Mi iros, krom se la laborloko estas en alia urbo.

Iros is the future tense of iri = to go.

• mi iras = I go / I am going
• mi iros = I will go

In this sentence, Mi iros means I will go.

You do not need al unless you explicitly say the destination:

• Mi iros. = I will go.
• Mi iros al la urbo. = I will go to the city.

So here, iros works on its own because the destination is understood from context.

Krom se means unless.

It introduces an exception:

• Mi iros, krom se... = I will go, unless...

A helpful way to think of it is:

• krom = except / apart from
• se = if

So literally it is something like except if.

Examples:

• Mi venos, krom se mi estos malsana. = I will come, unless I am sick.
• Li restos, krom se vi vokos lin. = He will stay, unless you call him.

The comma separates the main clause from the exception clause.

• Mi iros = main clause
• krom se la laborloko estas en alia urbo = subordinate clause

In Esperanto, commas are often used clearly to separate clauses, especially when a phrase like krom se introduces a new clause.

So the comma here is normal and helpful.

Laborloko is one word, and it is a compound noun.

It is made from:

• labor- = work
• loko = place

So laborloko literally means work-place, or more naturally workplace / place of work.

Esperanto often forms new words by combining roots like this. That is very common.

Other similar examples:

• dormoĉambro = bedroom
• lernejo = school
• manĝotablo = dining table

La is the definite article, meaning the.

So:

• la laborloko = the workplace

Esperanto has only one article, la, and it does not change for gender, number, or case in normal use.

Here it refers to a specific workplace already understood in context.

Compare:

• laborloko = a workplace / workplace in general
• la laborloko = the workplace

Estas means is, and it is often used in the condition after se or krom se when the speaker is talking about a real condition as it stands.

So:

• la laborloko estas en alia urbo = the workplace is in another city

Even though the main action is in the future (Mi iros), the condition can still be in the present if the speaker means the workplace’s location is a present fact.

English often does the same:

• I will go unless the workplace is in another city.

You usually do not say:

• I will go unless the workplace will be in another city.

So estas is natural here.

En usually means in.

So:

• en urbo = in a city
• en alia urbo = in another city

It shows location.

Examples:

• Mi loĝas en Londono. = I live in London.
• La libro estas en la ĉambro. = The book is in the room.

Here, en alia urbo tells you where the workplace is located.

Because en already marks the location, and this is not a direct object.

• alia urbo is in the basic form
• alian urbon would have the -n ending

In Esperanto, the -n ending is used mainly for:

1. direct objects
2. direction/motion toward something in some cases

Here the meaning is location, not motion:

• estas en alia urbo = is in another city

So no -n is needed.

Compare:

• Mi estas en alia urbo. = I am in another city.
• Mi iras en alian urbon. = I am going into another city.

No, because the meaning would change.

• se = if
• krom se = unless

Compare:

• Mi iros, se la laborloko estas en alia urbo.
  = I will go if the workplace is in another city.

• Mi iros, krom se la laborloko estas en alia urbo.
  = I will go unless the workplace is in another city.

These mean almost opposite things.

Yes, Esperanto word order is fairly flexible, as long as the meaning stays clear.

For example, you could also say:

• Krom se la laborloko estas en alia urbo, mi iros.

This means the same thing:

• Unless the workplace is in another city, I will go.

The original version may sound a little more natural if the main point is I will go and the exception comes after it.

That depends on context. Iri is a broad verb meaning to go, and in some contexts English might translate it as travel, leave, or attend/go.

By itself, Mi iros simply means I will go.

If you want to be more specific, Esperanto can add more information:

• Mi iros tien. = I will go there.
• Mi iros al la laborloko. = I will go to the workplace.
• Mi vojaĝos. = I will travel.

So iri is the normal general verb, and context tells you exactly what kind of going is meant.

Yes, it is natural and grammatical.

It has a very standard structure:

• Mi iros = main statement
• krom se... = exception
• la laborloko estas en alia urbo = condition

A native speaker would understand it easily.

If someone wanted to be a bit more explicit, they might say something like:

• Mi iros, krom se mia laborloko estas en alia urbo.

That would mean I will go, unless my workplace is in another city, which may be clearer if ownership matters. But the original sentence is perfectly fine as it stands.