You can literally flip the O and H and change the “what makes me happy” part to get the opposite side’s point of view.
The WFH crowd are unhappy if they don't get a choice in where they work. The WFO crowd are unhappy if others DO get a choice of where they work.
Or to put it another way, one side are unhappy if they're forced to do something they don't want to, the other is unhappy if the first are not forced to do something they don't want to do.
No. The points of view are not equal and opposite.
Some people who advocate WFO do so because they just want to work in an office (for various reaons) and they don't care how many co-workers do the same. But others want other people to also be present in the office to create the environment that they desire. People who advocate WFH have similarly varied motivations, but none of their motivations require other people to change their behaviour.
Why is that?
I find screen-share mentoring on dev stuff that more fruitful I stuck to that even when forced back into office. Less covid, less other awkward closeness, better for ears and eyes :) (Admitted, only non-computer-work mentoring is different).
I believe it's because coworkers rarely talk about non work stuff when they are WFH. Maybe it's just my company, but when we were in office I felt everyone on the team had some sort of relationship with each other because we'd eat lunch or talk about sports, or even the weather. Now we pretty much only talk about work stuff, which ends up meaning we silo more and collaborate less.
Of course it does. Some people who WFH will want things like no mixed meetings - either everyone is in the same room, or everyone is entering the meeting from their own computer - there's an example in this very thread. And even if you don't go that far, there are various smaller ways everyone must adapt their behavior to properly support hybrid work modes, just like WFO-only or WFH-only.