Right now, there are no ‘right’ answers. Pre-pandemic we were starting to pilot work-from-home (WFH) options, but they were a privilege an employee earned rather than being entitled to. I think this perspective should continue since some people work well from home while others do not. That said, having some employees on site and others not, the WFH people will miss the impromptu collaboration and innovation that happens when people pop-by office doors or across cubicles.
One approach is to select certain days of the week or month that people are all required to be in the office. On WFH days when you want a staff meeting, have everyone join from their own computers so that everyone participates the same way.
Having remote workers is fantastic and has drawbacks. Hiring remote workers means you could hire someone outside of your local workforce. Other perks include less expenses for office overhead, less commuting to work (think environment!), decreased distractions from coworkers, and the remote workers exercising more independence.
On the other hand, it can be hard to monitor the health and safety of a home office (yes, an employer still has an obligation there) or ensure confidentiality within the business. Remote workers may also be more likely to get distracted by activities going on at home, and management will have a harder time keeping tabs on them (if the preference is MBA, AKA managing by walking).
Be explicit in expectations for employees in whichever location they work from and how their performance will be measured. And be prepared to treat some staff differently based on whether they can demonstrate that they are effective working from home. You may need to pull some people back into the office. Remember that “fair” doesn’t mean the “same”.