From what I've seen, every push to have everyone return to the office has either been that they just want control over employees or they want butts in seats because the seats aren't free. It's never been about productivity as folks that work from home normally are always happy to drive in to the office if they have to. What's the different if they drive in during morning rush hour traffic vs at lunch time when they only have to physically be in the office for a few hours.

I think a large part of the push for return to work is definitely the control of employees when management actively selects for people who are sociopaths.

Exactly.

We had a slow day at work we knew was going to be slow. I wfh most mornings and then commute in. Decided to just take my time got to the office an hour later than usual. My goddman coworker called our supervisor and let him know I wasn't in. For what? There was nothing for me to do all day, except a half hour of work later in thr afternoon I easily could have done at home.

But my coworker didn't like that. So he had to call my boss who was on PTO and let him know. (He left at 2PM because there was nothing to do though.) He's not even my supervisor but he still had to throw his weight around for no reason.

Don't forget the industrial revolution attitude that you have to watch your employees like hawks so they don't "steal" from the company by slacking off. Even if they have to schedule constant pointless meetings that accomplish zero work while looking like work, just so they can keep an eye on their wage-slaves while making themselves appear productive. Control freaks, social bums, ladder climbers, and tin pot tyrants aren't the only middle manager subspecies.

So I'm gonna add something here... It annoys me that managers can't form or be part of a union. Far too often low and mid level managers and supervisors get shit on just as much and have to parrot the company line coming from the higher ups that are trying to push it. I wish they could be better empowered too.

I disagree. It has nothing to do with real estate. CEOs simply prefer working in an office with all their underlings around.

It's cheaper to run a company if you need less office space. Even if you already have a ton of office space and it's going unused, it's cheaper to have an empty office than a full one.

Following the money leads to embracing a WFH-first mentality. So if it was just money, then these companies wouldn't be forcing people back.

But besides money, people also enjoy power and they feel more powerful in a full office than working from home. So that's what they pursue even if it costs more.

Just like how rich people will spend money on big houses and nice cars, not everything they do is to save more. They send money on things they like.

This isnt a pro work speech- im just saying that any productivity gains benefit the business not the employee.

I've had very good luck in the last few years of intentionally sandbagging my work output to make sure I don't get additional work hucked on me if I can avoid it. I still have decent output based on feedback from my peers and management, but I know for a fact that I'm only working like half as hard as I could at work.

I think we as workers lack imagination through negotiation.

It would be interesting to experiment. Next time unions discuss raises they should suggest ex. instead of a 5% raise, a 5% reduction in working hours for the same pay which is the same outcome productivity wise.

It would be very interesting to examine the initial reactions to the suggestion.

any productivity gains benefit the business not the employee.

Yes, and that's a problem in the US. Other countries are much better about it, and we need to change to catch up to best practices for worker's rights!

Liberals allergic to marxist terminology.

Having effectively unlimited resources and the unbreakable power and control over the rest of us that comes with it sounds pretty elite to me.

Yes, and yes.

They do think of themselves this way though. It's fact that many billionaires want to buy an island to make genetically "superior" children at. Even Jeffrey Epstein wanted to.

What's hilarious is the idea that somehow their genes are superior to everyone else's:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/business/jeffrey-epstein-eugenics.html

I think it's a combination of both.

I do see a lot of articles targeted at ceo's on LinkedIn by real estate/office. So there is definitely a degree to it.

Micromanagement is also a factor here however a company can also install monitoring software on your laptop by company policy like mine did.

They probably have some tax breaks specifically around buildings and people in them

I didn't think about the "ambassador" angle. It probably is harder to get employees to drink the company koolaid when they're not physically in the office.

cruelty and domination.. it really is fascism..