It’s been a few minutes since we last dipped our toes into the Great Return-To-Office Experiment while outlining considerations for companies looking for in-person collaboration to return. As of last fall, several major companies launched efforts to roll back the remote work trend that took hold during the pandemic. Some found success, and others?
Let’s say RTO mandates aren’t going smoothly for all involved, and the related concept of “quiet firing” could also backfire on employers.
Grindr’s ongoing RTO fallout: We previously discussed how the dating app company asked workers to relocate into Grindr hub cities or accept severance packages. At the same time, workers expressed intent to organize with Communication Workers of America. Ultimately, 80 out of 178 workers opted not to relocate and chose severance.
This month, an NLRB lawyer asked for an injunction while claiming that Grindr’s RTO mandate did two things: (1) retaliated against workers even though organized, and (2) happened “out of the blue” after the company allegedly deemed “remote work benefits” to be “secure.” In response, Grindr insisted that their policy was planned before workers expressed intent to organize, and they offered to pay for relocation expenses. Yet one worker insisted he was given “less than a day” to pick an option.
How this case shakes out could establish a precedent for how much unions can push back against RTO. It’s also possible that Grindr would have faced opposition regardless of their approach. Still, it’s worth looking at how video game company EA recently framed a new RTO policy mandating three days in the office per week, similar to what Grindr aimed to accomplish.
One apparent difference? CEO Andrew Wilson specified that EA’s process would not be immediate and could take up to 24 months to complete. Is this a softer approach that could see less legal fallout? We will be watching.
You’ve heard of “quiet quitting”? Meet “quiet firing”: A recent survey from Resume Templates asserts that so-called “quiet firing” is being adopted this year by 53% of 1,100+ business leaders. Such practices can involve RTO mandates, depending on how they are handled. Still, as HR Dive sums up, they can also include “reducing pay or bonuses, cutting benefits, micromanaging employees, [or] ignoring toxic workplace behavior” to lower headcount without formal layoffs that can attract bad PR.
It doesn’t take much of a leap to see how miserable quiet firing could make workers, who could lose trust in their employers, which in turn opens the doors for union infiltration. These on-edge workers might feel they are simply hanging on for survival during economic downswings. Neither outcome will do much for productivity or for the likelihood of holding onto top-performing workers in the long haul.
The takeaways: Workers are finely attuned to shifts in workplace culture and vibes. They’re wise – and that’s part of why they were hired – enough to recognize less than graceful RTO mandates and the more unsavory examples of quiet firing when they see them.
Workers also universally want to know that employers hear their concerns and take them seriously. While tricky to navigate, we also previously outlined how RTO can be viewed as an opportunity to build trust by involving workers in the decision-making process. That trust is paramount to keeping workers engaged and far away from union promises.
