The Ups and Downs of Return to the Worksite

Jeremy York knows of a health care company that recently lost three key leaders less than two months after the firm announced that corporate employees must return to the office full time after working remotely.

All left to take jobs with competitors that offered hybrid schedules.  

The replacement costs alone outweighed any savings that the company hoped its return-to-the-office mandate would generate because of better collaboration and productivity, said York, SHRM-SCP, who is lead consultant and president of InvigorateHR, an HR consulting firm based in Indianapolis. 

In recent months, leaders at high-profile companies have issued similar mandates, telling remote-working employees to return to the worksite five days a week. 

While some employees may be excited about returning to work in person, HR experts express concerns about how the mandates might disrupt morale and the productivity that companies say their back-to-the-worksite policies are designed to improve. 

Policy: In-Office, Remote, and Hybrid Work Arrangements Policy

Reasons for Return-to-Work Mandates

That said, the return-to-worksite directives aren’t without purpose.

Reasons companies have given for returning to the worksite have included increasing organizations’ speed and agility, facilitating closer connections to customers and colleagues, and enabling stronger in-person collaboration and mentorship.

How-To Guide: How to Build a Successful Mentorship Program

Other reasons companies offer for ending remote or hybrid work — which entails both remote and on-site work — include enhanced relationships, networking opportunities, hands-on learning, and minimized distractions. 

“Most of my clients—small to mid-sized companies — indicate a concern about employees losing relationships and cohesiveness when they work remotely,” said Phyllis Hartman, SHRM-SCP, president of the Pittsburgh HR consulting firm PGHR Consulting. “I think the argument that having some face time with co-workers results in better relationships may be valid depending on the population [or] culture.” 

There also may be unspoken reasons for return-to-worksite policies. Those might include: needing to justify the cost of long-term office leases; filtering out employees whom they believe lack strong commitment to the company; reducing headcount without resorting to layoffs; and leaders’ belief that physical presence reinforces workplace authority and structure, allowing them to maintain greater control over the workforce.

“Is it maybe about having more control?” asked Trisha Zulic', SHRM-SCP, a consultant with Efficient Edge HR Services and author of the upcoming book UnMuted Leader: Lead So They Listen (Annabelle Sullivan Group, March 2026). “Sometimes, there are a percentage of people who take advantage of work from home, which makes it hard for organizations to trust the many because of the behaviors of the few.”

Research from McKinsey suggests that organizations that are more hierarchical can struggle to adapt to modern workplace expectations.

“For more traditional managers/supervisors, there are some control worries,” Hartman agreed, though she added that some organizations “may not have a good handle on what are reasonable expectations related to productivity. Though the results from remote workers may meet past standards, [leaders may] wonder if employees could be doing more.” 

As York pointed out, digging into productivity data is key. “If they have the right HR person, they are using data,” Zulic’ said. 

From the Pandemic to Today

Remote work became a widespread phenomenon during the COVID-19 pandemic, and many workers grew accustomed to the flexibility of telecommuting.

In 2022, research from the National Bureau of Economic Research suggested that return-to-work rules following the pandemic created tension between employers and their teams, and that voluntary attrition increased as a result, especially when competing employers were still offering hybrid or fully remote work. 

A year later, Buffer’s State of Remote Work report showed that employees value flexibility and are more engaged when they have choice over their work environment.

As of January, 23% of U.S. workers ages 16 and above who were at work, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics survey, spent some time teleworking or working at home for pay, including 12.3% who spent some but not all of their working hours teleworking or working at home for pay (i.e., hybrid workers) and 10.7% who spent all of their working hours teleworking or working at home for pay (i.e., fully remote workers). 

“This means, by extension, that 77% of workers ages 16 and above spent none of their working hours teleworking or working at home for pay (i.e., fully in-person workers),” said Justin Ladner, Ph.D., SHRM senior labor economist. 

Generational Considerations

There is a generational aspect to return-to-work policies that leaders should consider, HR experts say. 

Nearly three-quarters (71%) of Generation Z workers say a hybrid work schedule is  their top choice, according to July 2025 Gallup data.

Just 6% of Gen Z workers want to work fully in-person, along with 4% of Millennials, according to Gallup. Together, Gen Z and Millennials, generally considered those born between 1981 and 2012, make up more than half of the 170-million person U.S. labor force. 

“I suspect that younger workers, especially those with young families, might look to leave if full-time return to office occurs,” predicted Hartman. “If talent becomes more scarce and younger workers want flexibility over money, [return-to-work policies] may slow down or stop.”

Different Industries, Varying Approaches

There is also an industry aspect to remote or hybrid work that bears consideration, she said. 

The rates of remote work “vary widely, with occupation playing a huge role,” Ladner said. For example, in January 2026, nearly two-thirds of workers in the computer and mathematical occupational group spent at least some of their working hours teleworking or working at home for pay, including 37.5% who were fully remote workers. “This aligns with our intuition, as occupations in this group are almost universally compatible with remote work,” he said.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, just 0.8% of workers in the food preparation and serving group spend at least some of their working hours teleworking or working at home for pay, with the reason being that essentially all of the occupations in this group require workers to be physically present at a work location outside their home.

Those in jobs such as manufacturing and hands-on health care — as opposed to office-based manufacturing or health care jobs — can resent that they’re not afforded the same work-from-home luxury that others enjoy. Returning all employees to the worksite may be leaders’ response.

Added Zulic’: “There has been a bit of an uproar among the haves and have nots.”

Someone who must go to work because they’re a machinist usually makes less, while those who are office staff usually earn more, she said. “I had a warehouse worker tell me, ‘I risk my life to drive to get to work on time, and the accounting clerk gets to walk to her living room. They save gas and I spend on gas, and I make less.’”

Newsletter: Subscribe to Workplace Compliance 

Communicating the Change

Regardless of how remote- or hybrid-working employees feel about being ordered back to the worksite, they may not have a choice, unless they want to work somewhere else. How leaders communicate and roll out the change in policy is key to maintaining morale. 

“This is where I see companies fail spectacularly,” York said. “They announce mandates top-down with little input, tight timelines, and vague rationales. That approach destroys trust.”

A better approach, he suggested, is to start with the reason why. 

The why behind the policy change “better be backed by actual data and organizational needs, not executive preference,” he said. 

It’s wise, he recommended, to give workers significant lead time to return to the worksite.

York’s other suggestions:

• Acknowledge the impact on people's lives with empathy.
• Offer transition support — help with commute costs, child care resources, and schedule flexibility during the adjustment.
• Be specific about expectations and create clear policies for exceptions.
• For those who decline to return, York recommended individual assessments.

“A high performer in another state doing excellent work deserves a different conversation than someone local who's underperforming,” he said. 

Dana Wilkie is a freelance journalist based in Ormond Beach, Fla.