I would love this. I have to dress for two different climates on summer workdays - skirt/shorts and short sleeves for outside, jeans and sweater (plus a sweatshirt over it) for inside. It's absurd how overly air-conditioned office environments are.
This may be my own biases at play here, but it's really not that hard to warm up by dressing warmer. You don't have that option for cooling down unless you want to wear a vest full of icepacks or something. If the goal is to maximize comfort, it seems like the thermostat should be set lower rather than higher.
That’s the same as asking, “Who would seriously just switch jobs because of more money?”
It’s a quality of living thing. If you don’t loose anything but can gain something, why not do it?
I mean if your job only allowed you to sit on a small unpadded stool, wouldn't that motivate you to find a new job?
I cannot use my keyboard while wearing winter gloves, so there are limits. Sadly, I have tried.
To flip back around to your point though, I definitely understand it as my girlfriend has raynaud's so I'll be in my apartment with the fan on still hot while my girlfriend will be next to me freezing with her hands turning white because she is cold. We are hoping our future kids will even out our weird temperature imbalances and be normal.
So, pick your poison and while it may be just that the grass is always greener on the other side, I would definitely prefer to run on the colder side than the hotter side especially since I prefer to wear jeans and a sweatshirt/jacket over shorts and a t-shirt.
Edit: My girlfriend said she would rather be like me and be too hot than be too cold so maybe it is just the grass is always greener on the other side.
For most office spaces it's not so much the temp that freezes me it's the breeze while I'm sitting in a chair typing.
If so, then I would talk to your coworkers to see if you can get switched to a better desk location for your medical condition.
It's because offices are stuck air conditioning to a level that makes suits comfortable. There was a big brouhaha about it in England a couple years ago.
https://www.amazon.com/Charades-Astronaut-Space-Costume-Jump...
You catch a breeze wearing that, and it's like wearing a weightless AC unit on your back. Hand to God.
BTW 73-74 is not "like it cold" that is standard temp most offices should be at for the balance.
62f is liking it cold, and I like it cold. I have been known to wear short sleeves, and shorts outside in 45-50 degree weather.
78 in the building along with hot computers means you are quickly going to have a rather uncomfortable situation.
The fact this company has to adjust work hours to accommodate their “progressiveness” means they actually haven’t solved anything. It’s just virtue signaling. They could just as easily have their team work nights to get the same effect — but then they wouldn’t get media attention for just how innovative they are. Windows open in California means you also subject yourself to wildfire particulates, smog and other pollutants that HVAC systems mitigate. “Fresh air” is nice — when it’s actually fresh, and in most cities, it isn’t. Even Paris has had serious air quality situations. City air just isn’t all that clean. In Beijing, “fresh air” is downright toxic. I am not sure how eliminating air conditioning is considered an innovation. Air conditioning was one of the most important inventions, anyone that says otherwise never spent any time in an un-air-conditioned New Orleans house with box fans creating a cross breeze of 100% humidity. The nostalgia for the good old days is felt by those that never had to live through those days.
This story reads to me like nonsense. Seattle, while it can get “hot” is positively frigid when compared to much of the rest of the country. Try that in Atlanta, Houston or Arizona. This story is the equivalent of a Miami building being built without heating — it isn’t any kind of groundbreaking innovation. When a building in Minnesota is built without heat, then I might be interested.
What’s really innovative is how Apple Park handles fresh air and HVAC. Apple Park isn’t 78 degrees inside — it’s much cooler; they went far beyond the “innovation” in this Seattle building. This sort of innovation can be done, but being proud of a 78 degree internal temperature is like being proud when someone’s kid stops wetting the bed at age 12. It’s only a big deal to those who are experiencing it, but to the rest of us, it’s just self-congratulatory bullshit of the most mundane sort: big deal, you designed a building that isn’t quite at hot as the outdoors using groundbreaking technology that is equivalent to an open window.
I don't know why you seem to be so riled up about this building. Why can't you read an article about a building that is achieving sustainability in an interesting way without being triggered by it? Sure, it has it's characteristics that some people might not prefer, but it's nothing to get so upset over.