SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
How can an employee die at her desk and remain undiscovered for so long in a place supposedly designed to enhance collaboration and human connection?
The recent, tragic story of Denise Prudhomme, a 60-year-old Wells Fargo employee who was found dead at her cubicle four days after she came into her office, challenges the prevailing narrative about the supposed social and collaborative benefits of in-person work. Prudhomme's death went unnoticed in an environment that is often portrayed as fostering better communication and team cohesion. This disturbing reality casts serious doubt on the claims made by many corporate leaders that bringing workers back to the office is essential for their well-being and collaboration. The story reveals a stark contrast between the idealized vision of in-office work and its practical shortcomings.
Corporate leaders frequently argue that remote work results in isolation and a loss of team spirit, emphasizing that the physical presence of employees is necessary to maintain a connected and innovative workplace. Yet, Prudhomme's case suggests otherwise. Despite being in the office, her presence—or rather, her tragic absence—went unnoticed for days. This raises a profound question: How can an employee die at her desk and remain undiscovered for so long in a place supposedly designed to enhance collaboration and human connection? Several employees noticed a foul odor but attributed it to faulty plumbing rather than the grim reality. This oversight reveals a significant disconnect between what companies claim about in-person work and what actually happens on the ground.
The death of Denise Prudhomme is a stark reminder that the supposed benefits of in-person work are often overstated or misunderstood.
Recent research adds another layer to this discussion. The Survey of Working Arrangements and Attitudes (SWAA), led by Nick Bloom and his colleagues, shows that employees spend only about 80 minutes on in-person activities during a typical office day. The rest of their time is spent on tasks like video conferencing, emailing, and using communication tools—tasks that are equally manageable from home. These findings highlight the inefficiencies of in-office work, where the supposed benefits of collaboration are minimal, and the majority of the workday could be performed just as effectively outside the office.
The push for in-office work is often framed as an attempt to combat isolation and enhance teamwork, but the truth seems to lie elsewhere. Instead of being about employee welfare, it may be more about outdated managerial control and resistance to change, as found in recent research led by Professor Mark Ma from the University of Pittsburgh, alongside his graduate student Yuye Ding. This compulsion not only creates a toxic work environment but also perpetuates a lack of genuine engagement among employees. The death of Prudhomme, unnoticed by her colleagues, serves as a grim reminder of the consequences of such a culture.
The Wells Fargo incident also underscores the limitations of traditional office environments. Many workplaces are structured in ways that can be isolating. This reality challenges the narrative that in-office work fosters better mental health and social engagement. If the physical presence of employees was genuinely the solution to isolation, how could such a tragedy occur without anyone noticing for so long? It becomes evident that the drive to return employees to the office is not necessarily about their well-being or improved collaboration but often about control, visibility, and maintaining the status quo.
To genuinely improve workplace dynamics and employee satisfaction, companies should reconsider how they structure in-person workdays. By focusing on meaningful in-person engagements and allowing remote work for tasks that do not require physical presence, companies can reduce unnecessary commuting, increase productivity, and significantly improve employee well-being.
The death of Denise Prudhomme is a stark reminder that the supposed benefits of in-person work are often overstated or misunderstood. The reality of her unnoticed death in a supposedly collaborative office setting reveals the emptiness of corporate claims about the need for physical presence to foster better teamwork and social connections.
Disabled workers are a growing portion of the labor force and a vital asset to our economy, but pandemic-era accesibility gains could end up being temporary if we’re not careful.
This Labor Day, it’s time to talk about disabled workers.
This issue is personal for me. I debated for years about whether to disclose my disability status to potential employers.
I have rheumatoid arthritis, which is largely managed thanks to medication. I’m extremely lucky—I get to choose whether and how to disclose my disability, instead of needing to disclose it to get access to tools I need to succeed on the job. Usually, the only visible evidence of my disability at work is when an occasional flare-up gives me pain.
We’re at a crossroads: We can either continue to build on this progress that has opened doors for an entire section of the labor force—and for improved labor policies in general—or we can undo those great strides and shut disabled workers out.
At least 1 out of every 4 Americans has a disability, and conditions like long Covid may have bumped that number even further. Millions of disabled American workers rely on a variety of visible and invisible workplace accommodations to help them do their jobs and do them well.
As the U.S. Department of Labor explains on their website, workplace accommodations “may include specialized equipment, modifications to the work environment, or adjustments to work schedules or responsibilities.” That can mean anything from adaptive technology to ergonomic office furniture to a hybrid or fully remote work schedule.
