a big cup of tea, and let’s get into it.
Infighting At Audi
Someone has it out for Gernot Döllner, the current CEO of Audi, man in the black suit in the above photo. It’s not necessarily because he has no prior board experience or prior experience at Audi prior to being shuffled over from Porsche to fill the role, but those things likely don’t help. See, German industry publication Manager Magazine just ran a piece titled “The brutal regime of Audi boss Gernot Döllner,” whose subheadline reads (all translated from German via Google Translate):
The smartest, the most consistent: Gernot Döllner presents himself as Audi’s only true savior. But the restructuring hasn’t worked so far – new billion-dollar holes are opening up. A story about Germany’s toughest car boss.
The article’s art and context sets the tone bluntly—this is a German publication running a story on Döllner with the lead graphic featuring a red hat that says “Make Audi Great Again.” What’s all that about, then? From Manager Magazine:
Works council chairman Jörg Schlagbauer (47) once described Döllner as a “guy who gets things done”; “he has a plan.” In private circles, however, he is also said to be critical: Döllner “occasionally missteps in his actions, behavior, and words,” a colleague quoted him as saying. He has to learn that. Döllner initially didn’t realize, another supervisory board member added, “that as CEO, you’re only the first among equals.” A former colleague, at a very high level, put it most drastically: “Döllner doesn’t grab his people by the heart. He grabs them by the throat.”
An allegedly headstrong attitude also means a company can be hampered by hubris, which, the story implies, seems to be happening with both a return-to-office mandate and a new software debacle. As Manager Magazine reports, Döllner took the lead on integrating Rivian’s software into Volkswagen Group vehicles, which should work great for EVs but is reportedly experiencing troubles with combustion powered vehicles. For now, it seems that Audi is exploring a project from Applied Technology called “Nova” that will cost somewhere between €2 billion and €3 billion for future ICE software integration, and this project is threatening to delay Rivian software implementation. From the publication:
A six-week review is currently underway with three possible outcomes. Either Döllner continues with “Nova” – despite the enormous additional costs. Or, option two, the Rivian architecture undergoes time-consuming adaptations. Or, the desperate alternative, Audi continues to rely on the existing software for its combustion engines, which has caused so much trouble in recent years. Only what is legally required would be changed, improving only what was already planned via updates. All three options are really expensive, but none are likely to be really good.
They view the looming billion-dollar burden with renewed concern – but also with a certain amount of glee. The fact that Döllner is now failing at something as important as the software project is a source of satisfaction for some. “I’ve never met an automotive manager who can do everything,” a high-ranking sales representative quips. “Döllner, on the other hand, thinks he knows everything best, from development to sales.”
Ouch. Granted, the harsh tone of the piece may be driven by some alleged conduct; back in 2023, Audi Works Council Chairman Jörg Schlagbauer pushed back on Döllner’s return-to-office plan, an understandable move. However, rather than hear Schlagbauer out, Döllner allegedly made what some consider a cruel play at department managers and pushed ahead with return-to-office, demanding quotas to see who was able to get their team to the office most often and who stayed at home. Per the story, the five “worst” performers were made to run for the board, which seems like… an odd punishment, though certainly one that would shine unwanted light on those five individuals.
So what other side effects does this allegedly thorny sort of leadership style have? Well, one of the biggest internal moments involves tales of a meeting around sales planning. The meeting itself, which Manager says involved six people including head of sales Marco Schubert and Chief Financial Officer Jürgen Rittensberger, is officially said to have ended relatively peacefully, but that’s not the way everyone within Audi talks about that meeting.
Various other versions of this story are circulating. Sometimes objects are said to have flown through the air, sometimes hands played a role; sometimes it’s said that factory security was alerted. Repeatedly, specific dates allegedly haunted the Audi organization and the entire Volkswagen Group on which Gernot Döllner would lose his position as CEO. Döllner’s critics—and he has plenty of them—hoped for their boss’s replacement; they expected a coup.
[…]
The “heated conversation” one of the six speaks of, however, remains. The upheavals it triggered within the company demonstrate one thing above all: Something is wrong at Audi AG. A CEO whose organization believes he is capable of such outbursts has a problem. A company that has to deal with such stories and their consequences in the most economically perilous situation since the 1980s, of course.
While it ultimately seems like nobody ended up throwing hands in the boardroom, the fact that such tales were plausible paint a troubling picture of corporate culture within Audi. While autocratic leadership arguably worked in the Ferdinand Piëch era, those days are clearly decades in the past. We don’t have firsthand account of Döllner’s leadership style (we’ve reached out to Audi for comment), but he definitely seems to be making some enemies.
