Surprising no one but the mgmt teams…

Unispace found that nearly half (42%) of companies with return-to-office mandates witnessed a higher level of employee attrition than they had anticipated. And almost a third (29%) of companies enforcing office returns are struggling with recruitment. In other words, employers knew the mandates would cause some attrition, but they weren’t ready for the serious problems that would result.

Meanwhile, a staggering 76% of employees stand ready to jump ship if their companies decide to pull the plug on flexible work schedules, according to the Greenhouse report. Moreover, employees from historically underrepresented groups are 22% more likely to consider other options if flexibility comes to an end.

In the SHED survey, the gravity of this situation becomes more evident. The survey equates the displeasure of shifting from a flexible work model to a traditional one to that of experiencing a 2% to 3% pay cut.

  • NotAnonymousAtAll@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    In the SHED survey, the gravity of this situation becomes more evident. The survey equates the displeasure of shifting from a flexible work model to a traditional one to that of experiencing a 2% to 3% pay cut.

    Those number seem way too low to me. Just picking some semi-random numbers, let’s assume a 40 hour work week and an average travel time to work and back of 1 hour per day, so 5 hours per week. Being forced to come to the office would then be equivalent to 12.5% more of your time spent to earn the same amount of money. Of course that scales depending on how far away from the workplace you live, but for 3% or 2% to be realistic you would basically have to live right next door.

    • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      1 year ago

      Let’s not even account for the other added expenses of going to work. Like clothes, different food, gas, car repairs, and lost time for flexibility of appointments.

    • Jaysyn@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      WFH saves me ~$4000 per year in gas & wear & tear alone. 4 cyl sedan with a 30 mile round trip.

    • jasondj@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Even if they are next door, who cares. If you’ve got hybrid/remote status, you don’t have to put on pants today. Some days you just don’t want to get out of your pajamas.

      And if you are within walking/biking/no-transfer range, chances are there’s a bunch more other employers in the neighborhood, and several of them will let you work hybrid.

    • HubertManne@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I use 25% (or 5% per day required in office premium). I assume an hour commute. Usually its less but it tends to be close enough. Its a bit of an over estimation but that all is easily covered by things like walking the dog at lunchtime and eating cheaper and healthier. Along with seeing my wife even if I don’t have time to talk there is something about just being around. Oh and using my own bathroom with my prefered bath tissue. No catching other peoples kids crud. Man the list goes on and on.

    • penguin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      People aren’t that logical. Most people feel more pain losing something than never getting it in the first place (eg: rolling back an accidental raise would be worse to someone than not getting the raise at all)

      If you tell people to get back to work or lose 3% pay, you’ll get more takers than offering people a 3% bump. Although they’ll be very disgruntled of course.