Remote work won, don't let anyone gaslight you to believe otherwise
Remote work’s post-pandemic staying power is being weighed against renewed return-to-office mandates, with many arguing that employers and politicians are driven less by productivity than by sunk investments in commercial real estate, local tax deals, and a desire for tighter control. Commenters highlight clear economic and lifestyle gains from remote work—lower costs, wider talent pools, flexibility—alongside concerns about wage compression via global hiring, weakened career development for juniors, and growing social isolation. The emerging consensus is that remote and hybrid work are now permanent options, but the long‑term impacts on cities, compensation, and workplace culture remain unsettled.
Framing: “Remote work won” and gaslighting
- Some see RTO narratives (“you work better in the office”, “you won’t be promoted remotely”) as gaslighting attempts; others argue workers aren’t fooled but comply due to coercion and job risk.
- Several commenters criticize the overuse of “gaslighting” as a buzzword, preferring “lying” or “manipulating,” though others feel it’s often used correctly here.
Productivity and effort
- Experiences diverge: some report clear productivity drops (20–40%+ for average performers, near-zero for a minority), more coasting, and “busy work” in WFH.
- Others say WFH mainly emboldened people to stop unpaid overtime and work normal hours; low performers existed in-office too.
- There is agreement that management quality is central: slackers and poor onboarding are management, not modality, problems.
Economics: real estate, wages, and offshoring
- Many stress the cost savings of reducing office space; per-head occupancy costs in big cities are described as “eye-watering.”
- Some foresee commercial real-estate distress, with knock-on effects on city tax bases and possibly higher residential property taxes; others dismiss “apocalypse” talk as exaggerated.
- Remote work is seen as enabling wage leveling and offshoring: more global competition may cap or reduce salaries, especially in high-cost hubs, while benefitting workers in lower-cost regions or countries.
- A minority argues remote-first companies and national wage leveling will ultimately be a competitive advantage.
Career development, juniors, and social isolation
- Strong concern that juniors and new grads lose “osmosis,” mentorship, and informal learning; some say this is hard to replicate on Zoom, others say culture and process can compensate.
- Many note increased isolation, fewer “third places,” and mental health impacts; others counter that adults should build social lives outside work anyway.
- Some workers value in-office friendships, lunches, and spontaneous collaboration; others emphasize family time, reduced commutes, and suburban/LCOL living.
Motives for RTO and power dynamics
- Suggested motives: protecting commercial real-estate investments and tax deals, using RTO as a soft layoff tool, control-oriented middle management, fear of underwork, and executive preference for in-person communication.
- A longer systemic critique ties pandemic-era policy, inflation, layoffs, and RTO to broader wealth transfer and advocates unions as the main counter to wage suppression.
Hybrid, flexibility, and “remote won as option”
- Many favor “employee choice”: mix of home, office, or coworking spaces depending on role and personality.
- Some argue small, co-located teams are still more efficient for certain work (onboarding, intense collaboration, workshops), even if full-time office for everyone is unjustifiable.
- Several conclude remote hasn’t “won everything,” but has permanently expanded the menu of legitimate work arrangements.