Link to the Original Article

• One of the main concerns raised with the rise of remote and hybrid work is work equity.

• Forty-three percent of workers expressed concern that working remotely would harm their development and career progression.

• Recent findings argue that the shift to remote and hybrid work has worsened equity in some instances, while reducing existing biases in others.

Remote and hybrid work could potentially become the primary modality of work. Despite the various benefits offered by these work models, there are growing concerns regarding the possible negative ramifications of these changes.  

Some of these concerns are specific to equity.  

For example, a recent report from Poly suggests that the massive shift over to remote and hybrid work modalities has highlighted the need for assurance that the gains made in work equity over the past several decades are not lost through this enormous change. 

To what degree should we worry about losing ground on improvements in work equity? To determine the answer to that question, we need to look at how it has already affected it.  

Work equity during the COVID-19 pandemic 

According to a recent article published in the Harvard Business Review, the results on equity in the face of work shifting mostly over to hybrid and remote modalities has been “mixed.”  

On the one hand, these changes have, in some cases, been proven to worsen equity outcomes. On the other, these changes have, in some cases, reduced existing biases. 

The situation, therefore, is not cut and dry.  

It is not entirely clear that remote work will worsen or improve existing inequities. Given this uncertainty, however, vigilance is warranted. It should be an axiom that anything gone unchecked will worsen. Even if the results are “mixed,” that’s all the more reason to pay attention to future outcomes.  

One thing that is crystal clear, however, is that people are worried. According to a recent report from Poly:  

• Forty-three percent of workers expressed concern that working remotely would harm their development and career progression.

• Forty-seven percent reported worrying that they’d miss out on picking up skills from their co-workers and seniors.

• Fifty-two percent report being concerned that hybrid and remote work changes could be used to discriminate against particular employees. For instance, employees who are in the office full-time could being given special treatment.

The worry, it seems, is that there will grow a two-tier system that splits workers up into those who advance and adapt and those who get left behind. These worries are justified, given that this is the sort of behavior many have come to expect from organizations.  

However, these are worries; what has happened so far? What are the specificities behind that “mixed” data?  

Different demographic groups had different outcomes over the past two years. For instance, women did not necessarily benefit from the shift to working from home; the entire shift has resulted in women being more likely to experience burnout than men.  

To give some perspective on this, 37 percent of women report having a positive experience working from home, where 79 percent of men report positive experiences with remote work.  

This is likely in part due to inequitable arrangements surrounding childcare and housework. Even among families where both parents work –which now composes the vast majority of family arrangements– more often than not, the share of responsibilities unequally falls on women.  

In fact, according to Yale research, in cases where both parents work from home, women do more of the household and childcare work. So, it was good that many parents could stay at home with their children during the pandemic. But it’s also clearly exacerbated the interpersonal problems associated with the nuclear family convention that’s still quite common in the west.  

In other ways, remote work has benefitted women.  

For example, women report feeling less likely to be subject to harassment or uncomfortable social situations they frequently experienced when working in person.

Likewise, people of color say that they’re reluctant to come back to the office; during the pandemic, people of color reported experiencing reductions in workplace discrimination or harassment –whether overt or subtle– because of remote work. It follows why they don’t want to go back to the office –it’s associated with more unnecessary and unfair stress.

What can be done to quell worries?  

Firstly, we should focus on the inequities that have been improved through remote and hybrid work and implement policies to ensure that these gains aren’t lost. For example, the reduced level of harassment and discrimination experienced by women and racial minorities is something we should look to consciously preserve.  

But what about the worries that have yet to manifest? For instance, what about the potential for an unfair two-tier system? Managers must pay close attention to how much in-office work favors workers and how fair such favoritism is.  

Paying attention to this is crucial, as productivity and the quality of work are not determined by whether or not someone has or hasn’t been working in the office. If working remotely makes a worker more productive, such productivity should be rewarded, rather than the social brownie points accompanied by in-office work.  

A worrying example of what could become the future of work –one that should be avoided at all costs– arose a few months ago when Washingtonian CEO Catherine Merrill threatened that workers who remained remote would be subject to a loss in benefits and pay. Or, in some cases, the reverse is certainly possible –those who can’t adapt to remote work could very well get left behind if no steps are taken.  

One of the top drawbacks, according to the Poly report, is that workers state they lack the equipment required to enable remote work. However, some companies––especially in finance and banking– have already taken measures to reverse this by providing employees with the necessary equipment.  

However, these are companies that do so primarily out of security interests. Companies in general, nonetheless, should follow their lead, opening up more opportunities for a more significant percentage of the workforce who otherwise would be left out.  

Another good reason to pay attention to hybrid work is that it is rife with opportunities for accommodation. According to the Poly report, remote workers cite missing small talk with colleagues. This can be resolved either through an in-office option or through informal remote meetings.  

Finally, boundaries might be easier to set through remote work. For example, many remote workers report that they feel like they’re expected to work outside of work hours. This is something that employers need to take note of. 

We already have mandatory breaks and vacation times at many companies, where employers will not let you work during those times. Perhaps similarly, employers should enforce time-off when you aren’t scheduled to work. Part of this could entail providing tools, like computers, to your workers, which are the only places where their work is accessible.  

With all of this, the core is paying attention to the problem and listening to employee worries. This is the only path towards retaining equity gains and improving upon them as the world of work continues its inevitable shift towards remote and hybrid work modalities.