[sudeepj]

I think WFH choice is a spectrum. At one end its "I will work remote only" and the other end its "I want to be physically present in office". And then there are in between like 80% wfh but 20% for important meetups/discussions.

All this is fine but what happens when in a team of 5, 1 person prefers WFH all the time and 2 want in office and others in-between. Its really awkward to have meetings where majority team is in a room white-boarding and one guy/gal joining in remote. Also the person working from home will miss a lot of ad-hoc conversations/corridor talk.

Offcourse all of the above does not matter if one's nature of job is not dependent on others to large extent and then that person can definitely wfh much more effectively.

[halfmatthalfcat]

I’m not sure if it’s me, but most “corridor talk” ends up being a complete waste of time and usually not related to what I’m directly working on. Will you miss fringe stuff that someone on some other team might be working on? Maybe. But it’s just my experience that those “random run-ins” with people is just trivial small talk and doesn’t really amount to anything substantial.

[FpUser]

>"Its really awkward to have meetings where majority team is in a room white-boarding and one guy/gal joining in remote"

I've been participating in such meetings ( me being remote, sometime others as well ) for the last 20 years. I find it great time and mental energy saver. Way less bullshit. At least from my experience.

[skohan]

It might not be "fair", but I believe in most cases, if one person chooses to be physically absent they will gradually be marginalized by the team. It's just human nature that you will care more about and think more about people you physically see and spend time with.

[baby]

Interestingly I’ve always worked in teams that were either fully remote or had at least a few remote workers. So I’m not sure how much more efficient we could have been but I feel like it didn’t bother us much.