Federal return-to-office directive will hurt productivity, survey respondents say

On January 24, 2025By Littum

After President Donald Trump ordered agencies to return the federal workforce to the office full time, many federal employees said productivity would suffer under a blanket mandate to return to the office, according to the results of a Federal News Network survey.

Many survey respondents said the Trump administration should take a closer look at the massive variations in jobs across government — and therefore the need for variations in telecommuting policies. Some respondents who completed the Federal News Network’s online survey of more than 4,600 federal employees expressed concern about potential negative effects of a “one-size-fits-all” mandate to return to the office.

“They need to look at individual agencies and individual jobs,” one respondent wrote. “Some tasks just shouldn’t be done in the office – and some absolutely should.”

Currently, more than half of the federal workforce reports working onsite due to the nature of their jobs. Employees who are eligible to telecommute spend an average of about 60% of their work time in the office. Trump’s executive action on Monday called on agencies to return their federal employees to full office “as soon as possible.”

It’s unclear how or when Trump’s return-to-office directive to agencies will be implemented, but many feds surveyed felt negatively about the potential end results of the mandate as written. When asked what factors would be most negatively affected by a return-to-the-office order, close to 71% of Federal News Network survey respondents said the commute — making it the number one choice among survey participants. Work-life balance was the second most-chosen option, with 68% saying it would worsen under a mandate to return to the office.

Return to office survey results — Source: Federal News Network, January 2025 return to office survey of 4,600 federal employees. The survey is a non-scientific survey of respondents who were self-selected.

About 60% of respondents said recruiting and retaining employees would be worse if they returned to office. About 53% chose productivity, followed by the ability to manage personal needs, such as childcare or elder care.

“I have been taking care of my 82-year-old father,” wrote one respondent. “I was able to work two days from home which was great. For no reason my employer changed this policy and now I’m forced to come back five days a week. It’s been a real challenge.”

“Parents—especially mothers—often feel torn between a career and a family, even in the year 2025,” wrote another respondent. “Commuting and telecommuting options can alleviate these fears by allowing people to remain in their professional positions while being as present as possible for their growing children.”

In an open-ended survey, some respondents said they believed there were political motives behind Trump’s return to office this week.

“This has nothing to do with productivity or results and is all political,” one respondent wrote. “Federal employees currently feel completely demoralized by this administration.”

“This is a baseless and punitive effort to target federal employees and reduce the size of federal agencies through layoffs,” another respondent wrote.

Leaders of Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency, a non-government advisory panel, have also said they would “welcome” federal employee layoffs resulting from a return to office.

A return to the office and the federal footprint

More than a quarter of survey respondents said the quality of their physical workplace would be one of the aspects most negatively affected under a mandate to return to the office.

“A crammed, noisy, small cubicle yard does not allow for the concentration necessary for high-quality, high-volume work, or to be able to communicate properly with customers,” wrote one respondent. “It makes it difficult for the employees to get along and to deal with stress.”

“Our building is at full capacity and we are doubled up in cubes set up for one person,” added another respondent.

Because of telecommuting options for eligible federal employees, some agencies have begun scaling back the amount of office space they own and lease, with plans underway to continue shedding millions of square feet of office space in the coming years.

In a separate survey, close to two-thirds of respondents said they would be either “extremely concerned” or “very concerned” that their agency had enough physical office space in the first place to meet a mandate to return to the office . About 21% said they were “not much” or “not at all” concerned about having enough space.

One survey respondent who works in the Department of Veterans Affairs, for example, said their VA facility has “finite space.”

“If we were to return to the office, there would not be sufficient space for the staff to provide quality care to our veterans,” the respondent wrote. “For return-to-work mandates, there should be accommodations for facilities that do not have adequate office space. Work that can be done from home should be done from home, and work that requires in-person presence should be done in the office.”

Some respondents also said that instead of pushing for a full return to the office for federal employees, citing concerns about federal office space, the better solution would be to reduce the federal footprint to save costs and improve efficiency.

“If we’re wasting millions on empty office space, the most logical solution is to get rid of the offices, not spend more millions filling them with people who are more efficient at working remotely,” one respondent wrote.

The positive aspects of personal work

When asked what aspects of work would be positively affected by a federal workforce’s return to tenure, close to 61% of respondents said, “none of the above.” However, the second top response was “collaboration with colleagues”, with around 28% choosing this option from the list. The third most common choice among survey participants was “workplace culture,” with 17% selecting the option.

Few federal employees—between only about 3% and 8% of respondents—said that various aspects of work such as productivity, the ability to respond to customer needs, work-life balance, and recruitment and retention would be positively affected by a broad return to -office mandate.

Still, some respondents pointed to positive aspects of a return to the office of the federal workforce.

“I focus better on work tasks when I’m at work,” wrote one respondent. “One area that benefits from in-person work is onboarding, training and mentoring new staff. It’s harder to form relationships and learn team culture over virtual means.”

“Routine telecommuting destroys work culture, the ability to guide employees and the speed of decision-making,” wrote another respondent.

“Employees are more productive and engaged when they are in the office,” wrote yet another respondent.

Telecommuting leads to better productivity, say many federal agencies

Similar to the results of other surveys and data analyses, many respondents also said they were able to be more productive while working from home at least some of the time. Many said they believed a mandate to return to the office would lead to decreased productivity and efficiency in getting work done.

“My team is more productive in a telecommuting environment – the output proves it,” wrote one respondent. “There are fewer distractions, and less time spent commuting often leads to more time on the clock. The level of engagement is high and we actively use technology, such as Microsoft Teams, for collaborative meetings and discussions. Telecommuting also provides a better work-life balance, so staff are able to bring their most productive selves to work.”

Some respondents said that a long commute would worsen productivity and the number of working hours. With telecommuting options, some said they spent more work hours that would otherwise be spent driving or taking public transportation.

“My entire team lives in different states, but we are a well-oiled machine that efficiently and effectively gets the job done with excellence,” one respondent wrote. “Forcing a return to work would be a major negative impact for both employees and stakeholders.”

At the same time, many respondents expressed concerns about people leaving their jobs, especially those who are high performers and more likely to find work elsewhere. Some cited the potential for attrition of federal employees as a result of the return to office directive.

“It will result in talented employees leaving the government,” one respondent wrote. “Government should find a better way to retain high-performing and talented employees to continue to serve the public in a meaningful way.”

Many times, however, respondents said it’s critical to consider the vast differences in the work federal employees do. Many said a “one-size-fits-all” approach to remote work would hurt productivity. Some also pointed out that many — but not all — federal jobs should be done on site regardless. But ultimately, they said it depends on the agency and the specific job.

“Publicly-facing federal jobs and other select positions should be personal,” one respondent wrote. “But a large number of jobs can be done outside the office.”

“Yes, there are some jobs that have in-person clients, but many, if not most, telecommuting jobs do not fit that description. Many teams do not sit together in the same location,” wrote another respondent. “Congress needs to actually to do some real research and ask the staff how it will directly affect each and every one of them.”