Emissions Might Kill AMG’s Controversial Four-Cylinder
Over the past year or two, it feels like we’ve seen Mercedes-AMG go through the five stages of grief on customers not wanting a two-liter four-cylinder engine in anything bigger than a GLA 45. First came the denial that vehicles like the four-cylinder C 63 would alienate shoppers, later came the bargaining that the real issue was explaining the technology to consumers, and it seems like we’re finally moving onto acceptance. Autocar reports from Germany that “a senior insider confirmed that future petrol-powered Mercedes-AMG models are set to adopt either an updated version of today’s in-line six-cylinder engine or an all-new V8 featuring a flat-plane crankshaft, similar in design to that used by the GT Black Series.”
While a precise timeframe for the phase-out has not been confirmed, Autocar has been told the engine will remain in production for the time being before “eventually” being replaced.
Among the key reasons for the shift in strategy is the high cost of engineering the four-cylinder to comply with upcoming Euro 7 emissions regulations.
“There’s no doubt about its potential – this is one of the most sophisticated engines we’ve ever built – but the investment to make it EU7-compliant is very high,” said the source.
It’s interesting that the supposedly greener downsized, turbocharged engine may run into the headwinds of new emissions standards, but that gives us a rough timeline for AMG’s shift in focus. If any applications of the four-cylinder engine require significant re-engineering to meet Euro 7 emissions standards, don’t be surprised if they’re replaced before Nov. 29, 2027, the phase-out date for existing vehicles meeting Euro 6e but not Euro 7. It’s likely plug-in hybrid models like the C 63 S E Performance will require less work to remain compliant than non-hybridized applications like the AMG GT 43, so if models have to go, expect the ones you don’t plug in to switch means of propulsion first.
Everybody Hates NHTSA
Speaking of regulation, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is in the hot seat right now. In advance of a Thursday hearing on the state of NHTSA, written testimony from Alliance for Automotive Innovation president and CEO John Bozzella criticized NHTSA for allegedly drifting apart from the industry, citing restrictions on matrix headlights, concerns around upcoming automatic emergency braking standards, and the ancient-but-still-used unbelted occupant crash test. At the same time, Bozzella’s written testimony is critical around NHTSA’s feature-first approach to road safety at a time of elevated highway fatalities compared to pre-2020 figures.
New safety features can and should continue to play a role, but we cannot regulate our way to zero fatalities through technology alone. From mandate to deployment, new vehicle safety technologies often take 5 to 7 years to develop, and even then, it can take an additional 30 years for that technology to fully penetrate the fleet, given the pace of vehicle turnover. Behavioral change, on the other hand, has the potential to save lives today. The best outcomes will come when technology, policy, and enforcement work in concert, not in isolation.
Bozzella isn’t the only party to take issue with NHTSA ahead of Thursday’s hearing. In written testimony, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety President David Harkness took aim at the agency for dragging its feet on mandating potentially lifesaving technology now common in other jurisdictions.
One example of an action that we have repeatedly called on NHTSA to take is to require antilock braking systems (ABS) for motorcycles. Multiple IIHS studies have shown that this technology saves lives. Our most recent analysis, published in 2022, found that fatal crash rates for motorcycles with optional ABS are 22 percent lower than for identical models without the technology.
We first petitioned NHTSA to require motorcycle ABS in 2013. Ten years later, we submitted a new petition with updated evidence. To date, we have not received any response to either petition. In the meantime, the 27 member states of the European Union, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Japan, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand and India have all mandated the life-saving technology.
It’s usually a bad sign when a government entity’s made both the industry its trying to regulate and safety non-profits in that field unhappy, and it’s a downward spiral that’s been going on for ages. From a revolving door of acting administrators to funding that simply hasn’t kept up with inflation, NHTSA hasn’t been in its best shape for decades, and now it feels like it’s letting down a lot of people. However, I wouldn’t necessarily take this hearing as a good thing. The current administration hasn’t been secretive of its desire to defund agencies, and the path from here might not actually be beneficial to NHTSA as an entity.
Ford’s Return To Office
Oh, and while we’re on the subject of discontent, some Ford employees probably aren’t thrilled about the prospect of returning to the office for at least four days a week. Reuters broke the news, and while the return will happen after the best months of summer end, it’s going to affect a lot of people.
“Many of our employees have been in the office three or more days per week for some time now. We believe working together in person on a day-to-day basis will help accelerate Ford’s transformation into a higher growth, higher margin, less cyclical and more dynamic company,” a Ford spokesperson said in a statement in response to a Reuters query.
The spokesperson said the new policy affects the majority of its global salaried workforce, but declined to provide a specific number. Ford notified employees of the updated policy on Wednesday, and it takes effect September 1, the spokesperson said.
Here’s the thing: There’s no concrete, high-sample, peer-reviewed evidence that unequivocally states in-office work is any more productive than hybrid work or remote work. In fact, the Bureau of Labor Statistics found that productivity increased as remote work increased in 61 industries between 2019 and 2021. If a job can be done remotely, why not do it remotely? I guess power really is a drug.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
Sometimes you need a high-energy track to really get you into gear, and “Heaterz” by AJ Tracey & Pozer is exactly the sort of banger needed for a grey Thursday.
