Is remote working all that it seems?

As we stand at the intersection of technological growth and the evolving landscape of a post-pandemic world, it's undeniable that the traditional office model has undergone profound transformation in recent years. Pre-pandemic, flexible or hybrid working was predominantly the exception rather than the norm. And as we move ever further away from the pandemic, there’s a clear divide between employers and employees over working arrangements.

A recent tribunal case may now help to provide guidance for employers, especially those wishing to prioritise in-person working and meeting resistance from employees. In Wilson v Financial Conduct Authority, ?Ms Wilson brought a claim against her employer for refusing her request to work from home permanently, and the judge has ruled in favour of the employer. Wilson's story walks through the shift towards flexible work arrangements. The pandemic set a precedent, challenging the traditional notion of a centralised office environment, and pushing organisations to rethink their approach to work. Once considered a temporary measure, remote working has become a lasting fixture in our professional lives.

But is remote working the best solution for employees?

The case highlights the challenges faced by those navigating the remote landscape, prompting us to consider the irreplaceable benefits that physical workspaces bring. Such as the positive effects on employee well-being; being physically in the workspace allows for well-being check-ins that might not hold the same value virtually. As an advocate for in-person working, I firmly believe that the office is so much more than just a place to work—it is a hub of collaboration, innovation, and shared purpose.

With the new Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Bill coming into effect in April, employees will have the right to request flexible working arrangements from day 1 of employment. However, Wilson’s case stands to hold a unique position for employers, who can now feel reassured when requesting employees return to in-person working, for the benefit of employees and their business.

Peninsula’s founder and CEO Peter Done has spoken on this issue in his regular column in The Times, saying about employees returning to the workplace, ‘I believe it is impossible to build a good company culture with everyone working at home in isolation. Creativity, camaraderie, and productivity all suffer.’

While some businesses can certainly operate on a remote working model, this is far and few between. For the vast majority, it’s better to be physically together. And, of course, there are many businesses where remote working just isn’t possible, with one of the arguments against it being around a so-called ‘two-tier’ employment structure. It is much easier to create a culture of support and personal development when employees or varying levels are engaged in the same space.

Keeping employees in mind, maintaining a healthy work-life balance is also key. Having separate spaces for work-life and home-life provides a boundary that may be blurred working remotely and thus having negative effects on employee’s mental health.

Though employees have the right to request a flexible working arrangement, this tribunal ruling highlights how employers are first and foremost able to decide what is best for their business and their employees.

The key takeaway from this case is that of what remote work cannot offer, the inherent need for human connection and also the negative mental effects this can have long-term working in silo. ?Though we may have adapted with virtual collaboration tools and flexible schedules to an extent, it is crucial to recognise the importance of fostering a sense of community that in-person working brings verses the challenges that working remotely has. As we contemplate the future of work, let's not underestimate the value of the physical workspace; where innovation, collaboration and a focus on well-being come together to propel us to success.