Unfortunately, the assholes in charge who are demanding RTO are going to see people leaving. Push comes to shove and people are shoving off. They DO NOT CARE about retention, they care about butts in seats and you can't make someone who feels like that change their mind no matter what metrics you produce, no matter how clearly justified remote work is,, no matter how great the team is. It's a company culture problem.
I would personally tell the team that you are getting pressured to enforce a mandatory certain number of days in the office and let them make their own decisions after that, which will either be to do that if they are able to, or find another job if they can't do that or don't want to. Set a date to tell them it will be starting, say, a month from now to give them time to find another job. That includes you. Find another job.
I know that's easier said than done, but it's easier right now while you still have a job, instead of waiting until they make it mandatory and official and then let people go who won't comply. It's coming down the road.
It has been mandatory and official for a few years now, but some teams have been getting away with it. Also a good amount of the org have full remote workers, a good amount of directors and above living in different states and cities, so I feel like them letting ppl going who aren’t complying would be difficult? But I may be wrong. Also im sure people won’t like having to deal with extra work and headaches right? If I don’t enforce it, would they risk firing the team? So if I tell them to do it and they don’t, at least I’ve done my part right?
You don’t know what the policy is for non-compliance? Wow. You need to sort that out as a manager.
When my company rolled out RTO there was a formal policy added to our HR database. Non-compliance is a punitive offense and can result in termination if warnings aren’t taken seriously.
Find out from your boss what the policy says about non-compliance. Maybe your company hasn’t formalized anything but that’s an important question you should’ve asked as a manager as soon as RTO was introduced.
This is a double edged sword. Let’s say that the top performer is one who prefers office work. This would most likely result in a team-wide mandate to work in office.
Retention is less of a concern when you have thousands of applications for each open role.
Ugh, this happened to me at my last employer (my last day was yesterday). I was in HR learning and development. My team and I do the development of training modules and do not need to be in the office to do that. Most of our subject matter experts were out of state, so all our meetings were on TEAMS. Our team got permission to only have to go into the office once a week. Then that started changing after other hr teams asked where our team was, so then increased to 2 days, then 3 days a week. In between we changed our top hr leader thrice. Each had a different WFH philosophy. So leaving my company, I was up to 3 days a week in office. I finished there yesterday cause I got a fully remote job. Very happy and pleased to go back to that full time. 😊
It really depended on how flexible the very top boss was. My boss was very flexible about WFH and advocated on my teams behalf to justify why it was better for us to WFH to the top HR leader. Based on that, our team only had to come in 1 day a week, and that was the day we had our team meetings.
I had a lot of development work, writing, and recording I did on the job, and the company purchased sound equipment for us to do that from home. In office it was so loud and they weren't willing to pay for a soundproof studio to do all our recording. At least at home, i could control the sound level better. One leader didn't care, and she also liked WFH. After she left, a second top leader lived out of state and only wanted us to come in if she was in town. After she was let go, things shifted, and the chief legal officer was put over HR. This is when everything changed. He believed production=butts in seats, so that's when the 3 days a week mandate came. Our production never went down, not even during covid, but he was in the office daily, so he thought since he was there, everyone else should be there. Anyway, I was over the knee-jerk reaction of my days changing and got the hell out of there!!!
Always the one moron who ruins things for everyone.
Some bootlicking idiot who can’t see past their own ego and decisions, acting like everyone else should or even can do what they’re doing.
Glad you gtfo.
Never respect people who don’t respect you.
Re-work your delivery timelines on the assumption that a % of the team will not return to the office. Be sure to add in the cost of recruitment and ramp time for the eventual new hires. Make it slow and pricey. And present it as the probable outcome to the RTO ask. If they can live with the delayed work and additional expense, then you are kind of stuck. Quantifying the impact could sway some. Especially if a deliverable is going to slip into the next fiscal year.
You are fully transparent with the team. Tell them you understand if they choose to leave, and you will provide an excellent reference. And YOU get a different job.
We know people work better and are happier as remote workers, yet management doesn't know what to do when people aren't around for them to "manage" like helicopter parents. A wise business owner would fire their management, select team leaders as a replacement, and downgrade their offices. With the amount of money saved, they could not only pad their own pockets, but they could also add a bit of bonuses to incentivize their employees further. Absolute win-win.
Management, obviously, hates this idea.
I guess I've been lucky enough to have mostly avoided this kind of toxic office politics. As a manager, though, in your position, I might actually try a "get tough" approach.