The Big Question:
As it stands right now, NHTSA clearly isn’t living up to its potential. How would you fix the agency?
Top graphic credit: Audi
How to fix NHTSA?
Become the person in charge of it and change it to my specifications. Not going to do that much work.
“Our most recent analysis, published in 2022, found that fatal crash rates for motorcycles with optional ABS are 22 percent lower than for identical models without the technology.”
It seems like maybe they should counting “crashes producing fatalities or injuries not compatible with independent life.” Because the latter can be very expensive as well, AND represent long-term strains on healthcare resources.
AMG should have just called the 4-cylinder engine a “V8/2”.
It might have worked, we hairless apes are often pretty dim creatures.
Like how A&W’s 1/3 pound burger failed as people thought it was less than a 1/4 pounder?
How about the NHTSA give a safety deduction (demerit?) for weight exceeding 5,000 lbs so manufacturers will start looking for ways to cut down on the giant, hurtling missiles going 85 down the highway. Hell, maybe even testing if the brake rotor size is appropriate for the weight and brake pads that don’t wear out at 20K mi because of it.
But that’s just me. I prefer active safety measures where NHTSA seems 100% focused on passive measures.
Nothing beats in person for educating younger kids. They need the socialization in addition to larnin’ readin’, writin’ and ‘rithmetic. We tried virtual during COVID and it was a disaster.
The biggest impact I’ve seen from NHTSA is they put out large grants to local law enforcement to run DUI checkpoints. A DUI checkpoint is questionable constitutionally to begin with, but what they wind up being is nothing to do with DUIs, they’re chances for overpaid cops to rack up overtime and to say “let me see your papers” to a bunch of the poors.
Interesting that none of the guys in the picture with Dollner are wearing ties. Has that finally gone away in business attire? Just based on his looks (him and his clothes) I’d trust the guy on the left in the black T more than the others who look like they’re just trying too hard.
That AMG 4 cylinder is German engineering at its finest….a ridiculously complex solution to a question no one asked. It’s not really any more efficient in practice than the turbo V6 it’s replacing, it’s somehow less efficient than the turbo inline 6 they already had, it’s higher strung and will almost certainly be less reliable than the other engines they have, and it sounds like one of the Hyundai Ns (I like mine and think it sounds good for what it is, but it’s a $35,000 car, not a $70,000 one)…and now you’re telling it can’t even pass emissions?!?!
It’s just such an own goal…and they had the audacity to make it the base engine in the AMG GT lol. A six figure sports car with a fucking hot hatch motor. Hmmm let me think…oh yeah I’ll TOTALLY pick that over the flat plane crank V8 in the Z06, the glorious and 5 liter V8 in the LC500 that’ll outlive all of us, or the screaming flat 6 in 718 GTS that’s located directly behind my ears. Suuuuuuure.
Joking aside I think they thought the marketing would make that dumb engine a thing. They won’t shut up about the FoRmUlA 1 tEcHnOlOgY that’s basically a tiny part that’s vaguely influenced by their F1 engines and for a long time it was the MOST POWERFUL PRODUCTION 4 CYLINDER!!!!
They took enthusiasts for fools, but we’re the ones laughing. Good riddance…although for what it’s worth I’ll bet a 4 Cylinder AMG GT will be like 50 grand in a couple of years and the C43s are already around in the low 40s. So I guess if cylinder count and sound aren’t really your priority there will be deals to be had.
I think it’s indicative of a longer-term, overall trend. Not just the auto industry either.
Look at how Porsche thought they could push the 718 with a 4 cylinder. I was at the launch for that because they thought if they just got a bunch of Boxster/Cayman owners together and let us do hot laps with a pro driver it would prove it was a “real sports car.” Those sales never got above 50% of what the 981 were going for, at least last I looked at them. And it’s not like they were volume sellers to begin with.
Look at VW. How much are they working to convince everyone of how much better the DSG is than a manual for the GTI now? I will be watching that one with interest to see but I’d wager the sales will be lower than previous model years.
Let’s talk about the decision by everyone to replace all the knobs and buttons with screens and capacitive touch surfaces (actually, no let’s not rehash all that).
I think about other products out there. Apple is constantly telling me I need a bigger and bigger phone. Their motivation is certainly different than the automotive sector (they just want to make more selling bigger phones). Bigger phones suck huge and I’m so pissed that I walked into the pool with my iPhone mini and now I have this stupid, heavy phone that doesn’t fit in my pocket.
I’d love it if someone would actually apply the principles of testing what users want or what the best UX is rather than applying the lowest common denominator solution to a problem or trying to use expensive marketing agencies to overcome bad UX decisions made in the name of maximizing cost savings.
