I don't understand this thinking. JPM is in long-term arrangements with CRE landlords whether employees come into the office or not. If employees come in to the office, JPM actually pays MORE, because the buildings will need the lights on and the HVAC running to keep those employees comfortable. Worst case scenario is that JPM pays exactly the same amount for CRE in both the RTO and WFH scenarios. So how does CRE drive them to bring back in employees if, as WFH advocates say, people are as productive or more at home than at the office.

I suspect that JPM is telling the truth about their internal productivity numbers being better in the RTO scenario, but I also suspect that these numbers are based on "doing things the way they were always done" and don't take into account scenarios with a JPM that is structured differently for WFH scenarios (e.g. reducing middle management and its proclivity for in-person meetings).

JPM is not simply a company that leases CRE space. That describes a lot of hedge funds, which is why they haven't cared about RTO to the extend the big banks have.

JPM is a huge lender in the space.

If CRE falls, JPM has a tougher time than the average big bank. They are also building a huge tower on Park Ave that was started pre-COVID and still not done.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/deutsche-bank-goldman-and-...