January 26, 2026

Is your return-to-office (RTO) policy generating employee resistance, low morale, reduced productivity, excessive severance and expensive lawsuits?

Editor’s note: This article is the result of the research and experience of the writer. It is written in a direct and authoritative style appropriate to the seriousness of this topic. But it does not intend to provide or substitute for legal advice. It’s intention is to make you aware of issues. We strongly advise getting legal advice appropriate to your circumstances and of course, the jurisdiction and laws of your country, province or state.

Most high-tech employers viewed remote work as a temporary measure to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. For many employees and the courts, remote work has come to be seen as a significant term of employment that employers cannot revoke at will.

Too many employers misunderstand their obligations and end up worsening an unhappy employee’s situation. Courts are not inclined against employers. They favour evidence and reasonableness, areas where management falls short too often.

Here’s how to improve workplaces and avoid costly, disruptive lawsuits.

Remote work alters employment terms

When employers unilaterally impose an RTO policy, employees may view it as constructive dismissal even though employers view remote work as a temporary perk. It isn’t easy to characterize remote work as temporary when it lasted for multiple years. The courts view unilateral RTO action as a violation of employment terms and have sided with employees. The courts also side with employees even when the new arrangement requires only a few days in the office each week.

Employers can avoid low morale, undesirable turnover and expensive lawsuits with an RTO policy that is sensitive to employee needs and emphasizes the positive aspects of in-office work. Employers can define an employment policy and RTO process that includes many of these aspects:

• Describes a transition period from remote to in-office work.
• Offers flexibility in employees’ daily and weekly work hours.
• Includes clear and repeated communication of the reasons for RTO.
• Defines remote work and specifies that it’s subject to revision.
• Reminds employees of the benefits of the in-office experience.
• Educates employees about the value of collaboration and culture.
• Reminds employees that their purposeful in-office presence improves customer service and enhances innovation.

Often, employers announce a blanket RTO policy to simplify supervision and foster in-person collaboration. However, the importance of collaboration varies considerably by role. Those differences start discontent among some employees. For example, software project teams are much more effective and productive when they can collaborate in person rather than on video or work in isolation at home.

Employee surveillance backfires

Employers’ use of surveillance software doesn’t help them terminate employees for poor performance. Employers typically cannot explain how the surveillance data illustrates poor performance. As a result, courts often side with employees in wrongful dismissal cases.

Also, many reasonably tech-savvy employees can circumvent or uninstall the surveillance software. Some employees are so annoyed by the surveillance that they buy mouse jigglers.

Managers recognize that managing employees remotely is more difficult than managing in-house, where it’s easier to give direction and receive status updates informally. Resorting to software to address this problem makes employees feel resentful of what they see as unreasonable surveillance. Managers can improve morale and productivity by providing more formal direction and using video communication for regular updates.

Lack of documentation loses cases

Courts look for evidence in the form of documentation. Employers typically offer little. Employees, on the other hand, offer piles of emails, Slack messages and written reports. As a result, courts often side with employees when employers lack evidence.

Employers have no choice but to improve their written and digital documentation if they want the courts to appreciate their position.

Absence of remote performance management

Courts require evidence of coaching, warnings, and progressive discipline before accepting a termination for cause. Employers typically maintain such records for in-office employees but often fail to document similar events for remote employees. When courts hear about arbitrary, undocumented actions or see vague emails, they side with employees.

Employers can protect themselves by applying their extensive in-office performance management procedures to remote employees as well. Establishing a culture of two-way dialogue where employees feel heard and supported remains essential for many reasons, regardless of where they work.

Unreasonable employers lose cases

Employers appear unreasonable when they reverse remote-work policies overnight via an email to all employees that announces a new RTO policy. On the other hand, employees appear reasonable because they are willing to work and are performing adequately. Courts don’t like unreasonable or arbitrary actions, so they side with employees.

Employers can be reasonable in implementing their RTO policies by engaging in extensive communication and providing a transition period.

Employers can avoid negative repercussions and improve employees’ response to their RTO policy by clearly describing the policy and demonstrating flexibility.