Three compelling reports show just how damaging RTO mandates are turning out to be.
Surprising no one but the mgmt teams…
Unispace found that nearly half (42%) of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated. And almost a third (29%) of companies enforcing office returns are struggling with recruitment. In other words, employers knew the mandates would cause some attrition, but they weren’t ready for the serious problems that would result.
Meanwhile, a staggering 76% of employees stand ready to jump ship if their companies decide to pull the plug on flexible work schedules, according to the Greenhouse report. Moreover, employees from historically underrepresented groups are 22% more likely to consider other options if flexibility comes to an end.
In the SHED survey, the gravity of this situation becomes more evident. The survey equates the displeasure of shifting from a flexible work model to a traditional one to that of experiencing a 2% to 3% pay cut.
Oh it's been very damaging and a major reason for high staff turnover. Since COVID I have worked in transactional finance roles where the staff turnover rate has been has high as 95% - meaning that for every 20 hires, only one would stay with the company beyond twelve months.
A trend I noticed is that companies which refuse to embrace remote working will greatly struggle to hire staff.
It's more baffling how a lot of companies respond to these issues not by raising wages to market levels or improving working conditions/workloads, but by buying the team pizzas every month or two, pushing tighter RTO mandates and adding lengthier notice periods into new contracts.
COVID-19 had one saving grace and that was proving that many roles could be performed remotely. The pandemic has made remote working an expectation of today's workforce that corporations have either embraced or fought long and hard to reverse. It's the companies that embrace remote work which are going to thrive.
Who knows, that may be a good thing in the long run. We don't need ludicrously expensive luxury office space, which my city is full of. But you know what my city desperately needs? Homes. Bristol has the second-highest property prices in all of the UK behind London. Our rents are quickly approaching London levels because all the Londoners are fleeing the capital to clog up our housing market.
I can't even imagine accepting an employment offer that requires a notice period; it'd be a pretty good indicator that the employer's attrition rates are high.
In Germany 3 months are standard, from both sides. It is a good thing, because they cannot just put you on the street by tomorrow, but have to pay for another three months. This goes vice versa. Is that any different in the states?
In the united states, it is customary for a leaving employee to give 2 weeks notice, but a firing employer does not usually give any notice at all. They do just put you out on the street tomorrow.
Can't speak for the whole country but my employment is at-will, meaning it can be terminated by either side at any moment with no notice.
It is considered polite and relatively standard to give two weeks' notice prior to leaving your job, but there's no requirement in any of the jobs I've had.
Of course, employers don't have that same "polite standard" of two weeks, it's not unheard of for people to be fired on the spot. Though it's definitely unusual. For broader layoffs, it's pretty common to get several weeks of notice and pay.
I'm in Canada, and typically an employee will give two weeks as a minimum, more in some circumstances. Employer's requirements vary by province, and may require notice or severance pay.
California has the warn act which is supposed to mandate an employer to either provide notice or give 90 days compensation. It's not always followed and not always applicable, but it's similar to what you're talking about.
In our case it's slightly better for the employee though, because nobody can force you to continue working here. It's customary to give two weeks though, and that's generally followed so that you can use previous employers as a reference.
Yeah, I think those go hand in hand. The kind of leadership that would push RTO is the kind that frequently would also do other bad things (or let their managers).