[blueline]

pretty interesting that nowhere in the article does it mention that any of these CEOs have tried, say, offering higher compensation/better benefits compared to similar remote-friendly jobs.

when i see "at their wits' end" i take that to mean "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas"

[solarmist]

Nowhere in the article does it make a case that returning to the office is desirable outside of the CEO’s need to feel important.

[pixelgeek]

I recall reading a few articles after the first year of the pandemic talking about this very thing and how once employees realised how much unpaid time they pissed away each day getting to work that it would be impossible to get them back.

The only case for people going back to the office are people who want to be in an office environment. And I think those people are disappearing rapidly. My partner was one of those people who wanted to get back to the office and has had a pretty significant change of mind in the last year.

What I want to know is who are these CEOs that they are only just dealing with this issue two years into this pandemic when lots of people were already discussing this?

If these folks are so behind the curve on this issue then why are they even CEOs in the first place?

[SpicyLemonZest]

The CEOs are trying to convince their existing workers to return to the office, not attract new ones. Maybe I'm not typical here, but I'd be pretty uncomfortable if my company announced a raise that only office attendees are eligible for with the explicit goal of pressuring people to go in.

[pixelgeek]

I was talking about this with my partner and that was her first response. Clearly enhanced wage packages are something that only work for C suite 'employees'

> "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas"

I always love this