Banks in the US are _very_ insistent on the return to office mandate. Noncompliance would be met with termination.
Rest assured their goal is full return to office despite the current "hybrid" model they are pushing, and you are not important enough to them to keep your job while being civilly disobedient.
I believe they meant to use the tildes to indicate a strikethrough text format, as with markdown. The "cul", I would guess is an unfinished "cultists", even though you'd typically strikethrough a completed word. When trying to indicate a "change of mind" it would be better to use a dash: "Better at retaining cul- uh, employees."
The problem with this is that your previous manager may be an idiot who can't accurately judge your skills. You have the same problem: your manager is no more trustworthy than you are, and it's much easier to just have you write some code in front of me to solve this problem.
Many subreddits are simply themed containers of creative writing. With all the media attention the AntiWork subreddit has gotten lately that brings more karma farmers and therefore more fiction. It's an entertaining read, but not likely true.
You'd be shocked at how bad the average software developer is at writing software. I've interviewed many people who can't solve FizzBuzz level problems. In interviews I have people program a function to rearrange characters in a string, appropriately named "SimpleProblem", and >50% of candidates with experience can't write a function that compiles and solves the problem.
LeetCode is just what you get when you ask Software Engineers to solve the interview problem - they like showing off their chops so that's what you get. It doesn't need to be that complicated though. I know with about 80% certainty whether someone will work out based on how they solve that "SimpleProblem". The other 20% - just fire them if they don't work out. It doesn't need to be that hard. You don't need 100% certainty for a hire, you'll never get there. Just fire the ones that don't work out. You don't even need to feel bad for them - in this market they'll find another job by the end of the month.
I don't know why you're downvoted - it's absolute nonsense to think that your CTO should be 80% your best developer. Your CTO should not be writing code at a company with >100 employees - why would they maintain 80% of the skillset of someone who's entire job is writing code? Is the assertion that what a CTO does is only 20% different than what a software engineer does?
To expand - every meeting should have a clear agenda that is communicated beforehand. How can anyone expect to be prepared for a meeting if they don't even know what it's about? Spend the 60 seconds it takes to put a description on your meeting request.
Signed, someone who works at a company with a culture of sending blank meeting invites
People here are suggesting credentialing as if it will remove interview requirements rather than simply add a new hoop to jump through. I do not believe required credentialing solves the interviewing problem at all. You see it today with the certifications that already exist in the market. They aren't worth the paper they're printed on. Anyone can trivially study and pass the certification tests and still never have implemented a system, nor even have basic programming ability.
I would think that if anyone is overreacting it's the person who thinks people who struggle to identify with remote workers are sociopaths. I haven't made any black and white statements or used absolute terms such as "no empathy". I know people in general struggle with nuance, but come on - I'm making it easy here.
I am a manager and do have a concern for company culture. Culture is how the teams work together - socially, professionally. It's harder to maintain culture remotely. It switches from something that "just happens" with a bit of care to something that has to be actively fostered.
It's easy do dehumanize a voice on the phone. Many people don't want to even use cameras for video calls. How much empathy do you have for a voice on the phone versus a human being you interact with in person on a daily basis?
I think the benefits of remote work far outweigh the work that needs to be done to maintain culture remotely, but it is a new challenge that doesn't have a lot of good understanding around how to make it work.
The two people in the meeting decide it. I'm sure if either of them are creepy then you will end up with a creepy meeting. Otherwise it's just a professional meeting with an agenda and a desired outcome, like any other.
If you have no goals that's your failing, not the meeting's. If you lack the imagination to see where you want your career to go or the introspection to see where it's headed then, again, your fault - not the meeting.
Questions I get in my one on one's with people who care and are going places:
-Why is the organization failing at x/y/z? How can I make that better? Is it worth fixing?
-I am having trouble accomplishing e/f/g goal - I've hit q/r/s roadblock. What do you recommend I do about this?
-I want your job, how can I change what I am doing to get me closer to what you do?
I also use them to get information I need from these people:
-How is your team doing? Is anyone under/overvalued?
-Are your commitments on track?
-Is there anything I can do to make you or your team more effective?
I mostly have these meetings monthly. A month is long enough for things to change. 6 months is too long - too many things have changed, too many have been forgotten.
It's impossible to overstate how much I agree with the need for a separate project management role. Project management is the biggest distraction I have from the "things only I can do" and the biggest morale and time suck. I don't have advice to give because I haven't solved my lack-of-project-management problem, but I sincerely believe I could be much more effective if this was off my plate.
One on one meetings are not "creepy" - they are a chance to have an open conversation about your goals; your concerns; and anything else that needs to be discussed about your career, the organization, etc.
Do you know what the sales people in your organization do? What about the legal department? Procurement? HR? Your lack of knowledge is not evidence.
"lol, do some coding instead"? And what should I code? How do you know what _you_ should be coding? Where does that work come from? Who makes sure that you're writing quality code and not some shit spaghetti mess? When the lawyers come knocking who answers the questions about security and compliance? You're just going to write some code for that?
Your myopic complaints do nothing to further your own goals - rather than make baseless accusations, look into the problems yourself and try to solve them. You might get some career growth out of it. At the very least you'll understand that not all problems can be solved with code.
If you're revisiting Chick's music due to this event or learning of him for the first time, here's a duet that may introduce you to another electrifying pianist, Hiromi Uehara:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRU1o-sCnqY
I make a judgement call - either I end the interview immediately or skip most of the rest of the interview, let them think they made it all the way through the interview and say that we will get back to them with a decision later. When I end it immediately they usually take it badly but these are times that I just can’t justify wasting any more time on them. The bad reactions run the normal gamut of bad human reactions: angry, sad, indifferent, humor, etc.
Rest assured their goal is full return to office despite the current "hybrid" model they are pushing, and you are not important enough to them to keep your job while being civilly disobedient.