Until March 2020, Kari and Britt Altizer of Richmond, Va., put in long hours at work, she in life-insurance sales and he as a restaurant manager, to support their young family. Their lives were frenetic, their schedules controlled by their jobs.
Then the pandemic shutdown hit, and they, like millions of others, found their world upended. Britt was briefly furloughed. Kari, 31, had to quit to care for their infant son. A native of Peru, she hoped to find remote work as a Spanish translator. When that didn’t pan out, she took a part-time sales job with a cleaning service that allowed her to take her son to the office. But as the baby grew into a toddler, that wasn’t feasible either.
Meanwhile, the furlough prompted her husband, 30, to reassess his own career. “I did some soul searching. During the time I was home, I was gardening and really loving life,” says Britt, who grew up on a farm and studied environmental science in college. “I realized working outdoors was something I had to get back to doing.”
Today, both have quit their old jobs and made a sharp pivot: they opened a landscaping business together. “We are taking a leap of faith,” Kari says, after realizing the prepandemic way of working simply doesn’t make sense anymore. Now they have control over their schedules, and her mom has moved nearby to care for their son. “I love what I’m doing. I’m closer to my goal of: I get to go to work, I don’t have to go to work,” Kari says. “We aren’t supposed to live to work. We’re supposed to work to live.”
As the postpandemic great reopening unfolds, millions of others are also reassessing their relationship to their jobs. The modern office was created after World War II, on a military model—strict hierarchies, created by men for men, with an assumption that there is a wife to handle duties at home.
But after years of gradual change in Silicon Valley and elsewhere, there’s a growing realization that the model is broken. Millions of people have spent the past year re-evaluating their priorities. How much time do they want to spend in an office? Where do they want to live if they can work remotely? Do they want to switch careers? For many, this has become a moment to literally redefine what is work.
More fundamentally, the pandemic has masked a deep unhappiness that a startling number of Americans have with the -workplace. During the first stressful months of quarantine, job turnover plunged; people were just hoping to hang on to what they had, even if they hated their jobs.
For many more millions of essential workers, there was never a choice but to keep showing up at stores, on deliveries and in factories, often at great risk to themselves, with food and agricultural workers facing a higher chance of death on the job. But now millions of white collar professionals and office workers appear poised to jump. Anthony Klotz, an associate professor of management at Texas A&M University, set off a Twitter-storm by predicting, “The great resignation is coming.”
But those conversations miss a much more consequential point. The true significance isn’t what we are leaving; it’s what we are going toward. In a surprising phenomenon, people are not just abandoning jobs but switching professions. This is a radical re-assessment of our careers, a great reset in how we think about work. A Pew survey in January found that 66% of unemployed people have seriously considered changing occupations—and significantly, that phenomenon is common to those at every income level, not just the privileged high earners.
A third of those surveyed have started taking courses or job retraining. Pew doesn’t have comparable earlier data, but in a 2016 survey, about 80% of people reported being somewhat or very satisfied with their jobs.
Early on in the pandemic, Lucy Chang Evans, a 48-year-old Naperville, Ill., civil engineer, quit her job to help her three kids with remote learning while pursuing an online MBA. Becoming “a lot more introspective,” she realized she’s done with toxic workplaces: “I feel like I’m not willing to put up with abusive behavior at work anymore.” She also plans to pivot into a more meaningful career, focused on tackling climate change.
The deep unhappiness with jobs points to a larger problem in how workplaces are structured. The line between work and home has been blurring for decades—and with the pandemic, obliterated completely for many of us, as we have been literally living at work. Meanwhile, the stark divide between white collar workers and those with hourly on-site jobs—grocery clerks, bus drivers, delivery people—became painfully visible. During the pandemic, nearly half of all employees with advanced degrees were working remotely, while more than 90% of those with a high school diploma or less had to show up in person, CoStar found.
Business leaders are as confused as the rest of us—perhaps more so—when it comes to navigating the multiple demands and expectations of the new workplace. Consider their conflicting approaches to remote work. Tech firms including Twitter, Dropbox, Shopify and Reddit are all allowing employees the option to work at home permanently, while oil company Phillips 66 brought back most staff to its Houston headquarters almost a year ago. Target and Walmart have both allowed corporate staff to work remotely, while low-paid workers faced potential COVID-19 exposure on store floors.
