Fair point. One important difference is that my social needs can be met on my own, while others want to force me into an unpreferred situation to fulfill their own needs.
There's a difference between "just let me work the way I want" and "just make them work the way I want".
Ideally, those who want to work from an office could, while others on the same team could work from home, and everyone would be considerate enough to make it work. This is working well enough at my current company.
> Ideally, those who want to work from an office could, while others on the same team could work from home, and everyone would be considerate enough to make it work.
Again, this is putting the personal preferences of one group above those of another group. What you describe is only ideal if the office people don't mind working with the at-home people and vice versa. You don't have to be considerate of someone else's preferences if you're willing to leave for another job.
Personally, the next job I have will be office only with 0 off-site employees. It's my preference and hopefully I'll find a company whose preference aligns with my own.
Every decision a company makes treats people differently. The goal should be treating everyone fairly. If a person disagrees that they are being treated fairly, they can make their case and try to get something to change or they can get a new job.
If you were to somehow do your work in a way that didn’t require me to join video calls with you, that would be fine. I find those calls as hellish as you find commuting or the city.
There's a difference between "just let me work the way I want" and "just make them work the way I want".
Ideally, those who want to work from an office could, while others on the same team could work from home, and everyone would be considerate enough to make it work. This is working well enough at my current company.