During COVID companies suddenly found themselves able to offer remote working where it hadn’t previously been on offer. That’s changed over the past 2 or so years, with most places I’m aware of moving back from a fully remote situation to either some sort of hybrid, or even full time office attendance. For example last week Amazon announced a full return to office, having already pulled remote-hired workers in for 3 days a week.

I’ve seen a lot of folk stating they’ll never work in an office again, and that RTO is insanity. Despite being lucky enough to work fully remotely (for a role I’d been approached about before, but was never prepared to relocate for), I feel the objections from those who are pro-remote often fail to consider the nuances involved. So let’s talk about some of the reasons why companies might want to enforce some sort of RTO.

Real estate value

Let’s clear this one up first. It’s not about real estate value, for most companies. City planners and real estate investors might care, but even if your average company owned their building they’d close it in an instant all other things being equal. An unoccupied building costs a lot less to maintain. And plenty of companies rent and would save money even if there’s a substantial exit fee.

Occupancy levels

That said, once you have anyone in the building the equation changes. If you’re having to provide power, heating, internet, security/front desk staff etc, you want to make sure you’re getting your money’s worth. There’s no point heating a building that can seat 100 for only 10 people present. One option is to downsize the building, but that leads to not being able to assign everyone a desk, for example. No one I know likes hot desking. There are also scheduling problems about ensuring there are enough desks for everyone who might turn up on a certain day, and you’ve ruled out the option of company/office wide events.

Coexistence builds relationships

As a remote worker I wish it wasn’t true that most people find it easier to form relationships in person, but it is. Some of this can be worked on with specific “teambuilding” style events, rather than in office working, but I know plenty of folk who hate those as much as they hate the idea of being in the office. I am lucky in that I work with a bunch of folk who are terminally online, so it’s much easier to have those casual conversations even being remote, but I also accept I miss out on some things because I’m just not in the office regularly enough. You might not care about this (“I just need to put my head down and code, not talk to people”), but don’t discount it as a valid reason why companies might want their workers to be in the office. This often matters even more for folk at the start of their career, where having a bunch of experience folk around to help them learn and figure things out ends up working much better in person (my first job offered to let me go mostly remote when I moved to Norwich, but I said no as I knew I wasn’t ready for it yet).

Coexistence allows for unexpected interactions

People hate the phrase “water cooler chat”, and I get that, but it covers the idea of casual conversations that just won’t happen the same way when people are remote. I experienced this while running Black Cat; every time Simon and I met up in person we had a bunch of useful conversations even though we were on IRC together normally, and had a VoIP setup that meant we regularly talked too. Equally when I was at Nebulon there were conversations I overheard in the office where I was able to correct a misconception or provide extra context. Some of this can be replicated with the right online chat culture, but I’ve found many places end up with folk taking conversations to DMs, or they happen in “private” channels. It happens more naturally in an office environment.

It’s easier for bad managers to manage bad performers

Again, this falls into the category of things that shouldn’t be true, but are. Remote working has increased the ability for people who want to slack off to do so without being easily detected. Ideally what you want is that these folk, if they fail to perform, are then performance managed out of the organisation. That’s hard though, there are (rightly) a bunch of rights workers have (I’m writing from a UK perspective) around the procedure that needs to be followed. Managers need organisational support in this to make sure they get it right (and folk are given a chance to improve), which is often lacking.

Summary

Look, I get there are strong reasons why offering remote is a great thing from the company perspective, but what I’ve tried to outline here is that a return-to-office mandate can have some compelling reasons behind it too. Some of those might be things that wouldn’t exist in an ideal world, but unfortunately fixing them is a bigger issue than just changing where folk work from. Not acknowledging that just makes any reaction against office work seem ill-informed, to me.