This AMG engine is just the latest example I guess. I honestly can’t believe that anyone thought people would go for an AM-fucking-G with a 4cyl. But the people in marketing are becoming or have become some of the most powerful in large corporations and there is a lot of attitude that you can sell anything with the right messaging.
Idiots.
I would love for 718s to keep depreciating because I really want one. I think they’re the best looking cars Porsche has designed this century and after having a brief but life changing drive in a GT4 RS (which I will never be able to afford) I’m interested in getting the biggest chunk of 718 I can bite off.
I’ve also been browsing 981 listings as well, although as you mention they’re stubbornly expensive. I don’t actually think the flat 4s sound THAT bad. It’s not a screaming flat 6 but I think the people that compare them to WRXs are wrong.
With how out of control the Porsche Tax has gotten I think a used 718 S in the 40s is an incredible buy. I’d also be perfectly happy with PDK which lowers the cost of entry even more.
When I was looking for my first Boxster I drove a 2008 model with about 24K miles and in really good shape. I often wish I had bought that one instead of the 981 I ended up with because it was so much less $$.
If you are serious about it, my advice is to evaluate each one honestly for what you want. The 718 is truly faster and a better car in every way except how they sound. You’re right that they aren’t as bad as everyone makes out. For me? It just doesn’t sound like… a Porsche. I love my 2016 and the way it sounds. Flat out speed is not that big a deal to me so I went with the base Boxster that is more livable day-to-day anyway. S models carry a huge cost premium.
After you decide which one you want (to continue the advice), find one with higher mileage that has been taken care of well. There are usually plenty out there. If it has decent docs on maintenance history I would not hesitate to get an older one with higher miles to save because they hold up very well when cared for. There are just plenty of examples that skip the costly maintenance schedules and have problems from that.
That’s my 2¢. Now if I can just find a 911 Targa with a manual I could afford…
This advice is appreciated. It’ll be a few years until I search for my fun car but the wife has already agreed to let me do it if my next car is uber practical and cheapish. The smart play is to just enjoy the Miata life…but I’m not smart, I’m emotional, and the Porsche siren song has called to me since I was a child.
Edit: I could also just combine the budgets and get a Macan or certified Panamera or Cayenne or something but that just doesn’t feel like the full Porsche experience to me.
Without question sales will be lower. They got rid of a whole model of car. Those customers will go to Hyundai, Honda, Subaru, or Toyota.
Or the used market. I’ve resigned myself to the fact that due to new vehicles being so overweight and all the ergonomic decisions are made to make the car cheaper to produce and the fading engine and transmission options might all combine to mean that the best days truly are behind us.
At least from a subjective, “how does it feel,” metric I just made up.
A quick look at updates to the Euro emissions shows that apart from particulate size that counts toward emissions limit there aren’t any changes in tailpipe emissions between E6 and E7 regs for spark-ignition vehicles. The claim that the M139 can’t meet E7 could easily be a deflection on the part of a company that doesn’t want to admit it made a product mistake.
You’re not looking at the right metric. In test it probably never sees boost. In real life it always does. It passes a test better. It’s that simple. Not that this isn’t part of the problem, but makers should want to build the best and right product for long term use, not strong armed into some bull shit that blows up but saves 1 mpg or 1/2 kg of CO2.
Shitcan the footprint rule. Shitcan overly burdensome unnecessary requirements, work on a developed nation standard for car safety, minimize the burden to entry for foreign automobile sales in the US, etc.
Maybe just throw in the towel, and fully adopt Euro standards, so NHTSA doesn’t have to do anything at all besides copy the standards and sign off?
I’d be one of them (hating modern Audi).
Audi’s best engine of all time has been the 20v I5 Turbo, no argument. WRC legend, insane potential, STILL holds the record for fastest production sedan of all time, and it sounds glorious.
So they move on, sure… but then they develop a NEW 5 cyl turbo, based on roughly the geometry of the old one. Literally millions in development costs….
and they only put it in TWO FRIGGIN CARS. The RS3 (sedan) and the TT (coupe).
Okay, but the RS2 Avant is arguably one of Audi’s most legendary cars ever, so why in the ever living hell is that engine not available in a small wagon??? An A4 Avant + that engine would sell like hotcakes, and it’d be infinitely more relevant than the stupid RS6 Avant with it’s fake scoops and automatic transmission.
It also wouldn’t weigh 5,000 pounds like the RS6 Avant. If they put that engine in a more usable and less ugly package than the RS3 I’d sell a kidney for one. Why not use it in the S5/SQ5 to give them more enthusiast cred? That turbo V6 is pretty good but it’s also very polite and not all that memorable.
You’re also never going to out 6 cylinder BMW. Period. The B58 is as good as it gets and there are a not insignificant amount of people who’d argue it’s the greatest combustion engine of all time. I’m not sure if I’d go that far, but I would choose the BMW over the Mercedes or Audi equivalent for the powertrain alone every single time.
