Yeah, that's a fair point. I do also plan on moving away from London once I have a more remote friendly role. But, yes, will have to adjust my expectations on pay.
> Product knowledge is hard to disseminate
I haven't felt that. I think the combination of documentation, and being able to video conference my teammates is equivalent to seeing them in person and having the same conversation to share knowledge.
> its hard to figure out where people lack knowledge and skills.
Wouldn't these sort of things be evident in a weekly 1:1 with manager and in conversations on a team channel etc.
> It's easy to ignore promotions or even know who wants them.
Again these are things I'd speak with my manager on a weekly basis regardless of whether we were in a room or on a call.
Overall, I feel like the latter points could be easily addressed by establishing communication mechanisms that don't rely on physical monitoring of a person.
You're certainly not alone in feeling this way. But communications online and inoffice are different.
For example, when I skype an employee there's an automatic formality to it. "The boss is calling". If I bump into an employee in the office (even if I deliberately bumped) it's a lot more relaxed. They can read my body language and I can read theirs.
I'm not saying we can't communicate online clearly we do. But the quality of the communication is impaired.
Regarding promotions, there's formal stuff (you've been here 6 weeks so you're now a senior developer) and the informal (hmm new project coming up, I'm wondering who to make team leader..) In the latter case it's easier to choose someone you know, have observed, seen their interactions with teammates etc.)
That doesn't mean you have to be in the office, but its really hard to do the informal stuff over the Internet. And that stuff -really- matters.
Salary is only one of the axes. Qualifications is another one. You can get the same qualified candidate for less salary, or you could get a much more qualified candidate for the same salary.
While your points are valid, they are only part of the picture.
Firstly, to answer your question directly, there are lots of companies that have adopted full remoteness. They have no offices, and everything happens online. These companies (collectivly) hire tens of thousands of workers.
Naturally remote means their workers can live anywhere. And it turns out that people who can live cheaper will work for lower salaries. Salaries that are a tenth of what you need.
So yes, there are lots of remote jobs, but they are not being advertised in London. If you're going to live in London (one of the more expensive places) then you should be trading hard on your proximity to office not full remoteness. Being fully remote, but needing a London salary is the worst possible combination for an employer.
Now, to your point about the advantages of bring in the office. We were 100% office before Covid, 100% remote with really short notice, and since lockdown ended a sort of hybrid (most people at home most of the time.)
We've had to keep our office space. Partly for lease reasons , partly because space in our building is hard to get so giving it up is a very permanent decision we're not ready to take yet.
It's hard to demand folk to come back (time and commute cost) but at the same time I can see the negative effects being remote is having on people. Productivity is fine, but professional growth is non existent. Product knowledge is hard to disseminate and its hard to figure out where people lack knowledge and skills.
In other words its easier face to face to see where people are struggling, where they are bored, where processes are hurting not helping. It's harder to identify leadership potential. It's easy to ignore promotions or even know who wants them.
Remote work turns workers into a commodity, and really that's not good for either side.
I say all this not to convince you of anything, merely to point out that the issue is a lot more nuanced than you're seeing.