Comment by consteval 3 days ago
I would agree, but I have to ask: where's the cutoff?
If you let people "choose" and 99% choose to always work from home, do you think that's gonna fly? I don't. I think the in-officers would be very upset about that because that's not enough people to make their in-office experience how they like it.
No matter how you slice it, such a position is one born of control. You have to force some people's hand in where they work.
Why should I have to work from home just because I like engineering?
Because it wastes a lot of money catering to extrovert inclinations.
If 10% of the workforce loves pizza and the other 90% is lactose intolerant should we order pizza for the office every day and just let 90% of it go to waste? This is only really a discussion because working in an office was the norm for so long.
I don't think you should. I just think that the in-between is quite worthless. Why not have fully WFH and full RTO companies for people to choose from according to their preferences? I realize that's not the subject matter of the article.
Why should the world of commerce and industry never do anything else other than cater to one subset's need to be amongst people at work?
"I need to have people around me to do my best work, and you are going to be one of them -- no matter how much that fucks you up."
I advocated for no such thing. I'm just asking why I should choose another career, one which necessitates RTO, because I'm an extrovert.
Perhaps extroverts who can only thrive when in the company of others should stick with careers that require the company of others, instead of those careers that can be accomplished hundreds of kilometers from society (in a cabin in the woods).