Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States IT

America's Office-Occupancy Rates Drop by Double Digits - and More in San Francisco (sfgate.com) 98

Posted by EditorDavid from the office-spaces dept.
SFGate shares the latest data on America's office-occupancy rates: According to Placer.ai's January 2025 Office Index, office visits nationwide were 40.2% lower in January 2025 compared with pre-pandemic numbers from January 2019.

But San Francisco is dragging down the average, with a staggering 51.8% decline in office visits since January 2019 — the weakest recovery of any major metro. Kastle's 10-City Daily Analysis paints an equally grim picture. From Jan. 23, 2025, to Jan. 28, 2025, even on its busiest day (Tuesday), San Francisco's office occupancy rate was just 53.7%, significantly lower than Houston's (74.8%) and Chicago's (70.4%). And on Friday, Jan. 24, office attendance in [San Francisco] was at a meager 28.5%, the worst of any major metro tracked...

Meanwhile, other cities are seeing much stronger rebounds. New York City is leading the return-to-office trend, with visits in January down just 19% from 2019 levels, while Miami saw a 23.5% decline, per Placer.ai data.
"Placer.ai uses cellphone location data to estimate foot traffic, while Kastle Systems measures badge swipes at office buildings with its security systems..."

America's Office-Occupancy Rates Drop by Double Digits - and More in San Francisco More | Reply

America's Office-Occupancy Rates Drop by Double Digits - and More in San Francisco

Comments Filter:

  • Dropped by MORE than double digits?! (Score:4, Funny)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @03:38PM (#65169207)

    So office occupancy in San Francisco in down by 100%?

    Great headline.

  • I'd imagine that more companies will follow the lead of other Big Tech and government offices who are currently forcing workers to return to the office or lose their jobs.

    I'm not saying that's a good thing, but it seems to be where the momentum is headed now.

    • Re:I'd imagine that this will turn around soon (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @04:01PM (#65169237) Journal

      Usually when they do that it's an attempt to scare employees away to reduce head-count, not because it increases productivity. It's a sign the company is Focked in the Ess.

      • Or a sign of a weak economy. We've had a good run lately, but the economy moves in cycles over long time periods and if companies can use RTO mandates as a way to avoid unemployment and severance payouts during the next downturn, it should be very unsurprising when they do it.

      • Re:I'd imagine that this will turn around soon (Score:4, Interesting)

        by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @05:16PM (#65169331)
        Unfortunately, you’re wrong. I wish you were right. But it’s actually fairly common for a company’s measurable productivity to go up after a period of layoffs.

        If layoffs always reduced productivity, company owners, managers and executives would NEVER DO THEM. Maybe the manager’s bonus hinges on quarterly returns and that guy’s gonna be stupidly shortsighted. But owners and equity-holders usually keep longer-term success in mind. They’ll only allow layoffs if they think it’ll actually improve the company.

        There have been articles running about this because of what the Trusk is trying to do to the US federal government. The problem is that there are right ways to do layoffs (which encourages the checked-out and the quiet-quitters to leave) and wrong ways (crush everyones spirit so the strong performers give the middle finger and run for a better place). Trusk is doing it the wrong way, incidentally.

        My best link on this is paywalled. You’ll have to look it up yourself.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gweihir ( 88907 )

          For this type of layoff? I doubt it. You would have to very carefully exclude high and top performers from these stupid policies. I do not see that happening.

        • Re:I'd imagine that this will turn around soon (Score:4, Insightful)

          by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @08:55PM (#65169663) Journal

          Unfortunately, you’re wrong. I wish you were right. But it’s actually fairly common for a company’s measurable productivity to go up after a period of layoffs.

          You have to be careful here, in that there are different ways to measure productivity. The simplest way, profits/employeeCount, automatically goes up after a layoff as the company continues running on inertia. That doesn't tell you anything about whether the employees are working harder or not.

