Ending the Work From Home “Free for All” Will Not Be Free

The Wall Street Journal recently wrote about Amazon's return-to-office mandate. Far from a “Free for All” for employees, work-from-home is strategic for employers.

?

The trend to push employees back into the office doesn’t align with our experience at all, either as employers or recruiters. At Cambridge we were way ahead of the curve by hiring 100% remote employees since the late 90’s. Even back then we saw that the best way to attract and keep top talent was to provide them with an environment that allowed them a comfortable, sustainable work life balance.

?

Our employees are free to attend teacher conferences or pediatric appointments during the day. They can squeeze in a workout and walk the dog, though they are required to give us a heads up when they step away from their desks for more than 30 minutes or so. We use every available technology to stay in touch all during the workday with calls, emails, Slack DMs, and collaborations in Google drive. We also have regular face-to-face gatherings so that the team can enjoy a personal relationship as well. This freedom and flexibility has allowed our employees the peace of mind to know they are available when emergencies arise at home and provides them the time and energy savings of not getting dressed in professional clothing and grinding through a daily commute.

?

As a result, when they work, they really work. They are focused and “on it” because their attention doesn’t have to be split.? The respect we show for them as individuals with lives outside of work has engendered loyalty and commitment to the company and the team. I truly believe they work harder, and bring more passion and willingness to go above and beyond because they appreciate the whole life that work-from-home allows.

?

If we converted to an in-office requirement, we would lose virtually everyone who makes us great and finding new talent to replace them would be extremely difficult. Which leads me to attracting talent…

?

As recruiters, we see first-hand every day that there is an EXTREME difference between the market interest in positions that allow hybrid or remote conditions vs those that require full-time office attendance. With the exception of roles such as manufacturing, where an employee must be on site to do their job, our clients who do not offer remote options are at an immediate and substantial disadvantage in a competitive hiring landscape.?

?

Our clients look to us to find passive candidates who excel in their field. Anyone at the top of their profession will have higher expectations about what a company can offer them in the way of career development, compensation and, notably, work-life balance. The quality of a company’s employees has a direct impact on productivity. Turning away/turning off excellent workers who are not willing to give up their home office option will result in a much smaller talent pool, directly impacting productivity.

?

I will be watching to see if Amazon gets the results they were hoping for or if a year from now, employees are packing their offices and moving back home.

?

I’d love to hear from anyone who shares or disagrees with my opinion.