@OxfordFrom Not sure I understand what you're arguing. IF you were arguing that it would be in the interest of a cartel of CEOs to collude against WFH/hybrid workplaces because even though it increased productivity it increased worker bargaining power even more so profits down then maybe.

@OxfordFrom But I still don't see how for any individual firm, taking actions by others given, it would be in their interest to forgo a large productivity improvement and/or a benefit that workers valued more than it cost the firm to provide.

@OxfordFrom And we're not just talking about large publicly traded firms with lots of common ownership, I hear this complaint from people with 50-100 person firms in competitive industries.

@OxfordFrom Finally, Nick Bloom's argument is a 10-20% increase in profits. Your argument is that is wrong--CEO's are acting rationally, just that rational action is not in the interests of productivity/social welfare (something that, I agree, is often the case).