WFH people want to do work, take meetings, and just overall get things done. Sure they also want to be at home so they can use a 15 min break between meetings to start laundry.
RTO people want to do work, take meetings, and overall get things done while there are others around them working. RTO people need other people around them constantly.
This is the conflict. WFHers are happy without forcing RTOers to work in the same manner. RTOers are only happy when they force WFHers into the office.
WFHers want to be left alone to do their jobs. RTOers need others to be around them to do their job.
Separately, why do some commenters think that their personal experience is representative of Everyone? It's so mysterious to me. Not everyone who wants to WFH or RTO have the same needs, perspectives, trade-offs, living situations, working styles, etc. The world has nuance.
Without unsolicited personal opinions, there wouldn't be much conversation. And what then, have only people state verifiable truths? Only permit the exchange of pure fact?
> WFHers want to be left alone to do their jobs. RTOers need others to be around them to do their job.
This is just not true. It makes a sweeping statement about two groups of people with certain preferences, then assertions about how they work / what they want.
People can express opinions, while investigating (or at least leaving room for) nuance.
You're completely leaving out that WFHers are forcing the RTOers to work in a completely different (and in my opinion worse) way to accommodate the WFHers.
> WFHers want to be left alone to do their jobs. RTOers need others to be around them to do their job.
Or RTOers want to be able to collaborate with their co-workers while WFHers want to sneak away to do laundry and make it impossible to communicate with them in an efficient manner? I don't need them around just to work, I need them around so that I can have a dialogue with them, instead of sending a message that may or may not be answered this week because I have no idea if they are even "at work". I'm exaggerating, but I hope you were too.
Second, if WFHers aren’t available and responsive, they should be put on a PIP and then let go if they don’t improve. WFH is not an excuse to not work. With my team, everyone responds quickly. If they don’t, they don’t last very long.
If you work from home and I work from the office, you're forcing me to collaborate with you using remote tools, which is just remote work with a longer commute. In this sense, (some) WFHers are only happy when they force RTOers into Microsoft Teams.
Of course, there's a much better compromise available to us. I could be on an in-office team with others like me, you could be on a WFH team with others like you, and we'd all be happy.
Your conclusion is exactly my point. People should work on teams that fit their work habits. Where that falls down is when management hires for WFH but then asks those workers to RTO.
Debatable. They take issue with getting dressed and acting appropriately in an office, I can't imagine they're particularly hard working people given a commute is a hard no for them. You'll complain you haven't got time to do the work next
And if you're job can be done without anyone needing to speak to you, or you to them, it's probably not that important and ripe for AI to take off your hands, so enjoy it while you can autist
The WFH team I manage is one of the most capable and hardest working teams I’ve ever been on. You can take that outdated attitude elsewhere, thank you.
We collaborate all day long on teams. Various work focused and non work focused chats are constantly happening.
I love how you couldn't think of an example of work other than a teams meeting lol is that all you do WFH then?
It’s pretty simple, in my opinion.
They want both the specific job and the ability to work from home.
There is a zero sum element to it.
The best solution is for workplaces to be up front and consistent in their policies and let people select in or out.
other people grew up with healthy, cooperative relationships
Why is it a problem for you that they don't enjoy eating in canteens? Why does working with you mean signing up to be your best friend?
Friendships often form out of shared experiences. Work is one kind of shared experience. So is joining a club, or going to a concert.
I think a lot of people don’t do those things, because they’re so tired from work. Which is understandable, but then you have to make friends at work. And that’s really not ideal.
but sure there are enough exceptions to turn up once in a blue moon to have drinks with the new peeps who seem nice on slack.
Not everyone is like that. It's not cynicism but a fact of life that some people do not get on with people you find in tech companies, IT departments, offices, etc or do not enjoy the environment.
You should examine your own narrow view of this and realize that there are many types of people out there other than people like you. That someone else experiences life in a different way isn't a personal failing.
> Meanwhile some of them have personal lives so bad or they're so afraid of being alone that they genuinely do like it.
One of the definitions of cynical is "bitterly or sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic". I'm not trying to argue that my way is the only way, I'm just pointing out that some people (me) have fulfilling personal lives AND enjoy chit-chatting with coworkers in-person sometimes.
I think we can all agree that remote work is great for some people. And we should be able to agree that some people genuinely enjoy things about working in an office too.
That reminds me of a sign I saw in a handicapped parking spot: "Being an asshole is not a disability".
If someone does their work properly, and you're upset at their lack of sociability, you're the problem.