          In my own personal case, last time I was involved in a layoff, my own personal productivity went down, as I was annoyed that skilled coworkers were laid off, and I started plotting my own spectacular exit.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Tablizer ( 95088 )

          I meant productivity of hybrid telework versus in-office, not that changed by firing in general.

          As far as layoff-induced productivity, it often goes up because long-term projects are cancelled. These don't generate short-term results but rather are strategic in nature. It's almost always possible to "milk the future" for short-term gains if a biz so chooses.

          It also scares workers to become more productive, but burns good will and may eventually result in burn out: again short-term vs. long-term.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Yep. And there will be a high price due for crap like this. As some examples show, even the very largest enterprises are not immune to failure. The problem is just that the larger the enterprise, the slower the effects of crappy management become visible.

    • I think the issue is they're measuring cell phone data. Many major employers require some level of badge-ins. But most of us don't stick around. Offices are the anti-thesis of productivity, so we go back home. RTO is just making traffic and infrastructure problems worse, without actually offering any benefit to anyone except CRE bag-holders, who should go die in fires. Sooner rather than later.

    • Working from home (in jobs where that is practical) gives people superior work-life balance and greater satisfaction in life and work. More time with their families without sacrificing the time they must focus on their duties, plus options to live further away from hubs to save much-needed money and benefit from cleaner air. It also reduces air pollution overall since they don't need to drive nearly as much. It is such a win for so many people.

      I understand that traffic accidents went up during and after

      • I understand that traffic accidents went up during and after the pandemic, in absolute numbers. I didn't believe this until I read the stats myself. Apparently with lighter traffic, people drove like maniacs. As sad as this makes me, it is no argument for a RTO policy. On the contrary, it's a stronger argument for driving as little as possible (since it is clearly dangerous) and for beefing up traffic law enforcement.

        So your take-away, after proving to yourself/to your satisfaction, that fewer drivers led to increased accidents is to further reduce the number of drivers on the road? Because you think it will reverse the trend you yourself confirmed and lower traffic accidents?

        Your own evidence doesn't support your conclusion.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      I doubt that. The large organizations can do it because really bad business decisions have less short-term impact on them. Smaller companies will die if they mess up this badly and most know it.

  • Placer.ai uses cellphone location data to estimate foot traffic

    Kill it with fire!

  • Placer.ai uses cellphone location data to estimate foot traffic

    So what you're saying is that Placer.ai is just another Privacy Rapist.

    • So what you're saying is that Placer.ai is just another Privacy Rapist.

      No. Placer.ai doesn't collect any data, and the data they get from the telecoms is anonymized.

      Your privacy is unaffected.

      • No. Placer.ai doesn't "collect" any data, and the data they get from the telecoms is "anonymized".

        Your privacy is unaffected, if you already have Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, Uber, and the full Google suite of apps on your phone with location on full time.

        Fixed that for you.

  • Nothing grim (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eneville ( 745111 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @05:06PM (#65169305) Homepage

    There's nothing grim about not going to the big town office. We should be happy that people are working outside the big cities where pollution accumulates and the average road speed is measured in snail paces.

    Keep it up San Francisco

  • Tone (Score:5, Insightful)

    by coopertempleclause ( 7262286 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @05:09PM (#65169315)
    Why is this news written as if that's a bad thing?

    Work has changed for many professions, and the only people fighting against it are real-estate investors and poor managers.
    • Hyothetical positive slant:

      According to companies spying on cell phone locations, San Francisco has a higher rate of people working in private garages compared with other US cities, where people more often remain stuck in offices and spied on by their bosses. This is great news for SF and Silicon Valley as it shows the startup-in-garages economy is alive and well and doing much better than elsewhere.

    • Probably all the extroverts. They always want to be around people. It's like they just can't stand being lone and in quiet time.

    • Because of the value of the commercial real estate drops the owners of that commercial real estate will abuse the power they have to make us pay for it one way or another.

      It's like how when inflation goes up they crank interest rates in order to trigger a recession rather than enforce antitrust law and or take government action to increase supply in order to keep prices down.

