Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, you found simple solution for very complicated dynamic and you actually believe you solved this problem? I don't care about offices with doors. Sure, they're better, but still it doesn't solve my issues - I care about commute - time and money, especially time. I've been commuting like 3h / day before WFH and I don't want to go back unless you pay me at least 2.5x
I think this is a great comment. > I care about commute - time and money, especially time. I'm assuming you have done the whole draw a circle around where you live that represents your maximum willingness to commute and then apply for jobs in that circle thing? It was very popular in silicon valley during the dot com boom. When the commute circle comes up empty though, what do you do? Not snark, 100% serious. Hired a…
so her solution was a gamble? get a job and hope they care enough to compromise in 6 months when she tries to move back? It's an interesting strategy, but not an ironclad one without a lot of street smarts. stuff that's hard to research when you're not a local.
>he employer has factors they can change and factors they cannot when creating an attractive place to work for people who can (in theory) choose to work anywhere. Some of those employers will say "work at the office or quit, your choice." with the expectation that some will quit but presumably most will stay (change is really hard after all and it's scary to jump into the abyss).
but it sounds like the executive of interest more or less lost this gamble as well. they hoped most people would stay, and they either didn't or it fell below expectations, perhaps lofty ones. I feel it's a two way road here: employers won't sympathize with an employee who wants to WFH when the company doesn't, why shouold it work the other way around?