• nyan@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, I did say “within reason”. So the company would need to factor in how close the nearest available housing that the employee can afford is to the office, and/or where the employee lived before they were hired. So they can define a maximum distance that they’ll make payments for, but it has to be sane.

    If there isn’t enough housing for their employees within a sane distance of their office building, maybe the company should move.

    (There’s also a whole discussion in there on the extent to which employment is a choice, and who has the decision-making power.)

    • phillaholic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This feels like a disingenuous argument formed to prove WFH is the better answer. Similar to the argument that salary shouldn’t be based on COL wherever the person lives.