Your argument is that employers will eventually have the leverage to say, “come in to the office or else we’ll replace you with AI”.

If it becomes overwhelmingly obvious that AI is the more cost-effective employee, then it won’t come to that; employers will just replace their employees with AI. Office presence is completely unrelated.

Silliness. Willingness to come to office, or wear a tie, or carry a briefcase - will have about as much effect on pushing back progress as puffing your cheeks out to blow away a hurricane.

Companies aren't a charity. The minute knowledge workers can be replaced with AI they will be. Regardless of how much you obey your masters.

When that happens, it’s because AI is doing all labor. That point is the singularity.

are you suggesting that a worker who does not protest an arbitrary mandate to log onto their computer at a specific corporate office building, would receive greater clemency from the management team when the opportunity arises to replace them with automation?

My ability to work in an office efficiently or at home efficiently has zero bearing on whether my job can be replicated by an AI.

  - If a job can be outsourced, it will be outsourced.
  - If a job can be eliminated, it will be eliminated.
  - If a job can be replaced by AI, it will be replaced by AI.

Work location does not factor on these decisions. It's just simply an evaluation of production efficiency.

If they're ever in a position to replace me with AI, they'll do it regardless of where I'm working from. Might as well enjoy WFH while I can.