      It's a tacit acknowledgment that anything that inconveniences the top is converted into punishment for everyone beneath them.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        It's like how when inflation goes up they crank interest rates in order to trigger a recession rather than enforce antitrust law and or take government action to increase supply in order to keep prices down.

        Supply side economic control isn't possible. Many things take time to ramp up and down.

        For example - cars. They couldn't build cars because they couldn't get the chips needed to run them. But they can't get the chips to run them because the fabs making them were running at full capacity making other chi

        • Lead times on chips can easily be a few months, and that requires reserving it ahead of time. And chips cannot be moved between fabs without a chip resdesign as all the design rules differ by fab, so you can't take a design for TSMC and run int on GlobalFoundries without spending months redesigning and verifying.

          Fun fact, though you're absolutely right in general, I did exactly that not very long after Global Foundries was founded. The tiling on our design was done according to TSMC specification and considered their IP, so I stripped that. Other than that, it went out, fastest tape out in my life, one afternoon... Of course, it was on a process that GF had made a copy of, which they wanted to prove to our management.

  • Good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by spiritplumber ( 1944222 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @05:24PM (#65169341) Homepage
    Commutes are horrible. The office environment is horrible. In-person meetings are horrible. Office buildings are horrible.

  • This is things getting better (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @05:32PM (#65169357)

    ...At least in this one area.

    Life has enough pointless crap in it without us inventing more. If a job doesn't require physical presence, forcing an employee to commute to a cubical is stupid, wasteful, and downright abusive.

  • If more people are losing their jobs. They won't be going into the office.

    • Luckily, San Francisco's unemployment rate is below 4%, and falling. https://ycharts.com/indicators... [ycharts.com]. So it's probably not due to people losing their jobs, thankfully.

      • Re:Another way to look at it. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by iAmWaySmarterThanYou ( 10095012 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @06:39PM (#65169471)

        Or the jobless people left because it's super expensive there.
        Or the jobless people are no longer being counted once their unemployment ran out.

        • San Francisco's population is not decreasing.

          And jobless people don't stop counting as unemployed just because their unemployment benefits run out. https://www.bls.gov/cps/defini... [bls.gov].

          • Who said it was decreasing? And no you don't get listed as unemployed forever.

            • > Who said it was decreasing?

              You did.

              >> Or the jobless people left because it's super expensive there.

              People leaving causes the population to decrease. If those people are leaving are replaced with other people (so the population doesn't decrease) then it has no effect on unemployment (the new people are either employed or not, and the same number of people needs to same number of jobs) and hence would be nonsensical to use as an argument.

              > And no you don't get listed as unemployed forever.

              As l

              • No, I said jobless people were leaving. That is not the same as the population decreasing. You realize new people can enter the city, right?

                • If jobless people are leaving, and the population is going up, then people with jobs must be entering, at a higher rate. This would be one possible explanation for the unemployment rate going down. But it doesn't explain why the office population is decreasing.

                  • If I could play devil's advocate. People who once worked high paying jobs and contributed to society could be leaving while homeless migrants looking to sponge off the wealth or work minimum wage jobs could be entering. That would explain the increasing crime and filth.

                    • Your scenario would increase the unemployment rate, which is not happening. Homeless people are...unemployed.

                      I do buy the idea that people are having trouble finding, say, programming jobs that pay $300K. That's simply not sustainable, the market doesn't support that kind of salary for programmers, even if it is what's required to live in the Bay Area. And if that's the reality, then it's a good thing, the problem is the cost of living in the Bay Area, the problem is not programmer salaries.

                      The Bay Area has

                    • I was talking more about minimum wage / low paying jobs.

                    • It's very uncommon for office workers to be paid minimum wage. These jobs wouldn't significantly impact office occupancy rates, which is the subject of this story.

            • You do get listed as unemployed forever, as long as you keep looking for a job. Check the source link, it's as authoritative as it gets.

      • Only 4 percent - because the unemployed are leaving the city?

