For most of my life (until I wrote this post), I thought the seven diminutive laborers sang "Off to work we go." This was all in that eclectic and entertaining Grimm classic focused on parental (guardian) abuse, treachery, breaking and entering, poisoning, and worse. What a great kid's story, huh?
In fact, though, they do not sing "off to work," but only "It's home from work, we go." There is conjecture on the internet that the "off to" trope comes from a line earlier in the story about heading "off to work." It is amazing that one can become so convinced of falsity.
Nonetheless, the song conveys the challenge of the big commute. Perhaps it is better if we can sing along in route, or perhaps it is the camaraderie of commuting in a group activity, a common experience, a touchstone of commiserative experience? No, nobody really "likes" to commute, though some deal with it better than others.
The main point is that the time seems to have come for "off to work." The age of virtual employment dawned earlier this century and blossomed in the Great Panic. Remember when anyone suggesting that the virus was man-made was derided and insulted by the keyboard cowboys? The CIA now concludes a lab leak is a "more likely" cause than some transmission from animals as so long insisted by the experts.
Previous posts about virtual work are listed at the end of this post, and Virtual had quite a following. The thought of its diminishment came to me recently when a colleague expressed disdain and disappointment that a family member was being ordered back to the office.
The sentiments there were about
- Wasted time
- Unnecessary commuting expense
- Unwanted wardrobe expense
- Illogic and unpopularity
- Maturity and productivity
The bottom line is that every virtual employee believes she/he is more productive, more economical, and thus more useful than if she/he had to commute. Most managers I have spoken with feel that employees are more productive, more engaged, and more useful if they are in the office. This argument has as much chance of an amiable conclusion as one about the relative merits of SEC football between fans of any of those teams and any from the Big Ten, Big 12, or ACC (You could more readily get Gutfeld and Whoopi to agree on something).
But, the "Great Comeback" (c) is on. In 2024 such businesses as Amazon, the Washington Post, UPS, and AT&T abandoned remote work or curtailed it, according to Inc. Magazine, The experts consulted for that story are adamant in their remote-work fandom. Nonetheless, there are some concessions that hybrid work is the majority category of virtual work, and true-blue virtual work is diminishing. There appear to be few truly, fully remote workers out there, but they do exist. True virtual seem to share characteristics - highly educated, very motivated, and self-actualizing.
Then came January and a change of administrations in Washington. The news noted that federal workers will return to the office in significant numbers in 2025. The Independent reported that one of the first executive decisions in the new administration was the end of most virtual work in the federal government. Some agencies have reportedly already begun recalling workers. The pejorative and negative comments about government workers are too frequent and too stereotypical.
Reports on AT&T's return to office in December included various employee complaints. A primary gripe was that "there wouldn't be 'one-for-one' seating" for the workers. This means employees do not have a desk or office assigned to them. There are so many desks and they go to the first who arrive. Those who arrive later may have to use a conference table seat, the breakroom, or other unexpected accommodation.
Some are arriving very early for the perks; but, do they eschew that next cup of coffee to keep from losing their seat? One report suggested that workers were also therefore banned from putting up pictures or leaving belongings in those workstations.
Some also complained about limited elevator access, vehicle parking, and other accouterments. There is a theme to the reporting, suggestive of some employee dissatisfaction with the return to office policy. The press reporting this seems sympathetic to the workers and the post-Great Panic "Great Inconvenience" (C) of 2025.
The complaints and criticisms may be driving the worker dissatisfaction or may be ancillary to the main issue - money. Some report that the return to the office costs the employee the equivalent of a month's groceries ($504.00). After the last few years of historic inflation, a month's groceries can be quite an investment. My old friend claims persistently that "it's all about the Benjamins." I always thought that was a boy band, but now I get it. (by the way, if you decide to name your band that - (c). If you decide to name yourselves The Great Panic or The Great Inconvenience, or The Great Comeback, same - (c)).
Some see a drive to collegiality and team interaction. Others see heavy-handed management bent on control over contribution. There are many voices presently in the marketplace of ideas. That said, at the end of the day, there is no mandate on either side. The employer may certainly define the scope and process of the work. The employee is free to engage in that model or to choose other paths. Each side is free to choose.
Some will decry that perspective. They will insist that the employer has a disproportionate influence on the rules of any particular employment. That is simply supply and demand, which fluctuates. During the Panic, many did not work, and wages and accommodations like remote work increased. Labor was clearly in a positive negotiating position.
However, critics will stress that the working person now has little leverage or influence over the terms, space, or pace of work. Certainly, that might be a worthy observation within any workplace, and yet the employee could find other opportunities within an industry or profession, seek a different niche, or change employment entirely. Further, the more skilled the worker, the more accommodating the employer may have to be. Again, supply and demand.
What is the right answer? What is the real truth? As we so often conclude, the correct answer is "it depends." It will depend on the employer, the employee, and the circumstances. There will unlikely be any commonality or consistency. Some will be virtual, some hybrid, and some on-premises. Some will thrive in this mode or that. Others will struggle in the mode they choose or must adopt. Some will flourish and stay, others languish and merely subsist. The outcomes will be individual, imperfect, and perhaps at times incendiary.
The bottom line is that the trend is turning from virtual work and for now, many workers will have to adapt to the challenges of in-person work. From all of us who persevered through the Great Panic at our office desks, doing the daily business, with our daily commute, Welcome Back! Oh, and Heigh Ho!
Previous posts on virtual or hybrid work:
Presenteeism and the Coming Divide (June 2021)
Evolving Work Challenges (January 2022)
Remediating (February 2022)
Been Robbed (June 2022)
Too Sick to Commute? (July 2022)
Quiet Quitting (September 2022)
Productivity is Down (December 2022)
Generation Z Osmosis (April 2023)
Quitting Remote? (May 2023)
Virtual Productivity (August 2023)
Virtual Productivity (August 2023)