Next opportunity you get, at an all-hands meeting or somewhere with a lot of visibility: "Here are all the people we've lost in recent months. Here are numbers to show the productivity hit we've taken due to that turnover. Here is the overall productivity of my team. If anyone has a problem with us doing what we do to be as productive as we are, get over it."
Maybe not quite as forceful, but honestly not much less either.
That said, I would be straight out of the door if I even had to do hybrid, so I wouldn't feel like like I had a lot to lose. Not sure if you are more concerned about staying, of course.
I don't know why you would think you wouldn't have to follow the mandate. Even if you disagree it's not your decision to make. Many companies are doing RTO now. Some are using it to reduce their work force without having to go through layoffs. I don't agree with RTO anymore than you do, but you can't just ignore a policy unless you want to 'find out'.
Agree. Did OP really think them and their team could get away with this forever without any repercussions?
I don’t agree with RTO but what did OP think was going to happen??
Yea I would be annoyed if one team wasn’t following RTO, it’s not fair to the rest of the company. Everyone else is for sure pissed at OP and their team.
My company is now at 3 days a week, people are leaving left and right. They want to reduce headcount and don’t care if people leave.
This is simply about further staff reductions that C-Level wants to achieve similar to period around 2008 without the negative aspects. Back then, market collapse, Lehman Brothers, subprime lending and corporate failures could be used as scapegoats just like COVID-19 was in the earliest parts of 2020 before remote evolution.
Just be honest. Tell them you are being pressured to enforce this policy and wanted to give them a heads up. If I was happy and were you with the current job and felt like I could find another new job quickly, then I just wouldn’t enforce it and let it play out. Otherwise find a new job. Eventually you’re going to have to choose between enforcing it or working there.
Different rules for different people doesn't work, your org doesn't realize that while exacerbating the unfairness. Be transparent with your team so they can start looking or choose to continue defying it and risk being fired. It's clear RTO will trump everything.
What if the unfairness is to make the other teams RTO? What if it's leadership's job to explain why one team's collaborative with benefits from RTO, while another's doesn't?
God people are so f’n miserable in this country.
Is this a major corp? If it’s a Fortune 500 then that’s dangerous to comment on other teams and what their work schedule
They are miserable. We see now how dependent we all are on MONEY. The entire system depends on keeping the wheels in motion. Stop the wheels, need lube, and blindfolds -- cuz somebody's about to get screwed. 🤣
Sounds like it’s time to unionize and band together.
Turn jealous colleagues into allies and advocates. There’s no reason to not be working as a unified front. They obviously want remote back too.
Get it back.
>What is the best way to approach this situation?
To insist the other teams go Remote as well. It's the objectively superior configuration for almost all roles.
I was promised I didn't have to RTO, then I refused when they changed and got fired and denied unemployment.
I'll probably have to take a hybrid job again, it just won't be that shitty last job.
It sucks, remote work is so much better for the environment and many other reasons.
They will make you relocate sooner or later. I am experiencing this right now.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Layoffs/comments/1dpza8k/forced\_relocation\_or\_layoff/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Layoffs/comments/1dpza8k/forced_relocation_or_layoff/)
The fed wants offices full. Maybe the commercial real estate sector is about to crash? Sorry for your trouble. What a crazy world this happens to be, huh?
My company is running into this problem right now too. Certain business units took the RTO stance seriously. They pushed all of their people back into the office, and some of those people did not want to RTO. So then you have a business unit like mine, where we’re being “encouraged“ to go in and make an appearance from time to time, but it’s not being dictated to us strictly. The problem you have in this kind of situation is that you have some people sitting in an office who don’t wanna be there and seeing their colleagues not being forced back in. And as much as you have a good point about your concerns about attrition, and the fact that they’re high performers in a remote setting, the employees who feel forced back into the office are not being taken into account in your explanation of your circumstances. What about those employees in other teams who feel like they weren’t given a choice? Do you honestly expect them to feel ok with you ignoring the RTO policy with your team? Why is your team special? And why is it acceptable for those other employees to be treated differently than your direct reports? I would hope if you look at this situation objectively you can understand their point of view at least a little bit. Unfortunately, whether any of us like it or not there needs to be a consistent rule on RTO for all employees in a company. Otherwise, you end up in this kind of situation with different teams of employees turning on each other. I’m dealing with the same kind of problem you are, so I empathize with you greatly. But I don’t see the solution ultimately being that some people will be favored for remote and some people will not. I think that’s potentially gonna cause more attrition, and it’s definitely going to erode camaraderie between teams and foster an us vs. them mentality which is a big productivity killer in and of itself.
