I don't really take this personally but you're very persistent in selling this idea which I'd like to know the reason for. A couple of questions: I don't think that everyone is replaceable as easy as that. Years of experience weight very heavily and don't forget the cost of bringing in another person, training that person, having a new person work slower in the beginning and so forth. I'm slightly offended that you don't think I need a shower though That was a joke. Well, what if a person lives very close to work? I personally use my car for other things than commuting to work and I don't believe I'm the only one. Once again assuming that it takes two hours to get to and from work. Sure, if all of this is true for one individual then yes, he/she would save time and have generally better life. But my point here is that I as an individual would save time if I live far away from work and only use my car for commuting, and this has nothing to with the employer in any shape or form. If I choose to live close or far from the employer has no impact on my contract, right? I mean, why would it? The employer doesn't care where I live and if I do live quite far away then it's really just my problem since I would have less free time. What the employer can do is let a person that lives far away and has to take the train for 2hrs a day work from the train and come/leave 2hrs in total earlier every day. But that's not really an inconvenience for the employer just as long as the employee does his/her 8hrs of work each day, right? Once again, I don't see working from home as a benefit for the employer - there are jobs that can be done 100% digitally and from any location.