We still have a long way to go to make American workplaces around our country more accessible, inclusive, and more likely to hire and retain disabled workers. Labor Day is the perfect time to talk about how to raise the standard across the country when it comes to disability accommodations in the workplace.
Three years into the pandemic, changes in remote and hybrid work policies have transformed the job market for disabled workers, vastly expanding opportunities for employment and making it more feasible for disabled workers not only to survive but to thrive. Workplaces in turn benefit from disabled workers’ talents, perspectives, and adaptiveness.
Disabled workers are a growing portion of the labor force and a vital asset to our economy. But with a growing employer pushback against remote work and other basic accommodations, these pandemic-era gains could end up being temporary if we’re not careful.
We’re at a crossroads: We can either continue to build on this progress that has opened doors for an entire section of the labor force—and for improved labor policies in general—or we can undo those great strides and shut disabled workers out.
Despite some protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which just turned 33, disabled workers still face stigma when it comes to hiring, employment, and navigating workplace environments that require accommodations.
Although a lot of progress has occurred over the past several decades, workers like me can still face an uphill battle when trying to access workplace accommodations to fulfill our job duties. Doctors’ notes, medical records, complicated human resources processes, and other hurdles can be a barrier to getting even the most basic requests accommodated.
The cost for employers tends to be pretty small. A May survey of employers by the Job Accommodation Network found that fulfilling an accommodation request cost half of them nothing at all. Of those that did incur an expense, the median cost was just $300.
Meanwhile, staff-wide workplace measures like flexible scheduling, paid sick leave, intermittent breaks, or ergonomic office furniture tend to benefit everyone, not just disabled employees.
Let’s raise the standard this year. Let’s treat disability accommodations like we treat safety standards or anti-discrimination statutes—as common-sense measures that help employers retain great employees and ensure their full potential, for the benefit of everyone.
"Today looks like it might be the start of a new chapter in Amazon's history," one organizer of the nationwide protest remarked optimistically.
More than 1,000 Amazon corporate workers and allies rallied outside the e-commerce giant's Seattle headquarters on Wednesday to protest the company's return-to-work policy and what they called its failure to fulfill its climate pledge.
Sign and chant slogans during the Seattle lunchtime rally—which was organized by Amazon Employees for Climate Justice and Amazon's Remote Advocacy group—included "Amazon: Strive Harder," "Stop Greenwashing," and "Hell No, RTO,"—a rebuke of a mandate from Amazon CEO Andy Jassy to return to the office at least three days per week.
"Morale is the lowest I've seen since I've been working here," one Seattle-based employee who did not want to be named and has worked for the company since 2020 told Wired.
This year, Amazon terminated 27,000 workers, layoffs that mirrored cost-cutting sackings at other tech companies that overhired during the Covid-19 pandemic.
\u201cHundreds of corporate employees at the #Amazon walkout underway at the Spheres in South Lake Union. Workers calling out leadership for the return-to-office mandate and failure to reduce carbon footprint\u201d— Jackie Kent (@Jackie Kent) 1685560576
At least hundreds of other Amazon corporate employees and their supporters took part in similar demonstrations outside company offices around the nation on Wednesday, according to reports.
"Today looks like it might be the start of a new chapter in Amazon's history, when tech workers coming out of the pandemic stood up and said, 'We still want a say in this company and the direction of this company,'" Eliza Pan, a former Amazon corporate employee and a co-founder of Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, toldThe Associated Press.
\u201cThanks to everyone who showed up to make #AmazonWalkout a success!\u201d— Amazon Employees For Climate Justice (@Amazon Employees For Climate Justice) 1685559893
Amazon spokesperson Brad Glasser told Wired that "we're always listening and will continue to do so, but we're happy with how the first month of having more people back in the office has been."
"There's more energy, collaboration, and connections happening, and we've heard this from lots of employees and the businesses that surround our offices," he added.
However, Church Hindley, an Amazon quality assurance engineer, told the AP that working from home has improved his health and quality of life.
"I'm not suited for in-office work," Hindley said. "I deal with depression and anxiety, and I was able to get off my anxiety medication and start living my life."
\u201cMessages in the crowd at the Amazon walkout in Seattle.\u201d— Kurt Schlosser (@Kurt Schlosser) 1685563537
Pamela Hayter, an Amazon project manager, started the "Remote Advocacy" internal Slack channel, which now has 33,000 members.
During the Seattle rally, Hayter slammed the return-to-office mandate, saying, "I cannot believe that a company in this day and age, a company that claims to be an innovative leader in its space, would do that to one of its most precious resources—its employees."