Opinion
Why workers are rejecting five-day-a-week office jobs
By Sarah Green Carmichael
It’s hard to hire good people, and at some companies, it’s harder than others.
New data from Scoop Technologies, reported by Bloomberg, finds that firms that require employees to come to the office every day are adding employees at a slower rate than those that offer flexibility.
Workers aren’t excited about roles that lack flexibility.Credit: Peter Rae
“Companies with one-day-a-week rules expanded staff by almost 5 per cent over the past year,” writes Mia Gindis of the findings, “compared with 2.6 per cent at five-days-a-week businesses”.
The clear implication: a five-day-a-week office job is a last choice for many workers.
Of course, there are caveats. A sudden increase in the unemployment rate might make workers less picky.
But even if the unemployment rate does increase, elite talent will retain a lot of leverage. Plus, job hunters just aren’t excited about roles that lack flexibility. Although a desire for work-life balance is a big driver, the reasons for their reluctance go much deeper.
First, there’s what a five-day-a-week mandate says about a company’s culture. It sends a powerful signal, and not a positive one. Candidates are left wondering why it’s so important to senior managers that they show up in person all the time. Are there performance problems at the company? Do leaders not trust their staffers? Is it the kind of place where there will be a lot of arbitrary rules? Do employees have less autonomy?
Second, applicants looking for management roles are worried about getting stuck in jobs where, instead of mentoring and coaching their employees, they spend much of their energy taking attendance and enforcing policies they may not agree with.
Moreover, they’re worried about their ability to hire down the line: who will they be able to recruit if they must limit their search to people in the immediate area who are willing to commute five days a week? As I heard from one professional in the energy industry, the most highly qualified people typically have other options, and they are choosing hybrid roles.
Perhaps these slow-to-hire, five-day-a-week companies simply aren’t offering enough money. Executives serious about pushing a five-day-a-week policy may be able to nudge existing employees to come into the office more, but to attract new talent, they will have to pay handsomely.
The pandemic accelerated changes in the ways in which people live, work and relax.Credit: Phil Carrick
Just how handsomely? Recently, several mid-career men I know were discussing whether they would ever (yes: ever) take a job that required them to go back to the office five days a week. These are skilled professionals; they work in fields such as technology and finance where the labour pool is often tight. One said he would never go back into an office full-time for any amount of money. One said he’d consider it for double his current salary. A third wasn’t sure but had just withdrawn from a final-round interview for a fully in-person job that would have added more than $US50,000 ($75,000) to his annual compensation. He described the boss’s location expectations as one of several red flags.
Yes, they want to maintain some semblance of work-life balance. All are fathers and enjoy spending time with their children. They also know that accepting a strict in-office mandate could hinder their partners’ careers. (It’s not clear that executives pushing strict RTO policies always understand that they may be pitting spouse against spouse.) And they fear that spending five days a week commuting to an office would gobble up the rare moments they manage to carve out for exercise.
Are they speaking from a position of privilege? Yes. But with their credentials and skills, not to mention partners who share the breadwinning, they can afford to be choosy.
For them and so many other job candidates, the reluctance to accept a new job that requires five days of in-person time reflects a deeper shift. For decades, employees who wanted flexibility had to build an ironclad case that they deserved it, and even so, managers often refused. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Employers need to have very good reasons, and perhaps very deep pockets, to preemptively deny employees flexibility.
The sooner HR managers and senior executives recognise that, the easier they’ll find it to fill those open roles.
Bloomberg
The Business Briefing newsletter delivers major stories, exclusive coverage and expert opinion. Sign up to get it every weekday morning.