…but that psychotic 5 cylinder? That’s a different conversation. That engine is so goddamn cool and yet Audi refuses to use it.
I DONT GET IT! Why did they spend the money to develop it and then not use it?!?! The mind boggles.
They could throw that shit in a Yugo and I’d buy one for fuck’s sake. But nooooooo, you’ll get SCREENS ON SCREENS ON SCREENS and you’ll like it!
I worked at a company where the SVP of operations was like how that article describes Gernot Döllner. He was always the smartest person in the room. The team’s success was his success and his failures were the team’s failures (excluding him). He was able to bluster his way up the food chain, but didn’t last in the role very long.
Folks like that may be able to thrive in small-company conditions or where the staff is tight-knit enough to be successful despite them, but if the article is correct about Gernot Döllner’s behavior, that kind of leadership at a company the size of Audi is going to mean his time as CEO will be short.
fix the nhtsa??
it’s broken, isn’t that the desired condition?
/s
I measure my staff based on what they accomplish. It’s far more effective than measuring presenteeism. They tend to be far more engaged in a given project, find ways to collaborate in person or online as necessary, and frequently dip into the newly liberated time they gained by not commuting and dedicate it to work as well as their own lives. We started this long before COVID, so perhaps we’ve had a longer experience with baking it into our culture. When onboarding people, it does seem to take them a bit of time to adjust, especially when they have previously worked for an old school MBA degree mill boss.
Our clients rarely want to visit us and that’s a good thing. I had a sales manager many years back who said his favourite thing was an empty office because it meant the staff were out seeing clients.
Audi: I’m sure they’ll just roll our 5 new models to fill the MASSIVE GAPING HOLES in their lineup. That’ll fix everything /s
Ford: I work at a company where I was hired as a remote employee in 2016. It was perfect when Covid hit, since so much of our workforce was already remote or hybrid. We’re all 10-25 year veterans.
In 2021 they announced remote employees could no longer pursue promotions or new roles in the company. In 2022-23 they announce 3 days of RTO, but I was exempt as a remote employee…until they found a very obscure local office for me to report to (I didn’t even know it was there).
In 2023 they began announcing that anyone not in one of their six semi-arbitrary “Core Locations” would be progressively laid off over the next 3 years unless they agreed to move to one of those locations at their own expense.
It’s mid-2025 and I know I’m safe for another 6+ months, but in the meantime I still have to show up at a “fake office” 3x week just so my badge is recorded by HR. Meanwhile, I have to sit back and watch less qualified coworkers change into better jobs while I’m stuck where I am (which is fine, but boring).
Long story short, RTO is pretty stupid for experienced employees, but it’s the least stupid of all the stupid HR stuff going on in the world.
I have a similar experience. My company was full WFH when I hired on, but has slowly been pushing folks back into the office. Four months ago my division (but not other divisions) went full RTO because of some nebulous handwaving about “team dynamics”. I now get the honor of driving an hour per day to sit in an office and have the exact same Teams and Zoom meetings as I had at home, all because our company is global and every in-person meeting necessarily requires a virtual component. If there has been any benefit from forcing people back into the office it is that I hear about other companies that are hiring as people actively talk about other employment opportunities in the hallways.
Right. Of our immediate team of 7, only two are in the same geographical location, and statistically only in the office together about once a week. Everyone else is email and phone and Teams, including the 30% of our extended team in India who also have to work in an office in Bengaluru, some of them driving an hour or more to get there (which is like 3 miles in big city Indian rush hour)
After recent layoffs, I’m the only person in my division in my local office – the nearest person on my team is 1100 miles away on the west coast and after that is 1600 miles away on the east coast. The rest of the folks in my local office are in another division that is on a very loose hybrid schedule, so most days 70-80% of the office is empty. Team dynamics for the win!
At least you still sit at your PC for the Zoom meetings. They decided we needed to start using conference rooms for some of our Zoom meetings. So you get a couple people dragging their notes and laptops to a conference room and looking up at a TV and camera for the meeting others are attending remotely. And, invariably, some meetings go long and interfere with the next folks who need to use the room.
Unfortunately, I am the exception. I’m the only person left in my division in my local office, but they require conference rooms for all meetings where two or more employees in the same office are on the call. They also said webcams on for all meetings, but no one turns on their webcams unless there’s a senior executive on the call.
Dude honestly the whole world is so dumb right now I’m not sure I even want to contribute anymore. I could go into detail but I signed an NDA, I’ll just say some of the people in charge of things are SO FUCKING DUMB, and they blame other people for their mistakes, while taking credit for the teams success, and I’m now just completely jaded.
When I was a kid we were raised to believe hard work, creativity, and passion would see you to success, but the real world has taught me that liars, backstabbers, bullshitters, and cheats are the ones that rise to the top.
