By Erica and Karen

Toward the end of our careers, we grew accustomed to younger workers saying they wanted a more flexible working experience. If people can work remotely with modern communication tools, why not? Why face the commute every day? Why dress for a business setting? Employers will not be hurt by flexible arrangements that allow working from home some or all of the time.

We were skeptical.

Then, of course, we all had to work from home, and likely will do so for over a year. Corporate America has been very passive about getting workers back into the office. Yes, of course, there are serious health issues that must be addressed, both in the office and getting to and from the office. But we do not see corporate America agitating for a more rational approach—including spending for testing and vaccinating and following the guidelines—so that they can actually get workers back. Indeed, large companies are apparently deciding to incorporate working from home into their regular routines even after health issues are resolved.

We remain skeptical.

Many now retired career women like us had little experience of working from home. The only time we did was when we were on maternity leave. Of course we were not working, in theory, which meant we had to do a lot of things with very little support while trying to figure out how tiny humans operate. (Most of our male partners did not have the same experience—even if paternity leave was available they did not take it.) And of course when we returned to the office we had to remind people who we were and what we could do. We came away from that with little interest in working from home.

Now that we are retired, many of us have been separated from the working world. That’s not so great either. We don’t want to work the way we did, and we are no longer striving—no need to go over the top—but there is no reason why people like us who have learned a few things should be relegated to the sidelines as if we had nothing to offer. Many of us have insights that would be valuable to those still hustling. To do that effectively we should be where we are needed—in the office.

We fear that institutionalizing regular WFH policies will cause some groups of employees to be marginalized. The data seem to support us. One can imagine that women would again feel pressure to stay home a couple of days a week while men would not. If that happened, men would get ahead while women would not—because only being in the office offers the benefits—and the fun—of chance encounters in the lunchroom, and face time with the boss. Being home just reinforces the stereotype that women are not serious about careers.

Those in the middle ranks of organizations are at the age and stage where advancement accelerates, plateaus, or sputters out. The stepping-stone assignments that often transform managers into leaders, and the informal but essential coaching that might happen after a key meeting or a big pitch, are crucial for building a strong path forward. Virtual meetings on Zoom do not afford the same rapport-building and feedback mechanisms. Will constructive informal feedback, so essential to the learning process, become an even-more-gendered process? Why WFH is not Necessarily Good for Women, Harvard Business Review (paywall).

The same will happen to younger workers, who will be even less known to the people that matter than women who have been there a while.

Deprived of desk neighbors, impromptu coffees, and any real way to, for a lack of a better term, read everyone’s vibe, she said that new hires and young people who work remotely risk remaining unknown quantities. And unknown quantities don’t become beloved colleagues, or get promoted. How you begin your working life tends to shape your professional and financial prospects for decades to come. Those who were just starting out during the financial cataclysm of 2008 and the recession that followed have had their fortunes stunted by it, and many will never recover. For recent graduates beginning work via Zoom in the twin chaos of a pandemic and a financial crisis, the impact could be even more profound. Working From Home Hurts Young People, The Atlantic.

Perhaps most important, working in the same physical space builds community and loyalty. It is so much more gratifying to be around people than to be alone in your bedroom or kitchen with a screen 24/7. You can learn from everyone, and everyone can learn from you. You can laugh and commiserate and give advice to one another. One of the best things about work for us was the company. Did we love everyone and was every day just brilliant? No, of course not. But many were, and nearly every day we learned something new, or changed our view about a complex problem once we chatted with someone in the hallway. And where else do you get the lowdown on where to get those fabulous red boots? (By the way, we think there is much to be said for dressing for work. It puts you in the right frame of mind. Work is a purposeful enterprise, and your clothes should say you understand that.)

Can you do all of this on Zoom? You certainly can convey data. But you cannot convey the human element in anything like the same way.

That’s why we miss the office, and why any thought of regularly working from home is mistaken. Which is not to say that flexibility is not in order. If a worker—man or woman—needs to stay home with a sick child or to see a soccer game in the mid-afternoon, why not? On the contrary, that is why new communication tools are a boon. But they are a bane if they eliminate the real communication of personal interaction.

Humans are social. They do not want to live in isolation. Permanent plans for working from home are misguided. Corporate America should be agitating to get people back into the office.

PS—since this was posted, Goldman Sachs’ CEO, among others has publicly acknowledged that WFH is not the best for an innovative, collaborative business—as all businesses should be. Kudos, David Solomon!