Empire of office workers strikes back against RTO mandates
- Reference: 1748365798
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/05/27/office_workers_ignore_rto_mandate/
- Source link:
Researchers at King’s College London (KCL) and King’s Business School analyzed more than one million observations from the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and some 50,000 responses from the Survey of Working Arrangements and Attitudes (SWAA) UK.
This gave a clear pattern of the trends between early 2022 and the end of 2024, highlighting “growing worker resistance to rigid office mandates”. Just 42 percent [1]said they’d listen to their bosses and go back onsite for five days a week. This is down from the 54 percent that said they’d comply with requests in early 2022.
[2]
The percentage of staff insisting they’d rather look for a new job than return to their current employer’s office full-time rose to 50 percent at the end of last year, up from 40 percent in early 2022.
[3]
[4]
Women were more likely to resist RTO mandates, with 55 percent saying they'd look for a new job and 9 percent ready to quit outright by late 2024. Among men, 43 percent said they'd job hunt, and 8 percent would quit. Among mothers with young children, only 33 percent said they'd comply.
The percentage rates weren’t specified, but the study found black and minority ethnic respondents expressing higher rates of compliance with going back to the classic five-day week on site, “possibly reflecting job insecurity and workplace discrimination,” KCL said.
[5]
Plenty of tech businesses have initiated mandatory policies, including [6]Amazon , [7]Google , [8]Dell , [9]IBM , and [10]Meta . Yet the UK stats show hybrid work has become the norm locally. A little more than a quarter of men and women in the LFS specified home as their main workplace setting in 2022, and this has largely stayed the same ever since.
Yet not all employers are created equally, KCL said:
“There is also evidence to show that employers are less likely to allow fully remote working, with a slight increase in the number of home working policies that permit staff to work from home only one to two days per week.”
[11]'What's the point of me being in my office, just because they want to see me in the office?'
[12]Vodafone: Be in the office 8 days a month or lose bonuses
[13]White House asks millions of govt workers if they would be so kind as to fork right off
[14]AWS boss: Don't want to come back to the office? Go work somewhere else
[15]Now Dell salespeople must be onsite five days a week
SWAA data shows that one in four work remotely at least three days a week and two in five at least once a week.
Taking a look at the wider picture, KCL warns that employers are creating a two-tier system. Tech firms were previously warned they [16]risk losing their best talent if they order employees to work from the office, and there is seemingly [17]no benefit to productivity or the bottom line for corporations that do so.
[18]
As we’ve written about before, bosses can be [19]plagued by productivity paranoia - if they can’t see their personnel, they can’t be sure what they’re doing. Though as we revealed recently, another piece of research found [20]more employees launching start-ups when they worked at home during the pandemic, so maybe some of that paranoia is justified.
An increasing amount of research shows that well-designed hybrid working models offer significant benefits for both employers and employees
Heejung Chung, director of the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at KCL and the lead author of the report, said in a statement:
“An increasing amount of research shows that well-designed hybrid working models offer significant benefits for both employers and employees. Alongside this, there has been a marked shift in attitudes, with workers now seeing flexibility as the norm. Managers need to understand and adapt to this new reality. Rather than forcing a return to pre-pandemic working patterns, organizations should be looking to formalize hybrid models, invest in remote collaboration tools, and set up coordinated in-office days to maximize engagement.
“Where possible, workers should feel emboldened to hold their ground in the face of return-to-office mandates, as the weight of the evidence demonstrating remote working does not harm productivity is growing. In fact, many studies are finding [21]flexible workers tend to work longer and harder compared to those who do not work flexibly – and importantly, those who are able to work remotely tend to be more loyal and committed to their jobs.” ®
Get our [22]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.kcl.ac.uk/giwl/assets/return-to-office-mandates-what-is-at-stake.pdf
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/cxo&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aDY19lU4pQx-mygyLkneGwAAAco&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/cxo&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aDY19lU4pQx-mygyLkneGwAAAco&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/cxo&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aDY19lU4pQx-mygyLkneGwAAAco&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/cxo&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aDY19lU4pQx-mygyLkneGwAAAco&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/20/amazon_mandates_return_to_office/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/08/google_three_day_week_enforcement/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/31/dell_ends_hybrid_work_policy/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/18/ibm_orders_us_sales_staff/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2023/09/27/meta_coughs_181m_to_exit/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/29/wfh_report/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/10/vodafone_be_in_the_office_memo/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/29/us_government_workers_resign_deal/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/18/aws_rto/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/26/dell_sales_staff_full_rto/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/21/proximity_bias_workforce_productivity/
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/02/return_to_office_mandates_do_not_boost_profits/
[18] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/cxo&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aDY19lU4pQx-mygyLkneGwAAAco&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[19] https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/23/microsoft_highlights_productivity_paranoia/
[20] https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/12/remote_work_leads_to_more_startups/
[21] https://www.theregister.com/2020/10/16/work_life_balance/
[22] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Survey responses v. reality.
An issue with regard to the tech of homeworking, may be security. Each homeworker is a potential access point to your servers.
The idea that homeworking is some unique security risk because “each worker is an access point” is laughable. Every employee is an access point no matter where they sit - the difference is, at home, it’s their house.
