We’re perched on the cusp of change for the workplace. One year after the Covid-19 pandemic forced most employees to work from home, the end is in sight. Whether it’s this summer, fall, or in 2022, many companies are now planning—and signaling—how they will proceed when the pandemic is over. One option, though, is trickier to implement than the others.
The choices are three: Remain fully remote, return to fully in-person, or carve out a hybrid of the two. Most companies now have experience—and presumably data—with the first two. They know what to expect. Hybrid, though, is a huge unknown. Expect companies to experiment with hybrid structures that will benefit both the company and its employees. There are some risks. And perhaps the greatest is that this type of workforce creates two classes, with one having greater career benefit or equity than the other.
In Zillow’s fourth-quarter earnings call, CEO Rich Barton said the company will adopt a hybrid model, but that he’s concerned about repercussions. “We must ensure a level playing field for all team members, regardless of their physical location,” Barton said. “There cannot be a two-class system — those in the room being first-class and those on the phone being second-class.”
A January 2021 PWC survey showed that 68% of executives believe employees should be in the office at least three days a week. Employees were less eager: Only 47% of those surveyed said they’d like to be in the office three days a week or more. Presumably, the tech sector will lean further towards fully remote work—especially earlier stage companies—because of the nature of the work.
Hybrid models can range from requiring employees on-site a specific number of days a week or month, to having some teams elect to be 100% remote, while other teams within the same company elect to be 100% onsite. And everything in between. No matter the flavor, though, dividing the workforce into two groups creates the potential for two distinct classes, with one receiving different benefits than the other.
The face-to-face power play
The PWC survey suggests executives are more inclined to opt for in-person work themselves. So if senior managers return to the office, will their employees who don’t be at a disadvantage? As humans, we’re wired to connect best in person. Team members who are onsite may benefit from stronger connections, stoking their career trajectory.
Hybrid Zoom meetings are awkward
Video meetings have been a lifesaver during the pandemic, and we can all agree that the technology has gotten better. However, meetings with some people in the room and others on-screen are especially tricky. Just as schools going to hybrid models find that students in the room don’t get the same experience that those who are remote get—though technically with the same instruction—the same will probably be true for meetings. Training and mentoring activities may be subject to these issues as well.
Pay structures will be tricky
When tech workers fled expensive locales early in the pandemic, a number of companies announced they will adjust compensation downward for those in cheaper cost-of-living zip codes. Sure, remote work has opened up the talent pool by removing location, but when some roles are remote and some aren’t—or the same role could be remote or onsite—adjusting compensation is nothing but tricky.
Onsite work may attract different demographics
Parents of young children may be more attracted to remote work to ease child care issues and reduce commute. These individuals tend to be in a specific age demographic. Conversely, younger and new employees will need more onsite work. How will these often-age-defined situations affect each group’s career?
As companies feel their way forward into hybrid workplaces, there will be misses and course corrections. It’s a good idea, though, to keep a watchful eye on how these changes affect diversity, equity and inclusion, with the goal to maintain a single class: the highly valued employee.