I realize this isn't the point of the original article, but I couldn't get around the fact that either way the theoretical CEO phrased it he was basically saying "Because of a few people abusing a privilege and our management team being too spineless to confront them individually, now everyone at the company has to be penalized. kthx bye."
It's also a permanent change in response to temporary problem.
If the email said we have a significant problem with X, we are considering our options, but it a big problem so for the next 3 months we are going to do Y, and while we work out a better long term solution.
And then 3 months from now they say: Core work hours are 11:00am-3:00pm and you are expected to be online and available then even while working from home. Each team is expected to come up with a mandatory 1 or 2 days a week where everyone is expected to be here for core work hours. You no longer need specific permission to WFH on non mandatory days.
Then yes, it's a big change, but it's more likely to seem reasonable AND it seems like people spent a while deciding on a reasonable solution vs. someone randomly sending a quick email.
I realize this isn't the point of the original article, but I couldn't get around the fact that either way the theoretical CEO phrased it he was basically saying "Because of a few people abusing a privilege and our management team being too spineless to confront them individually, now everyone at the company has to be penalized. kthx bye."