If it works for your company, GREAT!
But we are talking macroeconomics here. It's clear that remote work is a failure.
It seems to work well for me. Am I surrounded by bozos in the remote workforce?
You are ignorant. Let me guess...middle management?
Remote work is not a failure where I work.
Remote work has been a stunning success at my company of 120,00 employees. We ramped up our network and server bandwidth and remained fully functional for our customers. Some employees had to be physically onsite because the work was behind a spin dial door. Air-gapped. Those engagements were reduced staff. Just enough to keep the lights on without risk of spreading infection. The work-from-home contingent remained healthy and productive. No spreading of infection in closed office spaces. The unneeded real estate has been vacated and no longer incurs an expense for floor space, utilities and cleaning. The expense saving is passed onto the customer in the form of lower labor rates.
Clear?
Have been performing my Engineering functions from home for four years.
My company doesn't have to pay for office space, I don't have to commute two hours each day.
For someone they've trusted to work un-supervised on the other side of the world, why not from 40 miles away?
I get more done now, and my whole group of five personnel gets more done than we used to.
Obviously this is not for everyone, some people cannot function without minute direction - the company identifies them and either brings them back in or fires them.
Some jobs require traveling most days. It wears out your vehicles but it is so much more pleasant than being cooped up in an office. It tends to lead to more work hours and working later in the day or it did for stupid me.
Totally agree. And if it WASN’T a failure, CEO’s would continue on this track and not call people back.
synergistic collaboration is a workable model; dispersing people into decentralized, unattached work models is a failing model.