"There is no apparent justification for resisting remote work besides a sort of management control-freak insecurity, proponents argue." This seems naive, disin

"There is no apparent justification for resisting remote work besides a sort of management control-freak insecurity, proponents argue." This seems naive, disingenuous, or just lazy reporting. In my experience, neither "management" nor "workers" are monolithic blocks. Some are in favor of more WFH, some not. Most people I work with want to return to the office or are indifferent. Reasons cited include, too many distractions at home (kids/family), work/life structure (more below), team social interaction, improved face to face collaboration & mentoring (new hires), office perks, and so on. Not everyone has the discipline, independence, and communication skills necessary to be successful at WFH. In my experience, WFH is especially challenging for many early career individuals. We should be realistic about human nature and organizational dynamics. There are significant down sides to teams if some people are in person and some are remote. The remote people will inevitably miss out on many in person / adhoc conversations. Having less information than peers can hurt job performance. This leads to people feeling like second class employees in the long run. We saw the same thing with remote employees pre COVID. I say all this as someone who is generally in favor of WFH. Remote teams need to work & communicate differently from in person teams to be successful. For example, we spend a lot more time on written communication (docs, emails, chat, etc) compared to in-person adhoc desk/whiteboard conversations. I think the more reasonable organizational approach is to have fully remote teams and fully in person teams. This enables everyone to get roughly what they want/need. Team processes and expectations can be tailored to the team's situation. The big question then becomes, how do companies refactor large orgs into remote and in person teams? My guess is that it's going to involve a lot of team changes and disruption to the org. This is likely why sr. managers are trying to make the transition in a slow, controlled way.