Anonymous wrote:Buy gas at Costco and plan better so you don’t make extraneous trips. Walk and bike more. Not because i don’t agree that WFH makes more sense, but because this admin absolutely will not do it.
Anonymous wrote:My parking lot at work is full of full size SUVs with people driving to work with one person.
Is it my companies job to say WFH cause I have a gas guzzler? I could just buy a Prius and get 55 mpg. Problem solved.
Anonymous wrote:Remember Trump and co care more about the interests of corporate landlords than they do you.
RTO policies were not motivated by the interests of the employers or workers, they were motivated by the collapse of commercial real estate prices.
Anonymous wrote:Employers don’t care about your commuting costs.
Anonymous wrote:Gas is going to explode to unaffordable levels because of Trump's war. Is there any legitimate reason why companies would demand employees they barely pay liveable wages still come to the office and waste tons of gas on a commute? The pandemic showed WFH works. We now have a war time economy. That means sacrifices have to be made, like consuming less oil, especially for stupidly needless things like an office commute so that you have meetings in person that can be done virtually anyway.
Anonymous wrote:I was thinking the same OP.
What an easy win for Trump- offering WFH week by week for Feds, allowing those who must commute less gas coasts die to less traffic. The rest of the corporate world could follow.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Last I checked, employers hold the leverage in this labor market.
I would not expect any extra treats.
Unless it's something that truly requires in person presence (like working in person all throughout Covid times), I've never understood paying for commercial space and utilities when you can eliminate those costs and send everyone home. It's always been a win-win. With a recession brewing, maybe some employers will wise up once their bottom line starts getting pinched.
The problem is they're all invested in CRE one way or another. They bought buildings and need to use them for the business expense write-off, or they have client relationships with landlords, or they bought personal homes near offices and will lose value if commute becomes a non issue.
If it were purely about cost efficiency to the business then yes, they'd all be remote already.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Last I checked, employers hold the leverage in this labor market.
I would not expect any extra treats.
Unless it's something that truly requires in person presence (like working in person all throughout Covid times), I've never understood paying for commercial space and utilities when you can eliminate those costs and send everyone home. It's always been a win-win. With a recession brewing, maybe some employers will wise up once their bottom line starts getting pinched.
Anonymous wrote:Last I checked, employers hold the leverage in this labor market.
I would not expect any extra treats.