Yeah there are clearly tradeoffs, neither side's zealots seem willing to admit it though cause the stakes are so high so the conversation remains fundamentally dishonest.
The debate isn't really about whether home or office is better, it's about who should have the power to weigh and make decisions about those tradeoffs: employer vs. employee. I think most of the professional class are loath to think about it that way because it sounds suspiciously like the beginnings of a labor movement.
There's definitely a lot of cowardice and fear underlying the capital class's current strategy of "remain in limbo until forced to move." Maybe it's fear of losing that crucial employee that keeps the light on, maybe it's fear of employees waking up to what exactly a job is and what's expected of them (compliance for 40-60 hours a week of their lives) and becoming demotivated.
It certainly doesn't seem to be fear that allowing WFH means they will lose their competitive edge in their industry. Agree it's more about the capital/labor relationship potentially fraying.
The labor movement LARPing you see every so often online I think is ridiculously premature. The labor movement at the turn of the century was ridiculously volatile and borne from a ton of unrest. It's a ways away.
