It’s not devastating for me. I’m happy for people to get what they need, but the broad brush in these declarations, at this stage of the conversation, is unhelpful.
Glad you're policing what "stage of the conversation" we're at. We wouldn't want to be at the stage where a lone "works for me" dismisses legitimate concerns from what could be your top employee.
Handled by the “for some” part. Some people like RTO, some like WFH, some want a bit of both, some want to live 2 km/miles from the office, and some want to live 2000 km/miles from the office. Some want the water cooler, some want to be left alone and focus. Some want to maximize income and others want balance. Anything that hews strongly in a particular direction will close off another demographic of workers.
Society should tilt the scale at least back to even in terms of power balance. Currently, the scale is tilted heavily towards the employer and against the employee. Power should always be even, if not slightly tilted in favor of the individual.
Who is the ‘individual’ you are referring to? In tech and many other skilled industries the individual employee has a huge amount of control over what their life looks like, who they work for, where they live, etc.
Those who are less skilled likely have less ‘power’ as you define it. But isn’t that exactly what we should expect?
Actually, the current labor shortage has given even those unskilled workers some temporary power. At least until the govt transfer payments dry up, student loan payments restart and people are forced back to into the workforce in droves.
It’s not devastating for me. I’m happy for people to get what they need, but the broad brush in these declarations, at this stage of the conversation, is unhelpful.