[cblconfederate]

There were no right to 8 hour work or paid leave, or paternity leave, until there were. work rights are not fundamental (as in, 'natural'), they are granted by worker's protection laws and they havent changed much in decades. Combined with climate action, i don't see why legislators shouldn't nudge businesses to switch to work from wherever

[blowski]

So you're saying the government should pass a law to make it a right?

[cblconfederate]

over time as it becomes increasingly popular, workers will demand from legislators to make it happen. who am i to demand what government should do

[JackPoach]

Yeah, but is working from home really a 'right' akin to 8 hour day or a 'perk' similar to office dinners or sabbaticals or corporate Christmas parties?

[cblconfederate]

Yes it is, as it enables whole classes of people who have the ability to join the workforce, e.g. disabled people, or busy mothers , or people who simply can't move to the bay area . Those perks you talk about are not an option for the vaast majority of workers outside a few cities aroudn the globe

[JackPoach]

How is it different from current situation, where there are a ton of open vacancies for remote work already available on the market. I.e. why does it have to be the right?

Here's my argument - stop thinking of yourself as an employee. Instead, think of yourself as someone who buys the service. Think of a service that can be done either remotely or in person, but you STRONGLY prefer it to be in office/on-premises. For instance, psychotherapy can be done via Zoom, but you really want it to be in person. Or yoga class - you can do it in home via Zoom or Youtube, but you prefer the gym. Or classes. Or whatever, but think of something that you want to pay for and for you it has to be in person, even though it can be done remotely as well.

Now, think of a mechanism that guarantees that you can buy this service in person in a marketplace where every person has the right to work from home or not. Wouldn't companies have to create multiple vacancies and some vacancies would be 'work from work only' and some would be flexible? I see no other way. You can't be one sided and think only about employees or only about employers. You have to think about consumers too. After all, we are typically all three - we are hired from some jobs, we hire for others and we surely consume a lot in addition to producing something.

[cblconfederate]

> there are a ton of open vacancies for remote work already available

Well no, there were actually very few pre-covid. For example it s very hard for a disabled person to be a lecturer, despite tons of them being great researchers, and i have seen it this year with my disabled friend who had an explosion of opportunities to present her work in conferences, since every one of them became virtual.

On-premise work will become work at a premium. Want a real psychotherapist, fine but it will cost more. On the other hand, virtual will be cheaper. The rest is market re-balancing. I m not arguing that remote work should be mandatory everywhere, but in certain domains where it's easy and feasible, yes, legislation could push for more adoption.

[blowski]

It also excludes (to some degree) those who cannot afford a dedicated, quiet office with fast internet at home.

[cblconfederate]

theoretically, "cannot afford" is impossible when remote work is abundant. After all what confines people to that tiny apartment was the physical requirements of their (or their parents') workplace. It certanily doesnt exclude anyone, it slightly inconveniences them, in return for greatly improving the lives of many more.