Workers are Ignoring RTO Mandates

It may seem like the remote work wars are over. Most companies have introduced “Return to Office” (RTO) policies and we see fewer full-time remote job openings. It may seem like that, but rules are only rules if they’re followed, and it appears a lot of workers are just not obeying these new policies.

A Resume Builder survey found that one in five workers are actively not complying with the new mandates. This is a shocking number mainly because it only counts those who admit to breaking the rules. This behavior ranges from finding work-arounds and loopholes in the policy to blatantly disregarding it and basically daring the company or their boss to do something about it.

In 2025, Thirteen percent of companies were “in-office only” workplaces. This has caused some companies problems in recruiting and maintaining their staff. Paramount/Skydance, for example, lost 600 people when they ended remote and flexible work. Companies that offer flexible or hybrid work are receiving more applications for management-level positions than those with more rigid attendance requirements.

Hybrid work is the policy at most companies now (over 80% allow some flexibility), but the numbers show that’s no guarantee the policies are adhered to. In fact, the policy may not be clearly defined, just left to the manager’s discretion.  Study after study shows that employees (where the work makes sense) prefer a three-day in the office, two days optional work week. This approach has a higher level of compliance than any other arrangement.

It’s not hard to tell if Bob is in the office the required number of days or not, so why do leaders and companies allow this level of non-compliance?

There are a number of reasons:

• Some people (especially during Covid) were hired with the understanding that most of the work would be remote. Circumstances changed, but the terms of employment did not so the rules were stretched to accommodate these people.
• Some managers have cut side-deals with employees based on the quality of their work, personal circumstances, or just plain favoritism.
• If the quality of the work is acceptable, and the team is functioning at a high level, many leaders take an “if it ain’t broke, don’t mess with it,” approach.

Twenty percent is a big number. If that many people are breaking (or at least flaunting) a policy with no consequences, there are one of two reasons (or maybe a bit of both):

• The conflict associated with enforcement would create more problems than it solves.
• The policy doesn’t really matter. It’s not impacting the quality or productivity of the work to an extent that it’s a problem which needs to be solved.

So, either there is a problem and leaders aren’t stepping up to address it, or the policy doesn’t really matter enough to enforce. As a leader, what do you do about that?

Managers should understand their company’s policy. They need clarity on whether these are rules to be rigidly enforced, or guidelines to be followed with flexibility for certain circumstances. They should also know they are supported when they take action.

Secondly, leaders must develop the skills to work in a more flexible (and chaotic) workplace. Are they making good decisions about who is allowed to work where? Are they avoiding conflict which will create larger problems down the road? Do they know how to coach and help people be productive?

A hybrid workplace requires high levels of decision making and confident leadership. What are organizations doing to prepare their leaders for this new world of work?

As leaders, are we comfortable in this new environment? What skills do we need to enhance that are different from what was expected a decade ago?

And what are workers to expect if rules are in place but not enforced?