>Well, most people took the job as a being-in-the-office job (before the work from home took off). Which means you took the job + commute for that salary. If you then suddenly don't have to go to the office it's not such a stretch to think you could/should be paid less.
That does not follow. I quote you a salary sufficient to warrant me to work for you. You don't get to come back and demand that you should be able to pay me less when I no longer commute when I'm still working for you. Unless the physical presence in the office is absolutely essential (which it isn't for knowledge workers in the way it is for a stocker or laborer), and the tech exists where working remote is a reasonable accommodation (which it does), then you wanting me in the office to get the job done is now something on the table for me (the employee) to charge you, the employer extra for. In no way are you, (the employer) entitled to an extra discount because I'm not driving in. Nevermind that I don't offer one of those. Though I may to have to ruminate on it.
>It's funny how people feel so entitled to their salaries and that management is there to rip people off.
It's funny how companies feel entitled to their profits and that employees are there to rip them off.
A) People are free to set the price of their time.
B) Management is explicitly there to get the absolute most out of workers with the least input. Even if that means playing dirty, (hopefully not, but I've seen a lot of it). You can say their purpose is leadership, but I've been privy to what high level management types think leadership is, and unfortunately, it ain't leadership. I know leadership. Come from a family with a lot of military background. Civillian business management theory abandoned most facets of leadership in order to cut corners, and maximize value generation. Just look at the C-Suite-to-everyone else pay disparity to see the fruits of that.
