In the wake of the pandemic, the federal government stands at a crossroads. Should it make its workers return to the office, or should it permanently embrace a more flexible work model?
This isn’t just about logistical convenience; it’s a strategic choice that will shape the very fabric of our federal workforce. At stake is the risk of evolving into an increasingly homogenous, older workforce, out of touch with the dynamic, diverse society it aims to serve.
The preliminary findings of a study presented to the National Capital Planning Commission paint a concerning picture. We already knew from previous research that limiting telework will cause a retention crisis for the federal workforce.
The new study finds that a mandated return return to the office in the federal sector will lead to a workforce that skews older and less diverse. A government workforce that does not reflect the population it serves undermines the very principles of representation and inclusivity. More alarmingly, young talent, more inclined toward flexible work arrangements, would view federal employment as an unattractive option, according to the study, leading to a significant loss of fresh perspectives and innovative ideas.
The implications of a reduced telework policy extend into the realms of urban planning and economic development. In densely populated areas like Washington D.C., where housing costs have surged, a rigid in-office work policy could exacerbate urban congestion, increase housing challenges, and strain public transportation systems. The survey suggests that a significant shift toward in-office work could lead to an increased demand for urban housing, further inflating costs. This not only impacts federal employees but also the broader community, contradicting efforts to create equitable urban environments.
The federal government’s recruitment strategy is at a crucial juncture. The younger generation of workers, along with minorities, are increasingly looking for employers who offer flexibility and work-life balance. The data indicates a clear preference among these groups for telework options. By neglecting to offer such flexibility, the federal government risks not only falling behind in its diversity goals but also in its ability to stay relevant and effective in an ever-evolving societal landscape. A diverse workforce brings a plethora of viewpoints, ideas, and solutions, essential for a government that aims to serve all its citizens effectively.
The challenge of telework is not uniform across all federal agencies. For example, the study shows that departments dealing with national security, such as the Department of Defense, face legitimate concerns regarding remote work. However, this should not dictate a blanket policy for the entire federal workforce.
A nuanced approach is required, one that acknowledges the unique needs of different departments while promoting flexibility where feasible. This approach not only addresses security concerns but also ensures that the majority of the federal workforce, whose roles can accommodate telework, are not unnecessarily restricted.
As the largest employer in the region, the federal government’s stance on telework will set a precedent for local jurisdictions and the private sector. The decisions made now will have lasting impacts on workforce demographics, urban development, and regional economies. The government has an opportunity to lead by example, demonstrating a commitment to modern, inclusive work practices that prioritize employee well-being and diversity.
The varied responses to President Biden’s directives for a nationwide return-to-office by federal staff — including serious resistance — highlight the complexity and diversity of needs within the federal workforce. A blanket return-to-office policy overlooks these variances and fails to consider the preferences of a significant portion of the workforce. This one-size-fits-all approach is not only impractical but also counterproductive in building a workforce that is representative of the nation’s diversity.
The commission interpreting the survey findings must balance the diverse needs of different federal sectors while advocating for as much flexibility as possible. This balanced approach is crucial in maintaining national security without sacrificing the diversity and dynamism of the federal workforce. It’s about finding a middle ground where security concerns are adequately addressed, but not at the expense of alienating a significant portion of potential employees who value flexibility.
As we debate the future of federal employment, we must focus on what kind of government we are building. Are we creating a rigid, outdated system, or are we shaping a flexible, diverse, and dynamic federal workforce?
Embracing telework and flexible work arrangements is not just a matter of employee convenience; it’s a strategic imperative. It is about ensuring that our federal government remains a vibrant, inclusive, unbiased, and effective institution, reflective of the nation it serves. By championing telework, we can attract a broader spectrum of talent, foster a more representative workforce, and set a precedent for modern, progressive employment practices.
Let’s not just fill our offices; let’s fill them with the diverse voices, innovative ideas, and dynamic energy essential for a federal government that is truly by the people, for the people.
Dr. Gleb Tsipursky is CEO of the hybrid work consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts and author of “Returning to the Office and Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams.“