Is this supposed to be an argument in favour of the 2 hour commute? Because that still sounds like a miserable waste of time to me. I would take the pay cut, look for a new job, or move closer to work. No job in the world is worth putting up with that kind of a commute to me.

A 2 hour commute isn't necessarily good, but it's also not necessarily horrible. The Seattle employee referenced in the article might commute by public ferry, which is very pleasant. A 10-minute drive to the ferry terminal, 5 mins waiting for the ferry, a 30 minute ferry ride, 5 mins disembarking, and 10 more mins to the office is not bad. Repeat for the evening commute.

The ride is beautiful and the interior of the ferries are very nice; you can sit at a booth and drink coffee and eat breakfast. If you're lucky, you might see some orca whales while you're out on the water.

As someone who can do a 90-120 minute door to door commute into our city office or an event in the city, it's still awful. I did it about half-time for about 18 months at another company. I would get up at 6am to drive to the train station, get to the office by about 8:30, get home 7ish--maybe somewhat later if I grabbed dinner in the city.

Yes, I could read and so forth and it was better than driving, but it still meant I had maybe 3 hours to myself in the evening.

It's OK as a very sometime thing but I'd certainly prefer not to do it even a couple days a week.

I've been living upstate and commuting to NYC for the last ~10 years.

A pay cut going full remote would basically cancel out my commuting costs. I might end up with slightly more money in my pocket once taxes and snacks are accounted for.

That said, when things "get back to normal" I don't currently intend to apply for full remote. I didn't mind my commute two years ago. Maybe I will when I have to start doing it again.