That'd be a lot easier to believe if you provided a source, which you should do if you care enough to comment in the first place, I think?

A cursory google suggests that the return-to-office movement is primarily driven by management's desire for voluntary turnover, avoiding the bad press of mass layoffs. But certainly doesn't show that it's 'been debunked 100 times'.

In my own experience, it's been 50/50 a desire for voluntary turnover, and also a control tactic. Employees are easier to strong-arm when they're immersed in the idea that company culture actually matters.

You think that the size of investment firms that own something like, a good sized chunk of midtown Manhattan class A and B commercial real estate aren't capable of deploying social and tradtional-media influence tools to push an agenda to repopulate their office space? That would be a very inaccurate assessment of how large and motivated they are.

Didn't mean to imply that was the only reason, so I've added another reason to my comment.

I haven't come across much of the debunking of the commercial property issue. I would say it's undeniably factor, but we can argue about the scale.

A total of $800 billion—in real terms—of value is at stake by 2030, and, on average, the total value of office space is expected to decline by 26 percent from 2019 to 2030.

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/real-estate/our-insights...