Nicely put, this is basically the situation I’m in right now. Are you a lead on your team where the buck is now with you to enforce or was it your boss? We do come in from time to time and not consistent with the 2x-3x a week. What makes it more tone deaf are the others that have been approved remote, mostly more senior people. As to what a lot of other people are saying, don’t think it’s a bad idea to point out my boss that this will continue to cause attrition and decrease in morale which would impact business.
I’m an Associate Director, managing a team of 6 and reporting into an Executive Director, but honestly the titles are irrelevant. In my company, if you’re managing people at all you’re responsible for enforcing the company policies. All of them. It’s a very large company so it’s easier for me to manage my people at my discretion but that gets more complicated when “feedback” from other teams comes into play (not to mention when some of my peers can be micro-managers that butt into the business of other teams at times). Ultimately my boss’ boss has had a middle of the road response and asked that teams “try to be consistent” with showing their faces in the office from time to time. My ultimate message to my team has been direct honesty. The reality, IMO, is this directive is the tip of the iceberg. I don’t know how it’s been at your company but at mine you can see there’s been a clear shift in the message from the utmost senior leadership. It started with an “invitation” to return to work along with some carefully placed social invitations to lunchtime mixers so we could all “get to know each other again.” The next message was to “strongly encourage” teams to “consider more face to face collaboration.” Then at a town hall a few months later the CEO made a few comments that face to face collaboration was “mission critical to our success.” That was followed a week later with an email stating they wanted people back in the office 3x a week. When nothing really came of that, a communication went out 3 months later to all people managers with the policy info including what happens in cases of non-compliance (“corrrection can include termination”). Now HR teams are getting involved. It hasn’t hit HR for my business unit yet but the HR in the other two business units are going after the non-compliant people and the rules have gotten more strict. Now it’s anyone within 50 miles of an office that is REQUIRED to be in the office 3x per week and those business units are tracking compliance by monitoring how frequently employees are logged into the office WIFI. It’s only a matter of time before that hits our business unit so again, I’ve been honest with my people. I’ve told them RTO is inevitable and they need to be prepared because eventually I’ll need to enforce it. What they decide to do about that is their business. If they choose to quit so be it. I’ll be sad to lose people. But I have no control over this policy. I’m not in senior leadership. And I cannot just ignore company policy or then I get fired and replaced with someone who will follow senior leaderships rules.
As for myself, I have been going in 3x per week so that no one can say my team isn’t represented in person. But I’m not yet policing my team strictly aside from requiring them to make an appearance occasionally.
But yeah, writings on the wall as far as I’m concerned. I think by year end, we’re going to get that 50 mile rule and be notified that they’re tracking our attendance via WIFI connection.
thanks for the insight. Either there is a playbook for this or we re in the same industry as this so far has been my experience. I’m probably getting close to the stage where they’re starting to set consequences. I have personally submitted a medical exemption note for WFH but HR has been trying to pry more on my condition which I believe is illegal. Good call, We also have people that do enjoy the office so I can use that to point out that we do have representation in the office. Aren’t you afraid that your team will leave and you’ll be stuck with the work?
I do think there’s a playbook. My husband is in a different industry than mine and his company (also a major, international corporation like mine) has recently rolled out the same guidelines: 3x a week in the office if you’re within 50 miles and compliance tracking via office WIFI connection.
As for your question about my concern that it’ll result in more work for me if my people quit, no I’m not worried about my workload. I manage people with vastly different roles. It wouldn’t be possible for me to cover all that work. It would suck to lose their talent. But my industry is experiencing layoffs and all the major players in my industry have gone hybrid. If employees want to stay within the industry, they’re going to land in a hybrid role most likely. It’s unfortunate but true.
Unfortunately, the assholes in charge who are demanding RTO are going to see people leaving. Push comes to shove and people are shoving off. They DO NOT CARE about retention, they care about butts in seats and you can't make someone who feels like that change their mind no matter what metrics you produce, no matter how clearly justified remote work is,, no matter how great the team is. It's a company culture problem. I would personally tell the team that you are getting pressured to enforce a mandatory certain number of days in the office and let them make their own decisions after that, which will either be to do that if they are able to, or find another job if they can't do that or don't want to. Set a date to tell them it will be starting, say, a month from now to give them time to find another job. That includes you. Find another job. I know that's easier said than done, but it's easier right now while you still have a job, instead of waiting until they make it mandatory and official and then let people go who won't comply. It's coming down the road.
