UK 
United States
‘Jane’ (not her real name) is fuming. Two years after her workplace going fully remote in 2020, and having stayed like that thereafter, she decided (for family reasons), that she would move out of London, and relocate to be much nearer to her aging parents, some 60 miles away. But two months ago she received the edict that she and many of her colleagues had long been fearing – an RTO (return to office) mandate. It required staff to suddenly be in the office from once a month (very manageable), to two (but preferably three), days a week. Not surprisingly, Jane is now seriously considering what exactly to do about it. And what she says this inevitably means is that barring any last minute change of heart, quitting the job she’s good at, enjoys, and has developed many years experience in – just because of what feels like an executive-level whim.
Jane’s story is not an isolated one. After the early lead shown by the more militant Square Mile investment banks to march their staff back to the office, even firms like Asda have announced that they’ll be cutting hybrid working, with employees expected to fall into line (despite making life choices based on the previous flexibility offered).
RTOs – what workers ‘claim’:
- Research by the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership and King’s Business School finds 42% of UK workers say they would comply with a five-day-a-week office mandate, down from 54% in early 2022.
- Women were more likely to resist RTO mandates, with 55% saying they'd look for a new job and 9% ready to quit outright. Amongst men, 43% said they'd job hunt, and 8% would quit. Among mothers with young children, only 33% said they'd comply.
- 42% of London workers would want a pay rise if asked to work full time in the office without any flexibility
But a question that never appears to be asked is an important one: ‘where exactly is HR’ in all this?’ Is the CEO simply ordering them to tow their line? And why do they seem to be doing it without putting up much of a fight? Isn’t now exactly the moment where HR should be expected to speak up and have a voice – especially if the edict from the top runs counter to everything they know?
It’s all from the CEO
“All of the big RTO mandate announcements, as far as we can see, have been driven from the CEO or the executive team around them,” says Caitlin Duffy, Research Director in the Human Resources practice, Gartner. “I can’t think of a single example of when a major RTO decision actually been driven by HR – and that’s a challenge, because HR is essentially being asked to force through a policy it typically fundamentally disapproves of.”
But according to Duffy, the opportunity HR has to resist and push-back on these demands is sometimes as futile as staff refusing the RTO mandate itself, because to do so would be to push-back on what she calls ‘powerful forces’ – where execs simply believe, as a point of principle, that staff should be together and/or because being remote was not something they ever experienced.
She says: “What makes RTOs even tougher for HR professionals, is that CEOs are typically not convinced by data to the contrary, because RTOs are usually an emotion-based decision.” She adds: “They see the notion of collaboration, or culture building – ironically, very HR’y concepts – as being important, but they’re justifying RTOs on something that can’t easily be measured in preference for often very hard data that shows issuing an RTO damaging to morale, and productivity and the very culture they want to create.
All of the big RTO mandate announcements, as far as we can see, have been driven from the CEO or the executive team around them
According to Gartner/Duffy’s own research, the fact is that RTOs do not improve creativity and they actually create lower intent to stay from the best performing talent. HR instinctive knows this, but worst of all for them, according to Duffy, is the fact there is a reason CEOs won’t listen – they believe HR is biased.
