[varispeed]

> were willing to put 5-10% of their income in exchange for work from home.

Why? The company is going to use your home as an office and they should be paying that 5-10% extra. Why business paying corporate landlord for office space is okay, but when Joe Public offers his own lowly place then it's a no no? When people don't recognise their value, they are prime for being exploited.

[agsamek]

We did the experiment to check if people are serious about WFH. There is a lot of work to make it happen inside a company. In particular to treat remote people as first class citizens. WFH was also a choice after covid and not necessity.

With a pay cut we are sure people are serious about WFH and not only demanding.

[varispeed]

> With a pay cut we are sure people are serious about WFH and not only demanding.

How that correlates with "seriousness"?

Wouldn't pay rise equally make sure people are serious about it?

[pnt12]

In that case, I'd be seriously considering moving to another company.

[bluesign]

There is no inherit value, it is determined by market, mostly supply and demand.

[zach_garwood]

Maybe you folks don't have to pay property taxes, but in the US we do, and that's a pretty clear indication of an "inherent value".

[bluesign]

Sorry if it was not clear, I meant value of work.