In the financial industry, titans like Blackstone, JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs expect employees to be back on site this summer. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon recently declared that remote work “doesn’t work for those who want to hustle-. It doesn’t work in terms of spontaneous idea generation,” and “you know, people don’t like commuting, but so what.”
There’s a real risk that office culture could devolve into a class system, with on-site employees favored over remote workers. WeWork CEO Sandeep Mathrani recently insisted that the “least engaged are very comfortable working from home,” a stunning indictment that discounts working parents everywhere and suggests that those who might need flexibility—like those caring for relatives—couldn’t possibly be ambitious.
Mathrani’s comments are yet another reminder that the pandemic shutdown has been devastating for women, throwing into high relief just how inhospitable and precarious the workplace can be for caretakers. Faced with the impossible task of handling the majority of childcare and homeschooling, 4.2 million women dropped out of the labor force from February 2020 to April 2020—and nearly 2 million still haven’t returned. Oxfam calculates that women globally lost a breathtaking $800 billion in income in 2020. Women’s progress in terms of U.S. workforce participation has been set back by more than three decades.
Despite Mathrani’s assertion, there’s little evidence that remote employees are less engaged. There is, however, plenty of evidence that we’re actually working more. A study by Harvard Business School found that people were working on average 48 minutes more per day after the lockdown started. A new research paper from the University of Chicago and University of Essex found remote workers upped their hours by 30%, yet didn’t increase productivity.
All this comes at a moment when business and culture have never been more intertwined. As work has taken over people’s lives and Americans are doing less together outside the office, more and more of people’s political beliefs and social life are defining the office. In thousands of Zoom meetings over the past year, employees have demanded that their leaders take on systemic racism, sexism, transgender rights, gun control and more.
People have increasingly outsize expectations of their employers. This year, business surpassed nonprofits to become the most trusted institution globally, according to the Edelman Trust Barometer, and people are looking to business to take an active role tackling racism, climate change and misinformation.
“Employees, customers, shareholders—all of these stakeholder groups—are saying, You’ve got to deal with some of these issues,” says Ken Chenault, a former chief executive of American Express and currently chairman and managing partner of General Catalyst. “If people are going to spend so much time at a company, they really want to believe that the mission and behavior of the company is consistent with, and aligned with, their values.”
Hundreds of top executives signed on to a statement that he and Ken Frazier, the CEO of Merck, organized this year opposing “any discriminatory legislation” in the wake of Georgia’s new voting law. Yet those same moves have landed some executives in the crosshairs of conservative politicians.
That points to the central dilemma facing us all as we rethink how we work. Multiple surveys suggest Americans are eager to work remotely at least part of the time—the ideal consensus seems to be coalescing around three days in the office and two days remote. Yet the hybrid model comes with its own complexities.
If managers with families and commutes choose to work remotely, but younger employees are on site, the latter could lack opportunities for absorbing corporate culture or for being mentored. Hybrid work could also limit those serendipitous office interactions that lead to promotions and breakthrough ideas.
Yet if it’s done correctly, there’s a chance to bring balance back into our lives, to a degree that we haven’t seen at least since the widespread adoption of email and cell phones. Not just parents but all employees would be better off with more flexible time to recharge, exercise and, oh yeah, sleep.
There’s also a hidden benefit in a year of sweatpants wearing and Zoom meetings: a more casual, more authentic version of our colleagues, with unwashed hair, pets, kids and laundry all on display. That too would help level the playing field, especially for professional women who, over the course of their careers, spend thousands of hours more than men just getting ready for work.
There are glimmers of progress. During the pandemic, as rates of depression and anxiety soared—to 40% of all U.S. adults, quadruple previous levels—a number of companies began offering enhanced mental-health services and paid “recharge” days, among them LinkedIn, Citigroup, Red Hat and SAP.