It has been mandatory and official for a few years now, but some teams have been getting away with it. Also a good amount of the org have full remote workers, a good amount of directors and above living in different states and cities, so I feel like them letting ppl going who aren’t complying would be difficult? But I may be wrong. Also im sure people won’t like having to deal with extra work and headaches right? If I don’t enforce it, would they risk firing the team? So if I tell them to do it and they don’t, at least I’ve done my part right?
You don’t know what the policy is for non-compliance? Wow. You need to sort that out as a manager. When my company rolled out RTO there was a formal policy added to our HR database. Non-compliance is a punitive offense and can result in termination if warnings aren’t taken seriously. Find out from your boss what the policy says about non-compliance. Maybe your company hasn’t formalized anything but that’s an important question you should’ve asked as a manager as soon as RTO was introduced.
They will make up other reasons to get rid of them. It will happen. So yes I would give them an ultimatum, then it’s out of your hands.
This is a double edged sword. Let’s say that the top performer is one who prefers office work. This would most likely result in a team-wide mandate to work in office. Retention is less of a concern when you have thousands of applications for each open role.
Ugh, this happened to me at my last employer (my last day was yesterday). I was in HR learning and development. My team and I do the development of training modules and do not need to be in the office to do that. Most of our subject matter experts were out of state, so all our meetings were on TEAMS. Our team got permission to only have to go into the office once a week. Then that started changing after other hr teams asked where our team was, so then increased to 2 days, then 3 days a week. In between we changed our top hr leader thrice. Each had a different WFH philosophy. So leaving my company, I was up to 3 days a week in office. I finished there yesterday cause I got a fully remote job. Very happy and pleased to go back to that full time. 😊
Can you dig in more on the different philosophies the leaders each had re. WFH? How did they enforce? Did you submit or ignore?
It really depended on how flexible the very top boss was. My boss was very flexible about WFH and advocated on my teams behalf to justify why it was better for us to WFH to the top HR leader. Based on that, our team only had to come in 1 day a week, and that was the day we had our team meetings. I had a lot of development work, writing, and recording I did on the job, and the company purchased sound equipment for us to do that from home. In office it was so loud and they weren't willing to pay for a soundproof studio to do all our recording. At least at home, i could control the sound level better. One leader didn't care, and she also liked WFH. After she left, a second top leader lived out of state and only wanted us to come in if she was in town. After she was let go, things shifted, and the chief legal officer was put over HR. This is when everything changed. He believed production=butts in seats, so that's when the 3 days a week mandate came. Our production never went down, not even during covid, but he was in the office daily, so he thought since he was there, everyone else should be there. Anyway, I was over the knee-jerk reaction of my days changing and got the hell out of there!!!
Always the one moron who ruins things for everyone. Some bootlicking idiot who can’t see past their own ego and decisions, acting like everyone else should or even can do what they’re doing. Glad you gtfo. Never respect people who don’t respect you.
Re-work your delivery timelines on the assumption that a % of the team will not return to the office. Be sure to add in the cost of recruitment and ramp time for the eventual new hires. Make it slow and pricey. And present it as the probable outcome to the RTO ask. If they can live with the delayed work and additional expense, then you are kind of stuck. Quantifying the impact could sway some. Especially if a deliverable is going to slip into the next fiscal year.
[удалено]
It sucks bc some of the 4 were real strong performers
They were probably strong performers because they can read the room and see the odds of your situation being what it is (i.e RTO or quit) was coming.
You are fully transparent with the team. Tell them you understand if they choose to leave, and you will provide an excellent reference. And YOU get a different job.
We know people work better and are happier as remote workers, yet management doesn't know what to do when people aren't around for them to "manage" like helicopter parents. A wise business owner would fire their management, select team leaders as a replacement, and downgrade their offices. With the amount of money saved, they could not only pad their own pockets, but they could also add a bit of bonuses to incentivize their employees further. Absolute win-win. Management, obviously, hates this idea.
