Yeah, it seems like the hope here is that the "good ones" will bail, forcing employers to re-evaluate their RTO plans and conclude that they have to offer WFH if they hope to retain their best and brightest. The fallacy in that line of reasoning is that they've never been able to really figure out who their best and brightest were to begin with (even assuming that those are the ones who are insisting on WFH). The only thing they actually measure is what they can easily count like number of commits, meeting deadlines, and hours physically spent in their line of sight. Eventually the protesters will have to pay rent and buy groceries, so they'll get in line and return to office for another employer - after salaries have dropped significantly.

It was a valiant effort, but probably for nought.

Ironically, the in-office employees tend to be the dead weight, just people who pretend to look busy, stand around and bullshit, and otherwise just waste time. Meanwhile, the WFH employees, who prize productivity and accomplishment over office pretense, will simply move on to companies that are more interested in making money than power games.