Some companies are offering subsidized childcare, including Microsoft, Facebook, Google and Home Depot. More than 200 businesses, along with the advocacy group Time’s Up, recently created a coalition to push for child and eldercare solutions. It’s essential that these measures stay in place.
We have an unprecedented opportunity right now to reinvent, to create workplace culture almost from scratch. Over the past decades, various types of businesses have rotated in and out of favor—conglomerates in the ’60s, junk bonds in the ’80s, tech in the ’00s—but the basic workplace structure, of office cubicles and face time, has remained the same.
It’s time to allow the creative ideas to flow. For example, companies are stuck with millions of square feet of now unused office space—sublet space soared by 40% from late 2019 to this year, CoStar found. Why not use that extra space for day care? Working parents of small children would jump at the opportunity to have a safe, affordable option, while having their kids close by.
Now would also be a good time to finally dump the 9-to-5, five-day workweek. For plenty of job categories, that cadence no longer makes sense. Multiple companies are already experimenting with four-day workweeks, including Unilever New Zealand, and Spain is rolling out a trial nationwide. Companies that have already tested the concept have reported significant productivity increases, from 20% (New Zealand’s Perpetual Guardian, which has since made the practice permanent) to 40% (Microsoft Japan, in a limited trial).
That schedule too would be more equitable for working moms, many of whom work supposedly part-time jobs with reduced pay yet are just as productive as their fully paid colleagues. Meanwhile, the 9-to-5 office-hours standard becomes irrelevant, especially when people don’t have meetings and are working remotely or in different time zones.
While we’re at it, let’s kill the commute. Some companies are already creating neighborhood co-working hubs for those who live far from the home office. Outdoor retailer REI is going a step further: it sold its new Bellevue, Wash., headquarters in a cost-cutting move and is now setting up satellite offices in the surrounding Puget Sound area. Restaurants might get in on the act too; they could convert dining areas into co-working spaces during off hours, or rent out private rooms by the day for meetings and brainstorming sessions.
Some of the shortcomings of remote work—the lack of camaraderie and mentoring, the fear of being forgotten—may ultimately be bridged by new technology. Google and Microsoft are already starting to integrate prominent remote-videoconferencing capabilities more fully into meeting spaces, so that remote workers don’t seem like an afterthought. Augmented reality, which so far has been used most notably for games like Pokémon Go, could end up transforming into a useful work tool, allowing remote workers to “seem” to be in the room with on-site workers.
There are plenty of other ideas out there, and a popular groundswell of support for flexibility and life balance that makes sense for all of us. Will we get there, or will we slide back into our old ways? That’s on us. Companies that don’t reinvent may well pay the price, losing top talent to businesses that do.
“We aren’t robots,” Kari Altizer says. “Before, we thought it was impossible to work with our children next to us. Now, we know it is possible—but we have to change the ways in which we work.”
By Joanne Lipman
Source: COVID-19 Changed Work Forever | Time
- “Real-time data show virus hit to global economic activity”. http://www.ft.com. 22 March 2020. Archived from the original on 22 March 2020. Retrieved 22 March 2020.
- Kaplan, Juliana; Frias, Lauren; McFall-Johnsen, Morgan (14 March 2020). “A third of the global population is on coronavirus lockdown — here’s our constantly updated list of countries and restrictions”. Business Insider Australia. Retrieved 15 April 2020.
- “Price Gouging Complaints Surge Amid Coronavirus Pandemic”. The New York Times. 27 March 2020.
- “FDA anticipates disruptions, shortages as China outbreak plays out”. FiercePharma. Archived from the original on 26 February 2020. Retrieved 26 February 2020.
- Sirletti, Sonia; Remondini, Chiara; Lepido, Daniele (24 February 2020). “Virus Outbreak Drives Italians to Panic-Buying of Masks and Food”. http://www.bloomberg.com. Archived from the original on 25 February 2020. Retrieved 14 March 2020.
- “Viral hysteria: Hong Kong panic buying sparks run on toilet paper”. CNA. Archived from the original on 26 February 2020. Retrieved 26 February 2020.