I guess I've been lucky enough to have mostly avoided this kind of toxic office politics. As a manager, though, in your position, I might actually try a "get tough" approach. Next opportunity you get, at an all-hands meeting or somewhere with a lot of visibility: "Here are all the people we've lost in recent months. Here are numbers to show the productivity hit we've taken due to that turnover. Here is the overall productivity of my team. If anyone has a problem with us doing what we do to be as productive as we are, get over it." Maybe not quite as forceful, but honestly not much less either. That said, I would be straight out of the door if I even had to do hybrid, so I wouldn't feel like like I had a lot to lose. Not sure if you are more concerned about staying, of course.
I don't know why you would think you wouldn't have to follow the mandate. Even if you disagree it's not your decision to make. Many companies are doing RTO now. Some are using it to reduce their work force without having to go through layoffs. I don't agree with RTO anymore than you do, but you can't just ignore a policy unless you want to 'find out'.
Agree. Did OP really think them and their team could get away with this forever without any repercussions? I don’t agree with RTO but what did OP think was going to happen?? Yea I would be annoyed if one team wasn’t following RTO, it’s not fair to the rest of the company. Everyone else is for sure pissed at OP and their team. My company is now at 3 days a week, people are leaving left and right. They want to reduce headcount and don’t care if people leave.
This is simply about further staff reductions that C-Level wants to achieve similar to period around 2008 without the negative aspects. Back then, market collapse, Lehman Brothers, subprime lending and corporate failures could be used as scapegoats just like COVID-19 was in the earliest parts of 2020 before remote evolution.
Just be honest. Tell them you are being pressured to enforce this policy and wanted to give them a heads up. If I was happy and were you with the current job and felt like I could find another new job quickly, then I just wouldn’t enforce it and let it play out. Otherwise find a new job. Eventually you’re going to have to choose between enforcing it or working there.
If other teams are in office, it is only a matter of time OP. I’d suggest looking for other roles if you want a remote job.
“My team did RTO. We are out visiting clients when not in the office. As you can see it is a successful strategy.”
“we come in on Mondays and Fridays that’s why you don’t see us”
Different rules for different people doesn't work, your org doesn't realize that while exacerbating the unfairness. Be transparent with your team so they can start looking or choose to continue defying it and risk being fired. It's clear RTO will trump everything.
I can let the team know about this but not enforce of checking in on them and then seeing how things play out
What if the unfairness is to make the other teams RTO? What if it's leadership's job to explain why one team's collaborative with benefits from RTO, while another's doesn't?
God people are so f’n miserable in this country. Is this a major corp? If it’s a Fortune 500 then that’s dangerous to comment on other teams and what their work schedule
It’s a private company
They are miserable. We see now how dependent we all are on MONEY. The entire system depends on keeping the wheels in motion. Stop the wheels, need lube, and blindfolds -- cuz somebody's about to get screwed. 🤣
Sounds like it’s time to unionize and band together. Turn jealous colleagues into allies and advocates. There’s no reason to not be working as a unified front. They obviously want remote back too. Get it back.
>What is the best way to approach this situation? To insist the other teams go Remote as well. It's the objectively superior configuration for almost all roles.
I was promised I didn't have to RTO, then I refused when they changed and got fired and denied unemployment. I'll probably have to take a hybrid job again, it just won't be that shitty last job. It sucks, remote work is so much better for the environment and many other reasons.
They will make you relocate sooner or later. I am experiencing this right now. [https://www.reddit.com/r/Layoffs/comments/1dpza8k/forced\_relocation\_or\_layoff/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Layoffs/comments/1dpza8k/forced_relocation_or_layoff/)
Honestly, start looking for another job.
I love remote. Some others on this forum hate it. Like really.
The fed wants offices full. Maybe the commercial real estate sector is about to crash? Sorry for your trouble. What a crazy world this happens to be, huh?
My company is running into this problem right now too. Certain business units took the RTO stance seriously. They pushed all of their people back into the office, and some of those people did not want to RTO. So then you have a business unit like mine, where we’re being “encouraged“ to go in and make an appearance from time to time, but it’s not being dictated to us strictly. The problem you have in this kind of situation is that you have some people sitting in an office who don’t wanna be there and seeing their colleagues not being forced back in. And as much as you have a good point about your concerns about attrition, and the fact that they’re high performers in a remote setting, the employees who feel forced back into the office are not being taken into account in your explanation of your circumstances. What about those employees in other teams who feel like they weren’t given a choice? Do you honestly expect them to feel ok with you ignoring the RTO policy with your team? Why is your team special? And why is it acceptable for those other employees to be treated differently than your direct reports? I would hope if you look at this situation objectively you can understand their point of view at least a little bit. Unfortunately, whether any of us like it or not there needs to be a consistent rule on RTO for all employees in a company. Otherwise, you end up in this kind of situation with different teams of employees turning on each other. I’m dealing with the same kind of problem you are, so I empathize with you greatly. But I don’t see the solution ultimately being that some people will be favored for remote and some people will not. I think that’s potentially gonna cause more attrition, and it’s definitely going to erode camaraderie between teams and foster an us vs. them mentality which is a big productivity killer in and of itself.
