USA 
United Kingdom
Hybrid and remote employees are being penalized by their managers due to biases unrelated to their job performance, according to a new peer-reviewed study.
Researchers found that physical proximity to leadership continues to shape promotion and pay decisions, with hybrid and fully remote staff facing measurable disadvantages, even when their output is identical to that of in-office colleagues.
In a controlled experiment involving nearly 1,000 UK-based supervisors, managers were more likely to promote or offer raises to employees who were office-based, especially when no performance data was available. Without that information, hybrid workers saw a 7.7% lower chance of promotion and a 7.1% lower chance of receiving a pay increase.
The study identified it as a form of statistical discrimination. Lacking concrete productivity data, managers defaulted to assumptions based on where employees worked. When informed that hybrid staff were performing identically to in-office peers, the promotion and pay gaps disappeared.
Remote performance still seen as lower commitment
Even when fully remote workers were described as performing equally to others, managers continued to perceive them as less committed. The study linked this to a belief that being physically present in the workplace signals greater dedication.
The perception was traced to the “ideal worker” norm, which expects constant availability and visibility in the office. Remote employees who challenge that model face implicit penalties, even when their contributions match or exceed those of their in-office colleagues.
According to the research, such bias leads to remote staff being overlooked for advancement based on assumptions about loyalty, not performance.
Gender, parenthood and perception penalties
The research also uncovered how proximity bias interacts with gender and parental status. Fathers and childless men who work remotely faced negative assumptions about both their performance and commitment.
Mothers encountered a different bias. While not initially penalized for working from home, they were later held to a higher standard. Once a remote working mother was reported to perform on par with her in-office counterpart, managers responded negatively, implying she should be delivering more to justify her flexibility.
Childless women, in contrast, often escaped penalties. Researchers suggested this might reflect either an attempt by managers to “offset” discrimination against mothers or a belief that childless women are more career-focused.
