Chinese (Simplified) 
Chinese (Traditional) 
English 
French 
Alemão 
Italian 
Japanese 
Norwegian 
Spanish 
4 min read
4 comments
The end of the Amazon remote work policy has sparked outrage among employees, who are reluctant to return to the office. The move is seen as a step backwards and an attempt to force layoffs. CEO Andy Jassy defends the decision, but the future of the remote work policy is still uncertain.
Would you rather go back to school than be forced to work in an office every day? That's the sentiment that has been gripping Amazon employees since CEO Andy Jassy announced the end of remote working at the company.
The decision provoked explosive reactions and a wave of resignations., while many professionals are already planning to leave the company. Could this measure represent the beginning of an unprecedented exodus at the e-commerce giant?
The impact of the announcement: a hard blow
-
Boticário is seeking interested candidates to lead CRM initiatives with a strong focus on performance, data, and benefits such as pet plans and private pension plans.
-
Work from home at Riachuelo and earn a salary plus 10 benefits! Temporary position seeking a tax analyst with expertise in ICMS and special tax regimes.
-
Work at Sesc with a salary of up to R$1.657! The institution is hiring an assistant in Santa Catarina, offering benefits and in-person contracting.
-
Work at Sesi 25 hours a week and earn over R$ 12: a unique opportunity for doctors with a Class B driver's license practicing in Santa Catarina.
Jassy's announcement, made in a memo on Monday, took employees by surprise. Starting in January 16, all employees will be required to return to the office five days a week.
The measure, which reverses the hybrid work policy in place since the start of the pandemic, has sparked outrage among workers, who consider the change a setback.
Many have pointed out that the new model is more restrictive than what existed before Covid-19, as one employee reported on Slack, according to Business Insider.
Internal reactions and leaving the company
On social media and on the company's internal Slack channel, the outcry was immediate. Some professionals have already changed their LinkedIn status to #opentowork, indicating that they are looking for new opportunities.
Others, however, expressed their discontent with irony. “I’d rather go back to school than work in an office again,” one Amazon Web Services engineer said on social media.
The discontent was even more evident in the comments on Reddit, where one employee said: “I’ll probably quit and get a new job. F*** Jassy,” describing the move as a “swift kick in the balls”.
According to Estadão, another employee suggested that he would prefer to be placed on Amazon's aggressive performance improvement plan, the infamous PIP, so that he could leave the company without meeting the new requirement.
Returning to the office: a setback or a necessity?
CEO Andy Jassy justified the new policy as a way to improve collaboration and company culture.
He argued that returning to the workplace is essential for learning, innovation and strengthening Amazon's values. However, many employees see the move as a blow to the flexibility they gained during the pandemic.
“We have observed that it is easier for our teammates to learn, model, practice and strengthen our culture; collaboration, brainstorming and invention are simpler and more effective; teaching and learning from each other are more effective,” Jassy wrote in the memo. Still, he acknowledged that the transition will not be easy and delayed the requirement until 2025 to “help ensure a smooth transition.”
A mass layoff in disguise?
The move also sparked speculation that Amazon was seeking reduce its workforce indirectly. Many disgruntled workers suggested that the new policy was designed to force voluntary layoffs, thereby avoiding the costs of severance and unemployment insurance.
“This is a redundancy in disguise,” complained one Reddit user, who said forcing everyone back into the office would result in mass resignations.
The company, which currently employs more than 1,5 million people, did not respond to requests for comment on allegations that the policy was a veiled strategy to reduce staff.
However, as per the Estadão, as early as July of this year, managers were given the green light to fire employees who did not show up at the office three days a week.
What to expect for the future?
Amazon’s decision could influence other large companies to adopt stricter in-person work policies, especially at a time when many companies are still debating whether to go hybrid or fully remote. The pandemic has proven that remote work is viable, and for many, flexibility has become a non-negotiable benefit.
Meanwhile, Amazon employees are bracing for significant changes to their routines and, in some cases, even life changes.
As Jassy acknowledged, many people have moved to the suburbs and organized their personal lives around the three-day office policy. Going back to working five days a week in the office will require adjustments that, for some, simply aren’t worth the effort.
A decision that divides opinions
The return to in-person work at Amazon puts the ability of large corporations to adapt in post-pandemic times into question.
Is the remote work model here to stay, or will physical presence requirements become the norm again? It remains to be seen whether other companies will follow Amazon’s lead or opt to maintain the flexibility that many workers have come to see as essential.
And for you, reader, is mandatory in-person work a setback or a necessity to maintain productivity and corporate culture? Leave your opinion in the comments!
Backwards movement. Bosses who only want to micromanage. And many professionals are preferring to quit their jobs rather than work in person. And this also applies to studies, distance learning has become increasingly popular, as has online shopping, internet banking, etc. There is no turning back.
A report I read a few months ago suggested that, instead of “strengthening the company culture” and “strengthening bonds between employees”, many people really want to have strict control over their teams when it comes to productivity; managers and directors expect their subordinates to be as productive or more productive than when they were at home… which is difficult when you take into account the commute between home and the office in certain cities, the environment, the stress generated… In short, they think it is beneficial for the company when in fact it is completely the opposite.
Remote work is a step forward for both the company and the employees. It is strange that some people simply go back on their decisions at the height of the pandemic, when many companies had declared that they would adopt remote work permanently. What has changed??? Could it be that involvement with politicians is influencing these decisions, as big cities are emptier, where many employees have adopted living in quieter and often safer places!!!
The decision of this guy and other CEOs is a senseless setback!!!