Employers who force staff to return to the office five days a week have been called the “dinosaurs of our age” by one of the world’s leading experts who coined the term “presenteeism.”
Sir Cary Cooper, a professor of organizational psychology and health at the University of Manchester’s Alliance Manchester Business School, said employers imposing strict requirements on staff to be in the office risked driving away talented workers, damaging the wellbeing of employees and undermining their financial performance.
It comes after Amazon said on Monday that all its corporate staff would be expected to work from the office five days a week from Jan. 2, as the latest big global employer to demand a strict return to pre-pandemic practices.
Photo: AP
“Unfortunately some organizations and companies are thinking of trying to force people back into the work environment five days a week. I think they’re the dinosaurs of our age. The old command and control type management style,” Cooper said.
“Amazon say they want people back five days a week, and a couple of investment banks. But that goes against the evidence,” he said.
Amazon did not respond to a request for comment.
“If you value and trust people to get on with their job, and give them autonomy — and flexible work is one of those — they’ll work better, you’ll retain them, and they will be less likely to have a stress-related illness.
“If you micromanage, you won’t get productivity gains, and you won’t attract the next generation.”
Widely regarded as one of the world’s leading authorities on workplace organization, health and wellbeing, Cooper coined the term presenteeism in the 1980s to describe when employees are at work but not performing to their full potential because of health issues.
He previously advised the government on work and wellbeing in the 2000s, producing research leading to an expansion in flexible working legislation under the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition in 2014.
Labor is preparing to unveil sweeping changes to workers’ rights legislation within weeks, including measures to make flexible working the default option for workers from day one on the job, alongside a ban on exploitative zero-hours contracts.
Some business leaders have expressed concerns about the scale of the changes, saying they could damage job creation and the economy. However, the business secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, told the Times on Monday that he wanted to end a “culture of presenteeism” that was holding back the economy.
“It does contribute to productivity, it does contribute to [staff] resilience, their ability to stay working for an employer,” he said.
Cooper said the “overwhelming evidence” was that flexible working created higher job satisfaction levels, better retention of staff and could help drive up workplace productivity.
“Reynolds is absolutely right,” he said. “Working longer doesn’t lead to productivity, but more ill health.”
Remote working boomed at the height of the COVID pandemic, leading some experts to predict a permanent shift in working practices. However, many firms have introduced return-to-office policies, which have since been tightened. Some, including Amazon, Boots and Goldman Sachs, have demanded employees return to a five-day, office-based working routine.
Andy Jassy, Amazon’s chief executive, wrote in a note sent to employees on Monday that the company believed that the “advantages of being together in the office are significant.”
However, Amazon applies different arrangements for warehouse operatives, where flexible part-time contracts and four-day working week arrangements are available.
Last month Amazon UK published the results of a survey it commissioned showing that half of all UK workers want more flexibility at work, with a majority of respondents saying a better work-life balance was the main reason.
In a press release highlighting Labor’s manifesto promises on flexible working, John Boumphrey, Amazon’s UK and Ireland country manager, said at the time that the company was “delighted” to offer flexible contracts to warehouse staff.
“These findings clearly demonstrate the huge importance of workplace flexibility, and why it matters so much to employees,” he said.
That US assistance was a model for Taiwan’s spectacular development success was early recognized by policymakers and analysts. In a report to the US Congress for the fiscal year 1962, former President John F. Kennedy noted Taiwan’s “rapid economic growth,” was “producing a substantial net gain in living.” Kennedy had a stake in Taiwan’s achievements and the US’ official development assistance (ODA) in general: In September 1961, his entreaty to make the 1960s a “decade of development,” and an accompanying proposal for dedicated legislation to this end, had been formalized by congressional passage of the Foreign Assistance Act. Two
President William Lai’s (賴清德) March 13 national security speech marked a turning point. He signaled that the government was finally getting serious about a whole-of-society approach to defending the nation. The presidential office summarized his speech succinctly: “President Lai introduced 17 major strategies to respond to five major national security and united front threats Taiwan now faces: China’s threat to national sovereignty, its threats from infiltration and espionage activities targeting Taiwan’s military, its threats aimed at obscuring the national identity of the people of Taiwan, its threats from united front infiltration into Taiwanese society through cross-strait exchanges, and its threats from
Despite the intense sunshine, we were hardly breaking a sweat as we cruised along the flat, dedicated bike lane, well protected from the heat by a canopy of trees. The electric assist on the bikes likely made a difference, too. Far removed from the bustle and noise of the Taichung traffic, we admired the serene rural scenery, making our way over rivers, alongside rice paddies and through pear orchards. Our route for the day covered two bike paths that connect in Fengyuan District (豐原) and are best done together. The Hou-Feng Bike Path (后豐鐵馬道) runs southward from Houli District (后里) while the
March 31 to April 6 On May 13, 1950, National Taiwan University Hospital otolaryngologist Su You-peng (蘇友鵬) was summoned to the director’s office. He thought someone had complained about him practicing the violin at night, but when he entered the room, he knew something was terribly wrong. He saw several burly men who appeared to be government secret agents, and three other resident doctors: internist Hsu Chiang (許強), dermatologist Hu Pao-chen (胡寶珍) and ophthalmologist Hu Hsin-lin (胡鑫麟). They were handcuffed, herded onto two jeeps and taken to the Secrecy Bureau (保密局) for questioning. Su was still in his doctor’s robes at
RSS