.jpg?width=5498&height=3092)
The shift to remote work saved countless businesses from financial ruin and enabled millions of people to continue earning a living during the COVID-19 pandemic, but has the time come for employers to mandate a return to office? Amazon, Dell, AT&T, Google, JPMorgan Chase, Meta, Boeing and many other companies have rolled back remote work policies and are now requiring employees to be onsite, at least some of the time.
Since the pandemic, Major League Baseball (MLB) had been operating with a hybrid policy but ordered its 1,000+ staffers back to the office five days a week in February, saying they feel people collaborate best when face-to-face. In other words, the organization shifted from “take me out to the ballgame” to “take me back to the office.” MLB employees will now have two flex days each month to work from home, if they choose.
It’s an issue that has crossed industries, geographies — and political lines. After President Donald Trump ordered U.S. federal government employees back to the office, numerous states followed suit, including deep-red Texas and deep-blue California.
While some employees welcome the opportunity to get back to in-person work, the trend has prompted significant pushback, with many workers signaling disgust with return to office mandates. From complaints on internal message boards and online petitions to walk-outs and threats to quit, employees haven’t been shy about pushing back — and neither have business leaders.
Two sides of the return to office issue
Employers cite a number of reasons for ordering employees back to the office, including enhanced collaboration, improved productivity, greater connection to company culture and better adherence to data security protocols.
Meanwhile, employees say the opportunity to work remotely has enabled them to achieve greater work-life balance by eliminating the commute, allowing for more time to sleep and exercise and giving them the freedom to tend to family and caregiving duties while remaining a productive member of the workforce. In fact, three-quarters of remote employees say they are often or almost always productive — virtually the same as hybrid or onsite workers, according to the 2024 Alight International Workforce and Wellbeing Mindset Study.
Likewise, only 18% of remote employees say they give no more than what is required, compared to 38% of hybrid and 28% of onsite. Similarly, just 19% of those working remotely say they no longer desire to produce top-quality work, versus 38% of hybrid and 22% of onsite. In other words, the myth that remote workers are less productive or not really working is false — or at least runs counter to what they are self-reporting.
What’s more, just under a quarter (23%) of remote employees say their work has a negative impact on their mental health, compared to 39% of hybrid and 33% of onsite employees.
That’s not to suggest all the metrics around remote working are rosy compared to employees working onsite and hybrid arrangements. On the contrary, just over half (56%) of remote workers say they feel like they belong at their company, contrasted with 70% of hybrid and 61% of onsite employees. Similarly, fewer remote workers (56%) say they feel connected to their company’s mission versus 68% of those working hybrid schedules and 61% working onsite.
When it comes to wellbeing, remote workers fare worse than their hybrid and onsite counterparts across all dimensions, especially in the area of finances. Only a third (33%) of remote employees have money left over at the end of the month versus 44% of onsite and 55% of hybrid workers. This finding is particularly interesting because it’s been widely publicized that working remotely can save an individual up to $12,000 per year ($6,000 if working hybrid) due to reduced commuting, lunch and clothing costs.
A flight risk
Despite their struggles with wellbeing, 86% of those working remotely are happy with their current situation. While just 6% say they would quit immediately if asked to return to onsite work, 31% say they would look for another job and 24% would stay but be less engaged. Parents and caregivers are particularly appreciative of the opportunity to work remotely, with 83% of parents and 96% of caregivers saying they are happy with the arrangement. If they were asked to return to a five-day-a-week onsite schedule, 27% of parents and 26% of caregivers say they would look for another job.
Some employers are trying to entice employees back to the workplace with extra benefits and perks. In addition to health insurance, retirement plans and wellbeing programs, companies are bolstering their offerings with free food, onsite fitness centers, enhanced childcare and professional development opportunities, relaxed dress codes, free parking and other commuter benefits. By sweetening the deal, they hope to convince employees that working onsite is more beneficial than working at home.
Some experts caution employers their RTO mandates could cost the organization dearly — by chasing away top performers who either have no interest in working onsite or simply don’t live close enough to the office and aren’t willing to relocate. Mindset data clearly shows that flexible schedules play a significant role in attracting and retaining talent. Among those employees planning to leave their current employer, 33% say the ability to work remotely would change their mind and convince them to stay.
Difficult decision
As they ponder whether to mandate a return to office or allow employees to keep working a remote or hybrid schedule, organizations need to decide if possibly losing top performers is a risk they would be willing to take. To appease employees who value flexibility, companies are increasingly moving toward hybrid schedules. According to our 2024 Mindset study, the percentage of employees working remotely fell from 19% in 2023 to 14% in 2024, but so, too, did the percentage of people working onsite — from 41% to 35%. However, the trend toward hybrid arrangements, where employees work onsite one to four days a week is growing, with 64% of employees reportedly working such a schedule, up four points in one year.
A hybrid arrangement resonates positively with the majority of employees, with one important caveat: if they get to choose their own schedule (73% satisfaction vs. 52% if the company chooses their schedule). The primary exception is parents and caregivers already working remotely. If asked to return to the office 50% of the time, 37% of parents and 21% of caregivers say that they would look for a new job. Perhaps even more concerning, 18% of parents and 31% of caregivers say they would comply with a hybrid schedule, but their satisfaction would drop.
The debate over return to office policies is not one that can be easily resolved — and there’s not a one-size-fits-all solution that meets the needs of all employees and employers equally. It’s a highly individual decision that must be made by each employer based on company culture, business needs, nature of work, employee sentiment and geographic proximity. For some organizations, having 100% of the workforce onsite 100% of the time might be the right way to go. Others may find employees are more productive working remotely all or part of the time. As employers weigh that equation, they must be ready for the impact to their engagement levels, able to absorb the retention risks and still be able to attract candidates from a narrower (local) talent pool.
Whatever the outcome of their calculation, it’s wise to avoid thinking of any return to office decisions as permanent. Just as employers pivoted to remote work in response to the pandemic, they can pivot between onsite, hybrid and remote as they continually evaluate which is best for their organization now and in the future.
