Slightly surprised by some of vitriol against working from home.
But I’ve been pondering it... myself, @elliott_kime & @tomjrowley have all reported on the rise of WFH. And all heard the same thing: enforced WFH has led to a huge shift in attitudes among workers and firms: 1/5

People (and bosses) realised it worked. Whereas previously it would often seen as a lazy, easy option.
But I guess those not working from home have not had an attitudinal shift.
So when politicians rant about the need to get back to the office, they aren’t always thinking... 2/5

... about saving Pret. They are appealing to non-homeworkers who may well think their office based peers have been on an extended holiday rather than working.
People working normally may also sometimes confuse the WFH and the furloughed.
3/5

In effect we now have three distinct working tribes: the WFHers, the furloughed and that “as normalers”. What they think about each other is an interesting question. And I bet they have different levels of virus caution too. Do attitudes to going to the pub vary between them? 4/5

If you’ve been going to your job everyday as normal this year, then I’d guess going to the pub doesn’t feel too risky. Whereas, perhaps?, those you’ve been avoiding the office and public transport have become more cautious? 5/5

And this concludes today’s amateur sociology thread.