The rise in just about every natural resource needed for human survival, the tension between the workplace and remote workers have grown to a feverish pitch. With CEO’s demanding associates to return to the office, studies show that most corporations are operating at 40% of pre-pandemic levels for full-time employees on campus. From executives, to blue collar, employees are turning in resignations in lieu of returning back to the workplace.
Due to a booming jobs market, the leverage is in the hands of the employee, opposed to the employers. In many workplaces, workers have gone as far as signing petitions, boycotting mandates, and even organizing strikes in the wake of a return to work ultimatum being placed on return to campus. With the current rise in fuel prices, millions of workers vied for working remote to offset the costs associated with a commute.
The official end of the pandemic was sounded by a third of Americans believing the sars-CoV-2, the prerequisite virus for covid-19 is behind us due to the vast majority vaccinated or previously infected. Many large corporations have blown the whistle for associates to return back to the workplace to conduct business as usual. The projections of a possible recession in the fourth quarter of 2022 has spread worry that failure to return employees back to in-person work will further impact the overall volatility of the global economy.
Although studies have proven remote workers have proven successful results in the past two years with 100% remote and hybrid schedules, employers argue that on-site employees are 20% more productive. The reasons given for this premise is the question of morality, social collaborations, and the ability to innovate through the eyes of visual prognosis. CEO’s persist that the traditional work module was more effective than working remotely: however, employee’s bark back with, “under what conditions.” The days of the traditional work setting will be changed forever with no return date of the days of old.
The integrity of the traditional 9-5 workday is in jeopardy! While many large corporations have made it clear that a return to the workplace is imminent, the rebellious pushback from employees from all sectors has fueled the revolt. The standoff between the traditionalist and the opportunist has struck a chord that has resonated to the halls of congress. A cry for freedom, as fundamental as the crack in the liberty bell from remote workers goes unheard by the corporations that argue a significant blow to the very infrastructure that built the Constitution.
The standoff between companies demanding on-campus work, and the millions of workers who wish to remain remote has escalated to a feverish pitch. Some employers have adapted a hybrid virtual model in which 2-3 days are spent on campus, with 2-3 days’ work from home. Does such a model yield promising results in lower cost, increased productivity, or even a greater employee learning experience? Are we losing sight of the meaning of work? Wiktionary defines work as, ‘an effort expended on a particular task, while a sustained human effort to overcome obstacles and achieve a result’. While the benefits of working remotely may be substantial, the hybrid model has produced mixed results which favors the premise that working on-site creates a much needed bond among employees and employers.
Now that the United States is considered to be in a post pandemic, the organizational structure of the workplace has been disrupted and fragmented. The norm is no-longer the norm. The standards of interaction and behavior have been substituted for a culture of accessibility and convenience. The in person need of social cohesion, trust, communication, and community is a thing of the past. The organizational structure that once was, is disenfranchised and so are the workers who choose to work remote. One may argue that remote work breaks down the very fibers that the employers have worked so hard to build in company mission statements worldwide.
At the end of the day, each employer must weigh the pros and cons of their bottom line, viability, and direction of the company. Your thoughts?
