Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy’s recent advocacy for federal employees to return to the office full-time has sparked conversations about the future of work. In a recent post on X (formerly Twitter), Musk shared his perspective, claiming that remote workers are “just pretending to work.” His comments highlight the ongoing debate about workplace dynamics in a rapidly changing world.
While the call for in-office work may resonate with some, the realities of today’s workforce suggest a more nuanced approach is needed. Companies that have embraced hybrid work models, including many of our customers, are finding success through flexibility and thoughtful balance.
Here’s why mandating a full-time return to the office could present challenges for federal employees:
The Scale of the Mandate: How 2.2 Million Federal Employees Are Affected
Top talent has options, and they know their worth. In a competitive labor market, forcing employees into rigid work environments risks alienating the very people organizations can’t afford to lose. A 2022 study by McKinsey found that flexibility was a top three reason employees chose to leave their jobs.
Workers value autonomy—whether that’s deciding where they work, how they manage their schedules, or finding the best balance for their personal lives. Removing that autonomy signals distrust and a lack of adaptability, two qualities that top performers are unlikely to tolerate.
Forcing RTO isn’t just a battle over location—it’s a battle over culture. Do you want a culture that respects employees’ needs and empowers them to do their best work? Or one that prioritizes optics over outcomes?
What Productivity Looks Like in Federal Agencies Post-COVID
Let’s talk data. Studies consistently show that forced RTO policies often yield poor results. A 2023 Gallup survey found that fully remote and hybrid employees reported higher engagement and lower burnout compared to those working exclusively in the office.
The productivity argument also doesn’t hold water. According to research from Stanford, remote employees are, on average, 13% more productive than their in-office counterparts. They also report higher job satisfaction and are less likely to leave.
These are not marginal gains. They represent a fundamental shift in how work gets done. Ignoring these insights isn’t just shortsighted—it’s bad business.
What Happens to Office Space After Federal Employee Return to Office Mandates?
Forcing federal employees back into the office raises another question: what about all that extra office space? During the pandemic, organizations rapidly adapted to remote work, leaving billions of dollars in commercial real estate sitting underutilized.
Imagine the opportunity here. Instead of stubbornly clinging to the “old normal,” agencies and companies could repurpose or sell excess office space. Doing so could save taxpayers money and free up prime real estate for housing or other uses.
For private companies, downsizing office footprints has already become a cost-cutting strategy. It’s time for federal agencies to follow suit, rather than doubling down on outdated models of occupancy.
The Challenges of Motivating Federal Employees to Return to Office
In the private sector, employees often share in the upside of their contributions—through stock options, performance bonuses, or other incentives tied to the company’s success. This creates a direct alignment between individual effort and organizational outcomes, fostering motivation and a sense of ownership.
But in government roles, this dynamic is missing. Federal employees don’t receive equity or financial incentives linked to organizational success. Instead, their compensation is fixed, regardless of how well the agency performs.
Nicholas Bloom, a Professor of Economics at Stanford University and a leading authority on workplace practices, outlines the risks of enforcing a rigid return-to-office policy:
“A huge challenge is also how will the Federal government enforce this? As the Romans long noted, a ‘bad law is an unenforceable law.’ In this case, they face problems from unions threatening mass legal challenges, lack of IT systems to monitor who is in the office, and lack of support from middle managers. With most middle managers presumably against the 5-day RTO, they will have a Swiss-cheese policy, with holes everywhere and exemptions the norm. This is going to create chaos, inequality, and a massive hit to culture. This will get so bad maybe 10% of the employees will quit—which I think is their plan—but the remaining 90% will be hugely demotivated. That seems like a poor way to execute on their visions for new government policy.”
This makes flexibility even more critical. If government leaders want to attract and retain top talent—especially those who could easily transition to the private sector—they need to think beyond traditional incentives. Offering flexibility is one way to bridge the gap, providing a perk that doesn’t cost extra taxpayer dollars but delivers significant value to employees.
The Invisible Hours: What You’ll Gain in Hybrid Environments
Hybrid work environments don’t just offer flexibility—they also unlock hidden productivity. Parents who can log on while their kids are napping, employees who catch up on emails during sick days, or night owls who get their best ideas after hours—all of these moments contribute to a richer, more dynamic workday.
By forcing employees into rigid 9-to-5 schedules, organizations lose the invisible hours—the time employees willingly give when work is no longer constrained by location. Hybrid work isn’t just about working from home; it’s about designing a system where employees can contribute their best at the times and places that work for them.
Elon Musk’s claim that remote workers are “pretending to work” misses this entirely. It assumes that productivity is a direct function of presence, which anyone who’s ever sat through a two-hour status meeting knows isn’t true.
What’s the Alternative to a Return to Office Mandate?
So, what’s the solution? It’s not rocket science (pun intended). The answer lies in embracing hybrid models that prioritize outcomes over optics.
• Trust and autonomy: Let employees decide how and where they work best.
• Rethink office space: Use the office as a collaborative hub, not a daily destination.
• Measure impact, not attendance: Focus on results, not hours logged in a cubicle.
As Brian Elliott, executive adviser and coauthor of How the Future Works, points out, “Elon and Vivek have said the quiet part out loud about return-to-office policies: they’re designed to make people quit. Unfortunately, it’s unlikely to be the right people or for the right reasons. The smarter move would be to shed excess real estate and focus on accountability and performance, not outdated mandates. The damage done by forcing out dedicated civil servants, including veterans, women, and military spouses, will be felt by everyone who relies on them for health and safety—essentially all of us.”
Elliott expands on this idea in his recent MIT Sloan article, emphasizing the importance of flexible work in meeting both organizational goals and employee needs.
Organizations that get this right—like Trip.com, which saw significant gains from embracing hybrid work—are already reaping the benefits. They’re attracting top talent, saving money, and driving innovation. Forcing RTO may feel like a return to stability, but it’s really a step backward. The world has changed, and clinging to old ways of working isn’t just stubborn—it’s bad strategy.
Let’s learn from the companies thriving in this new era of work and leave outdated ideas where they belong: in the past.