        • So if your theory is correct, why isn't the population of San Francisco shrinking, at least enough to reflect the decrease in office occupancy? https://fred.stlouisfed.org/se... [stlouisfed.org]

          Where are all these unemployed people going? They surely must be increasing the unemployment rate somewhere else, right? Yet, the unemployment rate for the entire country is also around 4% and slowly shrinking.

          Perhaps these unemployed people are leaving to find jobs where there is an *even lower* unemployment rate, like Houston or D

  • Fuck making people go to the office. It's a waste of everyone's time and energy, and it causes pollution and more traffic and reduces productivity, all so micromanaging twats can feel good about themselves.

    • I'm a surgeon. (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Explain to me how I'm supposed to do your trans-care surgery from home.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      I find it hilarious that some CEO cretins do not even know that they do not have enough office space anymore, because saner parts of the organization sold it or stopped renting it as it was clearly not needed. Assholes with a "slave holder" mind-set are not good leaders. Well, there are not many good CEOs overall, so it makes sense.

  • San Francisco (Score:3)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Saturday February 15, 2025 @11:34PM (#65169883)

    Homelessness budget: $1.2 Billion (yes with a B).
    Number of people sheltered: 3900
    Number of unhoused homeless: 3000

    My question is .. How the fuck are they spending $1.2 BILLION and house only 3900 people with that?

    Oh and I found out they pay shelter owners $300 per person even though people are housed like sardines.

    We need cheap UN refugee style cabins (they only cost $1000 to $3500 each) setup 25 miles from the city with free bus service. https://khomechina.com/project... [khomechina.com] They are sturdy, can be put on strong foundation cheaply, but as for building code compliance .. I don't know but they definitely meet more building codes than a sidewalk tent. Anyone drug free can stay in a cabin for 4 weeks at a time (after 4 weeks they must moved to another randomly assigned cabin, on condition they didnt trash their existing one). Oh and hardcore drug addicts need to be institutionalized until they can get clean.

    • Gov service is designed to spend money, not to solve actual problems.
    • This is because San Francisco didn't listen to their own prophet, Henry George, who predicted everything in 1870. Because they fail to tax their immense land value, the single greatest asset they have, and allow private rentiers to soak up all the value of the welfare spending, it's literally impossible for cities to help the poor, because the rent will simply rise to absorb all value.

      If they have a billion to spend, well, that's the amount of rent they have to pay.

      The very simple solution is to tax rent.

      • The very simple solution is to tax rent.

        How would that work? It will make rent even more expensive. The solution instead is to allow more buildings and tax extra based on land area ownership allocation. Just approve every housing development request. Any solution to housing can only come from either an increase in housing units or an expulsion of residents (uh good luck with the latter). Also, make it so an individual can own 2000 sq. ft almost tax-free, get taxed low for the next 2000 sq ft .. but then taxed higher as their ownership of space g

        • Taxes on monopoly rents, including land rents, cannot be passed on. This is a basic economic fact known since antiquity. Current market rents already represent the market cost of land acquisition; taxing the rents doesn't change what people have to pay, it only changes who gets the rent. This is why Milton Friedman called land value taxes "the least bad tax", because they cause no economic distortion, and why the US federal government was originally envisioned to be funded by a "small tax on land" (Alexande

          • It does not promote building of new units. If it doesn't promote new units being built, it means rent will be unaffordable for some.

    • Dude! If you gathered all of the dispossessed in one place, your society would collapse. There are MILLIONS of dispossessed and if they could communicate, they could work together to tear all of this evil shit down.

      I am conservative. I fully support merchants and businesses... but what is going on now has nothing to do with equitable trading. It is all theft.

  • San Francisco is a hellhole. Nobody in their right mind would want to drive there at any time of the day, on any day, ever. I fucking hate going to SF.
  • Are we paid: to work to increase a company's profit or attend a workplace?
  • I'm not sure I'd call a return to a worse way of doing things a "rebound".

Slashdot Top Deals

Enzymes are things invented by biologists that explain things which otherwise require harder thinking. -- Jerome Lettvin

Close