Is it morally wrong to want to work from home?

The tug of war between employees and corporations over working from home or at the office has reached the breaking point, with both sides giving ultimatums to one another.

Randstad has released data representing the ongoing debate on hybrid work between employers and employees. The data has revealed a vast majority (56 per cent) of employees would highly consider quitting if forced to spend more time in the office for work.

Hybrid work a non-negotiable for employees

For most Aussie workers, flexible work or hybrid work is now a non-negotiable when it comes to the conditions of their employment, with 63 per cent making arrangements under the assumption that working from home will remain the status quo.

Aussie workers are prioritising other areas in their career, such as work/life balance (95 per cent) and flexible working hours (87 per cent). Meanwhile, just over half (51 per cent) are totally comfortable being stagnant in their role, forgoing any potential promotions if it means more in-office hours. In fact, three in five Australians are placing career progression in the rear-view mirror altogether.

Pushback from corporations

On the other hand, some corporations are desperate to get workers back in the office on a regular basis. Claims of “moral bankruptcy” from members of the upper echelon of the corporate world have been put on workers who wish to continue to work from home. Tesla chief executive Elon Musk, for example, stated in 2023 that it was “morally wrong” to pursue a working-from-home lifestyle.

“There are some exceptions, but I kind of think the whole notion of work-from-home is a bit like the fake Marie Antoinette quote, ‘Let them eat cake,’” he said. “You’re going to make people who make your food that gets delivered [that] can’t work from home; the people that come fix your house, they can’t work from home, but you can?”

“Does that seem morally right? That’s messed up,” Mr Musk said.

Words and accusations aren’t the only tools corporations are using to persuade workers back to the office. As referenced by Randstad, IBM recently announced that those refusing to return to working from the office will be let go, while Amazon is offering promotions based on office presence.

Ultimatums

As outlined, there is a clear stand-off here with two different ultimatums. On one side, an overwhelming number of employees are threatening desertion if their work/life balance is not abided by, whereas some corporations are already showing people the door if they are not willing to sacrifice this balance. So, who drags who over the centre line?

The founder and managing director at HR Partners by Randstad, David Owens, believes leaders are dwindling and that employers must adapt to their employee’s wants and needs to avoid a shortage.

“Our research shows it’s not only getting harder for employers to navigate the demand for flexible work with a desire for teams to spend more time in office, [but] it’s also becoming more challenging to encourage talent to take on more responsibilities such as management. It’s possible that organisations may face a shortage of leaders as current executives retire. To address this, employers must support and align benefits with what employees want. If managerial roles offered flexible work arrangements, it could well make climbing the ladder more appealing,” said Mr Owens

According to the data, two in five Australian workers (44 per cent) never want to take on a managerial role, which, of course, opens up the possibility of a managerial gap, Mr Owens alludes to. Ensuring a lack of leadership issue does not occur could result in the pendulum swinging towards the work/life balance fully becoming the societal norm.

Kace O'Neill

Kace O'Neill is a Graduate Journalist for HR Leader. Kace studied Media Communications and Maori studies at the University of Otago, he has a passion for sports and storytelling.