I didn’t read all the replies, but I either have to be a bit terse or I could write a dissertation on this one. I’ll go with terse.
It depends on how well the job is really getting done remotely, and the rationale of the employer for requiring the employees to come back to the office.
I hate that the US anchors you to a job via employer-provided health care. It’s like a Bracero Program for no end of citizens. We Own Your Ass.
Where I worked a number of years back, several of our best employees worked remotely. Each was highly productive, but TPTB hated the idea that one, for example, wintered in his ski condo at the base of the mountain, would work from 5:30a to 9a, then ski a few hours, and then work at least a full day.
They gave him an ultimatum: come work at the home office or find another job.
This shit sucks.
It happened a few times to a few people where the problem that we were trying to solve … did not exist. It was power and control.
The traffic, quality of life, family matters, the fact that many people actually work more hours (ie, productivity) from a home office than in the Office.
Maybe TPTB are starting to lose leviathan real estate bets. I’ve heard rumors that VC funds invest heavily in RE when they start incubating tech towns like Miami, Austin, Boulder, Boise, et al.
The WFH thing is making “more livable” cities dramatically more attractive and hurting population centers.
And maybe it’s easier for workers to look for, and interview for, better jobs when they WFH. It’s happened to a few friends of mine during lockdown – big, big career wins that they otherwise didn’t have time to execute at the office.
If I’m my usual level of cynical, and I ask myself “who profits ?” the money piece starts to shed a little light on the likely motivations of at least some of the actors in this one.
Okay. Not so terse 