Infosys has announced a policy requiring employees to work from the office for at least 10 days a month, starting March 10, 2025. According to reports, this will be further enforced through attendance software, which will cap the number of work-from-home (WFH) days employees can request.
The policy applies to employees at job level 5 (JL5) and below, including software engineers and consultants, however, managers and senior ranks remain unaffected.
While the debate on the necessity of physical presence at work is still disputed, the decision has again sparked discussions in a post-pandemic world and its implications on productivity, job satisfaction, and employee retention.
Should offices employ this rule in 2025?
The debate around mandatory office presence in 2025 is still evolving. According to Shashank Mohan, a software engineer, companies make such decisions based on data comparing productivity in remote versus in-office settings.
However, enforcing such policies incurs infrastructure costs, and further braces the danger of lowering employee satisfaction, which can ultimately impact retention rates, and can hamper the day-to-day functioning of the company.
"While enforcing a policy can increase efficiency, it can lead to decreased employee retention in the longer run. When taking any decision, they need to consider these effects as well," stated Shashank.
Further shedding light on the issue, Advocate Harpreet Singh Saluja, President of the Nascent IT Employees Senate (NITES), emphasised that the Information Technology (IT) sector was one of the few industries that remained highly profitable during the pandemic (currently as well) despite remote work.
One such instance is, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, who recently discarded his employees' requests to not mandate office attendance, despite the company achieving record profits for this financial year. Additionally, the company laid off around 1,000 employees, drawing ire from the workforce, according to a report by Business Standard.
Based on this, the advocate further argued that several top IT companies, as well as the new mandate by Infosys, disregard employee preferences, adding unnecessary logistical and financial burdens, especially on those who reside in far-flung areas, and not in proximity to their office's location.
"Say if a person working for a company based out of Mumbai has his home somewhere in Sangli or Satara, how will it be logistically pliable for them to either commute, find a temporary residence, or stay in a city that might drain their pockets? This adds to their worries, and doesn't solve the existing ones," shared Saluja.
Would this measure an employee's efficacy?
Traditionally, office presence has been linked to supervision and productivity tracking, but does physical presence equate to efficiency or prove their loyalty to the company?
Shashank, refuting this notion, stated that work quality and commitment should be assessed based on performance rather than attendance.
The NITES President further highlighted that companies already have digital tools to track productivity remotely and argued that enforcing office attendance does not guarantee higher efficiency, nor does it show their compliance with the company's norms. In fact, it is coming off as "outdated" with their views/policies.
Will there be any job satisfaction?
A significant concern is whether such mandates would negatively impact an employee's morale. Shashank, who has had varied experiences with several companies, and is now developing his application, believes that strict office mandates could lead to lower job satisfaction.
"A strict policy may lead to decreased job satisfaction in their employees. Also, this is one of the significant factors job applicants consider when applying to a company. There are instances of people joining companies providing remote work but lower salary," he stated.
Hybrid models are for the good?
According to Shashank, hybrid models offer a balanced approach by ensuring collaboration when needed while allowing some room for flexibility.
"This approach benefits both employers, by reducing infrastructure costs, and employees, by improving work-life balance," he added.
The NITES representative also noted that the hybrid model had already proven successful, reducing commuting time and enhancing productivity. However, he opined that a hybrid model, if not thought out well, might just add to the confusion. It can inconvenience an employee who might have preferred remote work.
"When it comes to a capitalistic world, the emphasis on employees' wellness and satisfaction takes a rough blow. While there are companies that prioritise their employees, given the ongoing trend, employees are being turned into machines, and their status...diminished. THAT should not happen," emphasised the NITES president.
Policy to improve collaboration?
One justification that the company highlighted for introducing the policy is — improved collaboration. While some teams benefit from in-person meetings, Shashank believes that the effectiveness of the collaboration varies depending on project type and personal preferences.
Echoing a similar sentiment, the NITES representative dismissed such a notion. "Companies are now going global. If the boss is working out of Italy, and his employees are in India, does that mean that there would be no effective communication, or is the company doomed?" He argued that forcing employees into offices a few days per month does not necessarily enhance teamwork.
A study by Institut Européen d'Administration des Affaires (INSEAD) Professors Manuel Sosa and Massimo Maoret highlighted the crucial role of social proximity leading to strong interpersonal connections in fostering teamwork, even in remote settings.
Their findings suggest that while physical proximity facilitates communication, social ties can substitute for it, enabling effective collaboration through virtual means.
Are we moving forward or slipping backwards?
Advancements in technology, such as Zoom and Slack, have further bridged the gap, supporting both task-related and informal interactions. The research highlights that organisations should focus on building robust social networks through mentoring, virtual team-building, and cross-functional collaboration, which is rather a necessity in an increasingly digital world.
Anand Gopal, Vice-President of Product, HackerRank, a developer skills company, asserted that in such an age of automation, old business models are slowly turning obsolete, and further, with the advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tasks are rendered easier, efforts are reduced, and therefore, overturning of old models might stand as a necessity of the time.
With the changing times, Infosys’ move raises questions about the future of workplace policies and employee autonomy in the evolving job market.
What do you think of it? Let us know in the comments.