In an open-plan office? You’ve got contractors, cleaners, delivery people, random interns, visitors - often in buildings with paper-thin badge systems, lax enforcement, and revolving-door policies. Try spotting a stranger slipping a USB stick into a workstation among rows of distracted workers. Good luck.
At home? You instantly know if someone unfamiliar is in your space. And let’s be brutally honest: a worker who’s forced back into the office, miserable, paying £300/month on train fares alone that they can’t afford, drowning in a cost-of-living crisis - they’re arguably more likely to rationalise bending the rules or slipping something to an outsider. Disillusion breeds vulnerability.
It’s not a war between bosses and oppressed proles - it’s a mismatch between corporate nostalgia and cold modern realities. Security risks are about human factors, incentives, and systems, not the postcode of the device connecting to the server. If anything, hybrid work demands better digital security - not physical proximity theatre.
Re: Survey responses v. reality.
"It’s not a war between bosses and oppressed proles - it’s a mismatch between corporate nostalgia and cold modern realities. Security risks are about human factors, incentives, and systems, not the postcode of the device connecting to the server. If anything, hybrid work demands better digital security - not physical proximity theatre"
That should be engraved in stone.
And then all the fuckwit CEOs behind RTO mandates should have their faces smashed against it. But we just know that won't happen, and things like the M&S attack will be used as ammunition to justify RTO.
Re: Survey responses v. reality.
Each homeworker is a potential access point to your servers
If a company is too dumb to implement proper 2FA then it is on them if their servers are compromised, not their employees.
Besides, which is more likely? That someone gets into your HQ who shouldn't be there (getting hired by a custodial company may be all that's required for nearly unfettered access) or someone gets into an employee's home, and bypasses the 2FA that's required for remote but not local access?
Unless a company completely BANS all remote work (even when an employee is traveling on company business) so employees can't access those oh-so-valuable servers AT ALL when they're not in the office, then your supposed point is totally moot. Because whether an employee remotely accesses corporate servers once per year or 5 days a week the risk is the same. It is probably higher in the former case, actually, because they're more likely to have forgotten the procedures and will call the helpdesk - and they'll become used to walking people through the procedure, resetting 2FA codes and so forth that allow people access who shouldn't have it.
previously...
Study finds a quarter of bosses hoped RTO would make employees quit https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/09/rto_quit_study/
The reality is that companies that allow remote now have an expanded talent pool when it comes to hiring. I for one applaud any competitor with a strict RTO mandate.
Cuckoo land
The King’s College study proudly reveals what anyone with a working brain already knew: UK workers are flipping the bird at return-to-office (RTO) mandates - because why on earth would they volunteer for a pay cut just to get stabbed on the way to work?
The article solemnly reports that only 42% would obediently crawl back to their desks five days a week, down from 54% in 2022. What a shock. Have the researchers been on the Tube lately? Have they priced a monthly rail pass? Or are they sipping lattes in an ivory tower, unaware that UK public transport is a rotting corpse of delays, extortionate fares, crumbling infrastructure, and laughable “policing” that shrugs at muggings and assaults?
For the average worker, going back to the office equals taking a pay cut. Between the £300+ monthly rail costs alone, the hours lost to cancellations, and the joy of navigating crime-infested stations where low-level criminals operate with impunity (because real crime happens on X these days according to the police), RTO isn't just inconvenient - it’s financial and health self-harm.
And sure, the article notes higher compliance among minority workers, speculating it’s due to job insecurity and discrimination. But let’s also spell out the dirty little secret: UK businesses increasingly rely on immigrant workers who’ve already been hardened by surviving violent, precarious conditions - and are expected to tolerate three-shift rotas without complaint. It’s a quiet system of modern wage slavery, propped up by management paranoia and a refusal to pay anyone enough to live safely near the office.
Meanwhile, executives are terrified their staff might dare launch startups or, God forbid, do anything meaningful while working remotely. The irony? Remote workers consistently clock longer, harder hours and show more loyalty than their forcibly onsite counterparts.
In short: if bosses want bums in seats, they should start by paying city wages that cover gated-community safety, private transport, and first-world commuting conditions - not demand sacrifices on the altar of nostalgia for open-plan serfdom. Until then, no surprise workers resist. They’re not lazy. They’re just not suicidal.
Re: Cuckoo land
What are these trains you speak off?
My nearest one is 15 miles away. Unless you choose the heritage steam one near me.
Survey responses v. reality.
What people say when asked to take part in surveys and what they do in real life may differ.
Ultimately, the slice of the workforce that home working could be an option for, can already choose. With RTO mandates, the wealthier can and may walk. Some will do what most workers do about most issues: put a peg on their nose and comply.
The UK is an unusual case. Post-Brexit, good staff are difficult to bag, so you might think that they could make demands. But the economy is such a mess, that most people will hang on to any job they can. And companies are folding. The sums just don't add up so easily any more. Britons tend to have fewer cash resources than Americans. Quitting with a mortgage to pay is not an option for many.
An issue with regard to the tech of homeworking, may be security. Each homeworker is a potential access point to your servers. I'm sure malware folk are well aware of this. For workers, being at home may or may not be more convenient. Energy bills here are very high and we don't have air con at home. It may also be regarded as a lower tier of employment, with fewer chances of promotion. Swings and roundabouts.
It's a bit more complicated than a global war between employers and oppressed proles.