> the solution is unions. A union is only a solution where workers are trying to screw over each other to get a leg up. The classical example is where a worker

> the solution is unions. A union is only a solution where workers are trying to screw over each other to get a leg up. The classical example is where a worker accepts lesser pay to ensure that they get the job over the guy beside him who wants more money. A union sets up a 'brotherhood' where the workers mutually agree to not undercut each other like that, allowing them to maximize their benefit. Unions are not effective where the company is driving the bus. Going back to the classical example, a company that has decided that the work is worth $x and not a penny more, no union is not going to eke out more than $x. If a company is hell bent on the office being strictly necessary, there is nothing a union can do to change that. Only if a worker is trying to screw over another worker by dutifully showing up to the office, where the company would otherwise be lenient towards WFH if that were their only choice, might a union be effective. Granted, perhaps you misspoke and this is what you really meant? But that questions how effective the 'brotherhood' is when people are isolated from each other. It is one thing to honour your promise to other workers when you have to see them every day and face their scorn if you break the promise and continue to be an asshole. It is quite another when you have no connection to the other 'brothers' whatsoever – where you have probably never met, and may not even know that they exist. Unions are usually quite protective to ensure that doesn't happen. There is good reason why a software developer isn't normally welcome into a teachers union, for example. What successful WFH-focused unions that have stood the test of time can we look at? The various farmer unions fit the bill, perhaps, but I'm not sure they have proven to be all that effective. Farmers are quite good at screwing each other over and there isn't much reprisal when they do. The farmer unions that are enshrined by government rule fare better, but no doubt only because of a third-party (the government) holding the 'brotherhood' together. That is not quite the same as a 'brotherhood' by first-party accord.