> Many begin to see remote work as not only a necessary consequence, but rather as a new opportunity to diversify their workforce, increase employee productivit

> Many begin to see remote work as not only a necessary consequence, but rather as a new opportunity to diversify their workforce, increase employee productivity and cut some cost. Excuse my cynicism, but: "diversify their workforce" -> use subcontractors, temporary work agencies, and other people who are ore "increase employee productivity" -> From the experience of myself and people I know, productivity working remotely is generally lower than working on-premises, albeit with some exceptions. This sounds more like the potential for making people work longer hours and be on-call during off hours "cut some cost" -> That seems to be the opportunity here... > The biggest cost saving obviously comes from office space, I'd guess that the biggest cost saving probably comes from reduced salaries. People working remotely are easier to control and are much less able to resist management initiatives through interaction with their peers (and I'm not even talking about unionization, which is already very low in the US). We should never assume the debate is between different benevolent entities who just disagree about the proper moral criterion for setting wages. No. Those are commercial companies which have a tendency to depress wages when the opportunity arises. That doesn't mean they'll always do that, but it certainly means that their considerations and motivations are not what's best for employees or what's morally superior, or even what's fair.