Re: Here we go
See if what you're saying was actually true and the reasons this was being done, then people would actually be less up in arms about it. But the truth is that EVERY major study on the topic of remote and hybrid working has found significant efficiency improvements from Hybrid and remote working. In pretty much every metric - employee output, employee engagement, employee success at meeting set goals, remote and hybrid workers are more successful than in office. There are multiple studies covering this, a quick search here on El Reg will get you a half dozen articles covering them.
Unfortunately, in every other case where this has come up, it comes back to a few specific things:
- companies paying for unused real estate in long lease conditions, which they cant get out of so, they want to justify by having people in office.
- Disguised lay-offs, i.e. force people to do something they dont want to (come into the office every day), a number of employees will choose to leave, and boom you've reduced your numbers, so can avoid the bad publicity of forced redundancies (it never seems to matter to upper management that those that leave first, are those with the best and most desirable skills, leaving a less talented and less engaged workforce).
- Managers being afraid that they'll be for the chopping block, because they cant be SEEN to be managing their subordinates.
- Managers having no idea how to manage people properly and remotely, and so demand to have the people there for them to micromanage.
All you will hear from any company doing this is wishy washy statements about people working better together in the office, but they will never show the metrics that might actually show this. Basically, because they dont exist...