If a company already has an office near you they may just say you need to come into the office, they will not pay for your internet and electric bill.
If you drive into the office they don't have to pay for your car, insurance, registration, gas, etc.
I think CA had good intentions here, but I think it's going to give employers one less reason to hire remote employees in CA.
I've seen multiple employment ads in Seattle, "If you live within 50 miles of our office, this is an office position".
One had the balls to say "within 100 miles". In Seattle? Fuck that, 100 miles each way could easily be 2-3 hours each way.
The expenses listed seemed pretty typical for benefits. My last job already let me expense my cell phoen, internet, gave me a stipend for office equipment
After all, the whole point of this decision is to equalise the "windfall", as the article says.
This will force them to enforce it, with the threat of having to pay a big bill if any employee claims to be working from home.
"However, if your organization has returned to in-person work, but you choose to work from home, it's less likely that your business expenses will be seen as "necessary"—as you could have avoided them by working from the office or other worksite."
Asking for employers to pay more for remote workers than they do for in-office employees will either result in fewer remote jobs or remote jobs paying lower salary (which will lead to lower demand for remote jobs).
