Forcing employees back into the office can foster discontent with little impact on productivity. And carrots and sticks tied to office attendance may not pass the fairness test.
Loading
One of our biggest wins from the pandemic was our record low unemployment rate. Yet,if we’re not careful,we’ll end up erasing at least some of the gains.
Mandates mean workers who are carers in their personal capacity – disproportionately women – will be more likely to give up working hours because of how difficult (and often impossible) it can be for them to fulfil both roles. And financial incentives,unless sufficient to cover costs such as childcare,will be sacrificed by those who find it harder to come into the office and those earning less in a household – again,often women – leading to greater inequality and a lack of diversity.
Instead,we need to see this potential conflict – between bosses who want people in the office every day,and employees with diverse needs – as an opportunity. Much of the advantage in flexible work,such as saving on transport costs,spending less on childcare and being able to pop into the gym during lunch break,can be preserved.
If it’s really a big benefit for companies to have employees in the office,they should compete for that edge by providing access to amenities such as childcare and gyms,and opportunities including personal and professional development and mentorship.
Loading
We knew,even before the pandemic,that these are beneficial for companies to attract and retain talent,while improving productivity and employee satisfaction. As with flexible work,these are steps on which companies have generally dragged their feet until it becomes a necessity – and for which employees,until now,have not pushed as hard.
Companies can’t make up for such things as time otherwise spent with loved ones or time lost commuting,but they can encourage higher office attendance while retaining talent,improving cohesion and the transfer of knowledge.
It’s a good thing companies are facing resistance. The benefits,such as access to amenities,may seem skewed towards employees,but they’re also important for the growth and success of companies themselves. Happier employees,engaging in professional and personal development,will drive a company’s performance – rather than workers chained to their desks who may end up walking away.
We should also acknowledge we can’t bring every single person back into the office five days a week without substantial losses,or ambitious spending by companies,and probably the government on things such as cheaper childcare and public transport.
As with many innovations,there are pros and cons to working from home. But there is no significant harm to flexible work,as evidenced in many companies and countries that remain functional and continue to grow. Making work more accessible has benefited many lives,personally and professionally.
Working from home may have spread as a response to a global pandemic,where companies had little choice. But if bosses want to reverse the trend,they will need to make concerted efforts to preserve the gains we’ve seen.
Unless bosses are quietly plotting for an explosion in employee benefits by 2025,there seems to be neither a great likelihood nor a compelling case for workers to come back to the office full-time.
Millie Muroi is a business reporter covering banks,financial services and markets.