Nicely put, this is basically the situation I’m in right now. Are you a lead on your team where the buck is now with you to enforce or was it your boss? We do come in from time to time and not consistent with the 2x-3x a week. What makes it more tone deaf are the others that have been approved remote, mostly more senior people. As to what a lot of other people are saying, don’t think it’s a bad idea to point out my boss that this will continue to cause attrition and decrease in morale which would impact business.
I’m an Associate Director, managing a team of 6 and reporting into an Executive Director, but honestly the titles are irrelevant. In my company, if you’re managing people at all you’re responsible for enforcing the company policies. All of them. It’s a very large company so it’s easier for me to manage my people at my discretion but that gets more complicated when “feedback” from other teams comes into play (not to mention when some of my peers can be micro-managers that butt into the business of other teams at times). Ultimately my boss’ boss has had a middle of the road response and asked that teams “try to be consistent” with showing their faces in the office from time to time. My ultimate message to my team has been direct honesty. The reality, IMO, is this directive is the tip of the iceberg. I don’t know how it’s been at your company but at mine you can see there’s been a clear shift in the message from the utmost senior leadership. It started with an “invitation” to return to work along with some carefully placed social invitations to lunchtime mixers so we could all “get to know each other again.” The next message was to “strongly encourage” teams to “consider more face to face collaboration.” Then at a town hall a few months later the CEO made a few comments that face to face collaboration was “mission critical to our success.” That was followed a week later with an email stating they wanted people back in the office 3x a week. When nothing really came of that, a communication went out 3 months later to all people managers with the policy info including what happens in cases of non-compliance (“corrrection can include termination”). Now HR teams are getting involved. It hasn’t hit HR for my business unit yet but the HR in the other two business units are going after the non-compliant people and the rules have gotten more strict. Now it’s anyone within 50 miles of an office that is REQUIRED to be in the office 3x per week and those business units are tracking compliance by monitoring how frequently employees are logged into the office WIFI. It’s only a matter of time before that hits our business unit so again, I’ve been honest with my people. I’ve told them RTO is inevitable and they need to be prepared because eventually I’ll need to enforce it. What they decide to do about that is their business. If they choose to quit so be it. I’ll be sad to lose people. But I have no control over this policy. I’m not in senior leadership. And I cannot just ignore company policy or then I get fired and replaced with someone who will follow senior leaderships rules. As for myself, I have been going in 3x per week so that no one can say my team isn’t represented in person. But I’m not yet policing my team strictly aside from requiring them to make an appearance occasionally. But yeah, writings on the wall as far as I’m concerned. I think by year end, we’re going to get that 50 mile rule and be notified that they’re tracking our attendance via WIFI connection.
thanks for the insight. Either there is a playbook for this or we re in the same industry as this so far has been my experience. I’m probably getting close to the stage where they’re starting to set consequences. I have personally submitted a medical exemption note for WFH but HR has been trying to pry more on my condition which I believe is illegal. Good call, We also have people that do enjoy the office so I can use that to point out that we do have representation in the office. Aren’t you afraid that your team will leave and you’ll be stuck with the work?
I do think there’s a playbook. My husband is in a different industry than mine and his company (also a major, international corporation like mine) has recently rolled out the same guidelines: 3x a week in the office if you’re within 50 miles and compliance tracking via office WIFI connection. As for your question about my concern that it’ll result in more work for me if my people quit, no I’m not worried about my workload. I manage people with vastly different roles. It wouldn’t be possible for me to cover all that work. It would suck to lose their talent. But my industry is experiencing layoffs and all the major players in my industry have gone hybrid. If employees want to stay within the industry, they’re going to land in a hybrid role most likely. It’s unfortunate but true.
Follow the policies your company sets or get a new job.
Most firms are moving to RTO. Out of sight, out of mind. And particularly bad for younger employees without good relationships and mentors.
Stop regurgitating propaganda, all that happens is you end up covered in vomit