CEOs managing to raise everyone’s eyebrows from time to time is nothing new. Not long ago the CEOs of SpaceX and Meta had us raising not only our eyebrows but our blood pressures as well. However, this time around, the senior executives of companies such as Apple, Meta, Amazon and Zoom have ruffled feathers by instituting a return-to-work policy in recent months. Throwing this in the face of employees who have gotten comfortable adapting to the flexible work-from-home style or hybrid work style has created a surging wave of anger. But it does not look like the CEOs are backing off either.
The genesis of August 2023 was marked by an ironic event. Zoom CEO Eric Yuan decided to mandate the return of certain employees to the office. While this was an official announcement, a leaked audio from an internal zoom meeting reveals that Yuan wants his employees to be physically present because he is of the firm belief that “remote work did not allow people to build as much trust or be as innovative”, reported the Business Insider. This decision was apparently based on the notion that being physically present in the office environment would foster better collaboration, communication, and a sense of camaraderie among the employees, ultimately leading to increased creativity and productivity. However, none of this seems to be compatible with the brand-image of Zoom. Not to forget that they cashed in heavily from work being remote and conducted via Zoom. Before the pandemic, not many people were familiar with Zoom, but during the lockdowns, it became a common tool used by millions of people for everyday activities like virtual meetings and communication. It transformed into a superstar, thanks to remote working patterns. Therefore,this sudden pivot from Zoom’s end has thrown most employees into a fit of fury.
A tug-o-war
Eric Yuan put his beliefs into practice by implementing a new rule. Starting August 3rd, Zoom introduced a policy stating that employees living within 50 miles of a Zoom office must come to work in the office for a minimum of two days every week. And whoever did not want to abide by the rules were welcome to resign, with the blessing of Eric Yuan. A similar sentiment was shared by tech giants such as Amazon, Apple and Meta.
Many higher-ups placed trust in their assumption that employees would eventually return to the way things used to be and that they would happily return back to their office spaces. However, since everyone has now transitioned into a new normal, employees are feeling empowered to resist the directives to return to the office.
To illustrate, when Amazon’s CEO Andy Jassy stated that employees must come back to the office for three days each week, Amazon’s tech workers composed an internal document urging company leaders to reconsider this requirement. Similarly, Walt Disney Co.’s CEO Bob Iger declared that many corporate employees at Disney should return to the office four days a week, prompting more than 2,000 of these employees to sign a petition asking for a reconsideration of this decision.
Furthermore, Starbucks instructed its corporate staff to be present in the office for a minimum of three days weekly, citing the need to rejuvenate its headquarters and regional offices. The outcome was a notable backlash from the employees. Even Apple hopped on this ship where the senior leads requested the workers to come back to office at least three days a week. CEO Tim Cook explained that this decision was mainly to reinstate “in-person collaboration”. The reactions were similar to the previous incidents where the employees fought back and issued a petition which delineated how employees can do ‘exceptional work’ from home.
A significant number of employees hold a different perspective from company executives when it comes to working in the office. Research indicates that many employees are not as enthusiastic about returning to in-person work. They argue that remote work offers them the advantage of achieving a better balance between their work and personal lives, particularly when dealing with responsibilities like taking care of children or elderly family members. It also helps them save money that would otherwise be spent on commuting and professional attire. Additionally, remote work is seen as a way to compensate for perceived lower salaries or a lack of opportunities for career growth. Many employees find that working remotely enables them to be more productive throughout the day.
This sentiment is highlighted by a recent survey conducted by Microsoft, which revealed that 52 percent of employees express a desire to continue working in a hybrid or remote setup for the entirety of their careers.
But things have gotten ugly
Here is the picture.
Amazon’s chief human-resources representative dismissed an internal petition that around 30,000 employees had signed, which voiced concerns about the company’s plan for returning to the office. At Apple, employee attendance is being monitored, and there have been warnings of consequences for those who don’t adhere to the requirement of working from the office for at least three days each week. Elon Musk sent an email to Twitter employees at an early hour, 2:30 a.m., in March, reminding them that the company’s policy mandates their presence in the office and asserting that being in office is not an optional choice.
More recently, Chipotle informed its employees that they would need to come to the office four days a week, as reported by Bloomberg. Previously, the fast-food chain had stipulated a three-day office attendance policy. This change was announced in late May. In another incident from May, groups of Amazon’s corporate workers organised walkouts, partly as a response to express their opposition to the company’s plans regarding returning to the office.
The reason why it has gotten ugly is not because employers don’t have valid reasons for wanting their employees back in the cubicles. It is true that activities such as collaboration, mentoring and culture building flow smoothly in an in-person context rather than a remote one. On the other hand, the reasons of the employees as to why they don’t want to come back to office are also legitimate. The problem here is the lack of compromise and the way that most companies are taking a cookie-cutter approach to this problem. For example, Amazon’s return to work policy was updated where if employees fail to live up to the company’s in-office attendance requirements, they can be terminated. Meta followed suit and implemented a similar mandate. Additionally, the requirements mentioned in the new mandate (released by Meta) include the use of employee badge swipe to keep track of attendance and the workers are expected to display where they are physically, at all times. Extreme measures such as these can adversely affect the trust that employees place in their workplace.
While on some fronts there is positive feedback about returning to the office where some employees genuinely enjoy being there, some are still adamantly against showing up at the office without an apparent reason, especially when they can get the same work done in better quality, when working from home. This stalemate situation needs to be broken, but in attempting to do so, a continued power struggle is determining how companies are taking actions and enacting policies. Like the ultimatums that were mentioned above. Amidst the prolonged confusion, the many sides that exist in this struggle show that a solution which appeases both parties does not exist in the foreseeable future. Especially because the employers forget to ask what the employees want and the employees don’t want to succumb to the wants of their employers.
(Sandunlekha Ekanayake)