My goal in life is to never spend another day stuck in a cubicle. I’d rather change oil, mow lawns, or do anything else. Cubicles are hell, and the people that run things are despicable people.
Yep. The disillusionment is real. I’m fortunate to have contributed a lot in my 9+ years, and made a pretty decent living, but I’ve ironically lost a lot of faith in the American Dream along the way. Many of the best people I ever worked with in small companies were paid peanuts in comparison, and my greatest job skill gained here is sometimes “putting up with red tape.”
Part time at Carmax and Lowe’s is actually kind of appealing right now. If only I didn’t have 2 kids to put through college in the next several years. Like I said, I’ll ride it out as long as I can and will keep putting in effort for my coworkers, but I feel like the bosses (collectively, across the US economy) stopped caring a long time ago.
So much this. You can make a pretty good living in corporate America. But damn if it doesn’t carry a heavy cost as well.
Yup, I’ve never been one to be stuck inside, especially an office (proud to say I’ve never had an office job) I’ve done all kinds of labor work, but my favorite has been landscape/lawn care. I absolutely love mowing yards. Nature, exercise, minimal talking to clients, etc. Always thought of starting my own company but never did it. Also loved all the driving jobs I’ve had. Figured I’d put that out there
I wish these companies would just say they are paying for expensive office space leases and want to justify the cost by forcing their plebes back into them. I cannot take the lying any longer. They don’t give a shit about collaboration.
I think they also need to justify the existence of a lot of managers, who do nothing but wander around with a coffee cup, and look over the shoulders of the people actually doing the work. The managers probably look bad if they are just bumbling around a mostly empty office, trying to micromanage each other since everyone else is at home.
My lucky wife works for a company that tells their employees to not come into the office. They basically mandate WFH. She goes into the office a scant 5 miles away every few weeks just for the novelty of it.
I’m jealous of her commute to the room next to our bedroom. Worst interruption she experiences is the dogs barking loudly at people walking by the house.
I do not see any reason for someone to suffer through a commute (that is unpaid) to do a job that doesn’t require them to be physically present. If corporations really cared about their employees’ work/life balance, WFH would be even more prevalent.
I said it elsewhere and I’ll say it here for awareness.
If we were serious about solving climate change, we’d be incentivizing WFH for as many people as possible (salaried and hourly), as quick as possible. Of course factory workers, blue collar, health care and service industry people will have to be in office, but a reduction in transportation emissions from vehicles and jets would be an immediate and significant step toward carbon reduction goals.
Bonus side effects: Commercial property can be repurposed to much needed affordable housing.
Traffic, infrastructure spend, transportation improvements wouldn’t need the money they currently get, and there wouldn’t be a need to invest in mass transit or alternative transportation, or EV’s for that matter!
If fully remote, people wouldn’t need the unaffordable cars that are being built today.
We’ve already done a proof of concept during the pandemic on how much carbon can be reduced in a hurry. We just need to prioritize it, incentivize it and restructure our tax code for the change.
You can see my personal anecdote above, but this encapsulates everything my coworkers and I have said for the past 4+ years. It makes zero sense. The best argument for RTO is tutelage and training of newer employees, but honestly most new employees are Gen Z and have very little trouble differentiating online presence vs in person. To them it’s a vague continuum.
Bottom line is there is too much economically at stake for upending the pre-Covid status quo. We proponents saw Covid as a proof of concept; the powers that be (especially in CRE) saw it as a temporary setback.
My wife is WFH all but one day per week. She and several of her co-workers are pretty much on some kind of chat amongst themselves most of the day. When I come home sometimes they are still online chatting/working…not much different from sitting next to each other in office. Her company had been pretty far along setting up WFH before the pandemic because they didnt want to build yet more office space on their corporate campus.
Which would be amazing, but is a big part of why they don’t want to push WFH. A lot of these companies have a ton of money tied up in commercial real estate via both ownership and investments. If we made that less profitable, the shareholders would get reduced dividends.
Property as an asset should be disincentivized. Having large investment corps/private equity that uses RCI (residential, commercial, industrial) properties as a ETF just creates this false scarcity that squeezes everyone and everything. That sort of problem requires a systematic carrot and stick to change.
In my opinion, it’s the worst form of market manipulation. And everyone who invests in the stock market is part of the problem unfortunately.
Definitely agree.
I’m work from home full time, and have been since the pandemic. The agency I was at tried to make everyone come in a few times a week, but also knew I’d quit if they tried that with me.
Now I work for a Fortune 500 company with 70,000+ employees across the globe and in most countries. There isn’t even an office in a state that boarders mine. I’ve also never been more productive.
