Hacker News Reader

> Then you've got sales types who need an office for occasional client meetings. And corporate politics makes that hard if they can't justify it by having the few local workers show up regularly.

I worked at Dropbox for a couple of years post-remote-work, and I think they got this bit right: They kept a substantial amount of office space, kept on-site cafes, and turned those office spaces into collaboration spaces. You aren't supposed to (officially, "allowed to") use them for solo work. But, team off-sites are now on-sites, so there's always a smattering of people in the office, and there's plenty of space for sales to have client meetings as necessary, too. And, despite the requirements not to, I know there are people who go in just for some coworking at times.

Also managers that think "time spent with butt on a chair where I can see him" is a good metric for estimated productivity. But yeah you've got a ton of competing dynamics which make the problem hard.

This puts it quite well.

And a company who has to support remote and non remote kinda have an issue since they now have to know how to work both ways.

Imho it's not that complicated and it's mostly driven by CRE and desire to have strict control over the worker's time.

A huge part of why this debate is reductive mindsets like these where something that’s ridiculously complicated to the point where nearly every individual involved has their own unique situation, is reduced to “the people who want what I don’t want are just doing it for evil”.

'Even a broken clock...'