If you were told that WFH would be permanent and your productivity hasn't dropped, and in fact went up as it did in many cases, why would RTO be mandated?
The large multi-national bank is grappling with this right now. We were told WFH would be permanent. Productivity went UP largely due to people working the time they'd otherwise be commuting which here in the Shitcago area is about 45 minutes each way for most, which was 1.5 hours/day on average that the bank got in return for WFH.
Many worked weekends to complete emergency changes and work on large projects that needed to be done to support WFH and make that more efficient for everyone. It was all wildly successful.
Now, our employer wants to renig on the WFH promise?
We've already seen more than 700 people leave the bank because of it since January. More leave each week.
Kinda counter-intuitive to tell people to return to the office "or else" and then be surprised when those employees give you the middle finger and say "here's your or else!" on their way out the door.
That's not anecdotal evidence, it's fact. And it's happening in a lot of places including financial services, telecom, insurance and more.
So good luck with your attitude and next time you're getting shitty service somewhere, thank your attitude.
In over 20 years dealing with remote workers, few, very few, did as much work as in-office workers. They were out-of-sight, out-of-mind, useless for the most part. Sure, there may be exceptions, but they are few and far between.
...besides, once you start hiring remote workers, easier for too many companies to off-shore those jobs for a fraction of the money required to pay for an American. Look at IT in particular, but true in other jobs.