When I was in the office, I’d inevitably get stuck talking to some lady I hardly knew. By the end of the conversation I’d know all about her husbands affair (this literally happened with three DIFFERENT people at my workplace) or their kids or whatever. Now I can work, take a break to pet the animals or do a quick chore. My boss treats me like the adult I am. I don’t have to request time off for doctor’s appointments, vet visits, etc. I just block off my calendar and do my thing.
As someone with multiple disabilities (bipolar, ADHD, autism) working from home has improved my quality of life beyond words. Plus I only drive like 6k miles a year now.
I work a govt environmental job and we’re still at 1 day per week in the office. I want to think we’re keeping it that way to set an example for reducing commuting emissions but I really don’t know. We downsized our office during COVID but could probably support everyone 2 or 3 days a week there.
A lot of people are serious about solving climate change. But too few in positions of wealth and power are.
Unfortunately, I’ve heard that it’s pretty hard to convert office spaces into housing, they’d have to be rebuilt. Still agree though!
A lotta’ “mean girls” at VW Corporate.
Gernot, stop trying to make Step&Fetch happen!
“ Someone has it out for Gernot Döllner, the current CEO of Audi, man in the black suit in the above photo. It’s not necessarily because he has no prior board experience or prior experience at Audi prior to being shuffled over from Porsche to fill the role, but those things likely don’t help.”
I love how when a CEO who is female or a person of color fails there are folks all over the place who scream “DEI HIRE”. Yet hiring an incompetent white guy isn’t EXACTLY an example of a person hired because of their gender and race… which is what that complaint is about in the first place.
You missed the opportunity to say “Infighting in Ingolstadt.”
Asbestos in Obstetrics!
https://beavisandbutthead.fandom.com/wiki/Asbestos_in_Obstetrics
If NHTSA actually cared about their purpose and mission statement, they’d mandate ADB (Adaptive Driving Beam) headlight systems for the USDM. And if yet more technology is unreasonable (I generally disagree with technology for its own sake), then mandate headlamp lumen thresholds with systems that are self-leveling or are easier for manual adjustments. Driving at night is hazardous and painful when you’re getting your retinas seared off by drivers who’ve installed aftermarket LED headlights and failed to adjust them properly.
I feel for those who have problems with migraines resulting from excessively bright headlamps. Again, that crosses over into more of a state legislation aspect, especially if these installations are required to be performed by a proper shop. Regardless of the solution, this should be a priority for NHTSA, because it is absolutely a safety issue that should’ve been addressed years ago.
Completely agree that we should be talking about headlight alignment more. Where I live has a lot of slight elevation changes and you’re always getting blinded.
Plus it seems like Toyota and Tesla completely ignore the fact that they should align their lights at the factory.
I think the biggest concerning trend in headlight design right now is the split headlights. It’s heinously ugly but that is pretty irrelevant compared to the fact that it makes the blinding lights problem worse. Lower mounted headlights require being aimed at a flatter angle and blind other drivers more on slight undulations in the road.
My 18 year old Audi has auto-leveling headlights that also have a dip in the beam pattern built into the direction of incoming traffic. Best designed non-adaptive beam pattern I’ve seen for sure.
I’ve noticed that with Toyotas. It seems like their headlights are aimed as flat as can be, so any elevation change makes being in an oncoming car rough.
Also, who drives a Honda? I need someone to tell me how hard it is to actually see the high-beam indicator. It feels like every other car coming at me with brights on is a damn Civic or CRV.
The lower set of lights generally have one advantage. They can easily be permanently disabled by a parking curb.
Ironically, the split headlight trend might be an attempt to make the headlights pass IIHS glare tests better. Probably some flawed methodologies involved (perhaps completely flat test roads?)
Company: come back to the office, let’s share ideas and be dynamic
Employee 1: can you do this thing for me
Employee 2: Sorry, can’t take tasks outside of planning, so open a ticket, describe your task and prioritise it with the PM.
WHAT’S THE POINT OF BEING ON THE OFFICE IF THE WORK IS STILL DONE ONLINE?
I remember being back in the office in a meeting. All I could think of is how better meetings went when everyone was at a desk in front of their computer instead of face to face. Back at their desk was where the answers were.
The only meetings that go “better” face to face are the BS ones where people show off, grand stand or blather on.
Nailed It!
To be honest, I personally preferred face to face meetings. But most non-phisical work is being pushed to the digital realm more and more anyway, so I see no point in having all the hassle of going to the office to leverage two, maybe three actual useful personal interactions. Gimme my commute time back that I will put it to better use!
I believe the increase in productivity working remotely was at least in part, if not mostly, due to the Hawthorne effect. It was new, exciting and people liked the new arrangement so they worked harder. They also knew their bosses were closely monitoring the new arrangement. I also believe at some point human nature is going to kick in (or already has) and the lowered level of management oversight will lead to laziness and lower productivity. Obviously not all people. Many are that self-motivated and many have personal situations that they really do benefit from remote work. But I’d be willing to guess the net increase in productivity is lost and net productivity is starting to go back down in many companies. A customized approach that accounts for the specifics of each situation is probably best.
Good points. Makes sense.
WFH certainly comes with an inherent amount of flexibility, but there’s also far fewer distractions. Nobody stops by my desk to ask if I saw “the game”, nobody stops me on the way out of the breakroom for an ad-hoc chat, my office equipment is way nicer than anything my company would provide, I’m not worried about leaving before X time to beat the traffic, I never take a lunch (I just snack at my desk), I could go on. Truth is when I WFH I stay focused and productive because I’m left to do my work with no interruptions in the environment that is the most comfortable for me.
Very fair comment. My wife homeschools our kids so working from home was a constant struggle for me. I’d rather spend time with them than work any day.
Very fair comment. My wife homeschools our kids so working from home was a constant struggle for me. I’d rather spend time with them than work any day.
Can confirm, pretty much ALL of my friends to WFH work more hours, or will spend an hour or two extra at another time, because it’s easy to start/stop when there’s no commute involved.
I, personally, enjoy the extra hour of sleep I get when I’m WFH.
My commute time also turned into to more sleep.
And we all get time to comment here. 😉
Hard agree. I think a lot of people who think WFH is automatically less productive forget just how much of the day is wasted on that stuff. Or on reading and commenting on automotive websites. Or just trying to look productive when it’s close to quitting time so you don’t want to start another project.
Good points, but anecdotally my colleagues who come into the office twice a week seem to work longer hours on WFH days when they don’t have to commute. They’re replacing the time it takes to drive to work with actual work on those days. Not relevant to me though as my office is 7 minutes from home.
That’s my wife’s attitude. She’s been WFH since the world shut down, and hasn’t had to go back full time (as of yet). She’s said for years that if she needs to be in the office, when it’s time to go, she’s gone, and that’s the end of her day, period. Her employer gets much more value by having her at home.
WFH makes the most sense, really. If your job can be done remotely, it should be done remotely. The only downside is the feeling that you’re somehow always on call. If a semi-important email comes in at 7:00 PM, you seriously have to resist the urge to respond to it then and there. If you’re not good at setting very hard boundaries for yourself you’re going to struggle.
Extroverts may not agree with you. There’s no one size fits all answer here is my opinion.
My response would be that work is not a social club. It’s cool if you feel the need to hobnob during work hours, but not all of your fellow employees would want that.
One hundred percent work from office has worked so well in the past /s
Yep, we all know how well Audi did working with Bosch behind the scenes to cheat emissions with software…
Aren’t return to office policies generally just soft layoffs of the folks unwilling or unable to return?
Maybe that’s less the case now that full-remote jobs are harder to find (grateful for mine) but it has mostly seemed like companies aren’t exactly shedding tears if not everyone makes it back in.
There’s some of that and a little of trying to justify holding large properties that are empty a lot of the time.
Yes, and it’s possibly the worst form of layoff because you don’t lose your low performers, you lose the high performers who know they can find someone else to hire them with more flexible requirements. It’s stupid, and happens every few years at certain large tech companies who shall remain nameless.
There is that, also what @Njd suggested…and poor and/or lazy managers who equate “seeing” employees with “managing” them.
This is why I love my manager. She just sets performance goals and checks in to see progress. Asks if I need help/resources, but otherwise leaves me to get shit done.
It’s great.
It’s a very loosely kept secret at our large employer (225k+ people) that RTO is a voluntary attrition program. Scroll up for my specifics, but that’s a big part of it.
The problem here is adverse selection. The people most averse to RTO are very often the most marketable elsewhere, so they’ll be the first to leave.
Me? I’m waiting it out to see what happens, maybe force them to pay the contractual severance as a “parting shot” for the insanity they’ve put us through.
I think it is partly that, partly to justify all the office buildings they own, all the shit they filled the office buildings with, and appeasing state Governments. Who wants to move to a state with a state income tax and high cost of living and work in an office when you can work from home in a state with low cost of living and no state income tax?
Office building are really only useful for being office buildings, converting one to apartments requires major modifications. Frankly I think a lot of special interests are just trying to keep office buildings relevant, when they really are not anymore.
If I were working a conventional office job there’s no way in hell I’d do it anywhere but from home. In this economy you need to save money wherever you can, and extract as much value from work as you can. Not having wear dress clothes, commute, make pack lunches/eat out/eat cafeteria food, and not having to deal with a lot of office politics is worth it, especially so for the same pay as someone who has to deal with that.
I also think that part of this is getting rid of the people who have little attachment to the company. For someone working remotely if they decided to quit or get fired they don’t lose much overall. Someone who has to commute to the office every day, found an home close by to minimize commuting time and cost, has a bunch of work clothes, etc. and has less take home pay due to the associated costs has a lot more to lose if they wanna quit or get fired.