- Rummler, Orion. “Household basics are scarce in Hong Kong under coronavirus lockdown”. Axios. Archived from the original on 26 February 2020. Retrieved 26 February 2020.
- Strumpf, Dan (31 January 2020). “Tech Sector Fears Supply Delays as Effects of Virus Ripple Through China”. The Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Archived from the original on 31 January 2020. Retrieved 26 February 2020.
- McLean, Rob; He, Laura; Tappe, Anneken. “Dow plunges 1,000 points as coronavirus cases surge in South Korea and Italy”. CNN. Archived from the original on 27 February 2020. Retrieved 27 February 2020.
- “FTSE 100 plunges 3.7 per cent as Italy confirms sixth coronavirus death”. CityAM. 24 February 2020. Archived from the original on 25 February 2020. Retrieved 27 February 2020.
- Smith, Elliot (28 February 2020). “Global stocks head for worst week since the financial crisis amid fears of a possible pandemic”. CNBC. Archived from the original on 28 February 2020. Retrieved 28 February 2020.
- Imbert, Fred; Huang, Eustance (27 February 2020). “Dow falls 350 points Friday to cap the worst week for Wall Street since the financial crisis”. CNBC. Archived from the original on 28 February 2020. Retrieved 28 February 2020.
- Smith, Elliot (28 February 2020). “European stocks fall 12% on the week as coronavirus grips markets”. CNBC. Archived from the original on 28 February 2020. Retrieved 28 February 2020.
- Anticipating the impacts of COVID-19 in humanitarian and food crisis contexts. Rome: FAO. 2020. doi:10.4060/ca8464en. ISBN 978-92-5-132370-0.
- “Major Events Cancelled or Postponed ~Due to Coronavirus”. Archived from the original on 5 March 2020. Retrieved 3 March 2020.
- Bordo, Michael; Levin, Andrew; Levy, Mickey; Sinha, Arunima (27 January 2021). “Scenario analysis, contingency planning, and central bank communications”. VoxEU.org. Retrieved 27 January 2021.
- Sheppard, David; McCormick, Myles; Brower, Derek; Lockett, Hudson (20 April 2020). “US oil price below zero for first time in history”. Financial Times. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
- “New virus mutes Lunar New Year celebrations worldwide”. AP NEWS. 25 January 2020. Archived from the original on 31 January 2020. Retrieved 31 January 2020.
- “Shanghai Disney shuts to prevent spread of virus”. CNBC. 24 January 2020. Archived from the original on 26 January 2020. Retrieved 6 February 2020.
- “China cancels Lunar New Year events over deadly virus fears”. Deutsche Welle. 23 January 2020. Retrieved 24 January 2020.
- Gigi Choy, Echo Xie (4 February 2020). “As China goes back to work, will the coronavirus spread even more rapidly?”. South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 6 February 2020. Retrieved 6 February 2020.
- Cheng, Evelyn (1 February 2020). “More than half of China extends shutdown over virus”. CNBC. Archived from the original on 5 February 2020. Retrieved 6 February 2020.
- “Hong Kong Chinese New Year”. Hong Kong Tourism Board. Archived from the original on 29 November 2019. Retrieved 26 January 2020.
- Lum, Alvin; Sum, Lok-kei (25 January 2020). “China coronavirus: Hong Kong leader hits back at delay criticism as she suspends school classes, cancels marathon and declares city at highest level of emergency”. South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 25 January 2020. Retrieved 26 January 2020.
- swissinfo.ch, S. W. I.; Corporation, a branch of the Swiss Broadcasting. “Procura por máscaras aumenta 100 vezes e prejudica luta contra o coronavírus”. SWI swissinfo.ch (in Portuguese). Archived from the original on 12 February 2020. Retrieved 12 February 2020.
- Boseley, Sarah (7 February 2020). “WHO warns of global shortage of face masks and protective suits”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Archived from the original on 12 February 2020. Retrieved 12 February 2020.
- Schwartz, Nelson D. (21 March 2020). “Coronavirus Recession Looms, Its Course ‘Unrecognizable‘“. The New York Times. Archived from the original on 24 March 2020. Retrieved 24 March 2020.
- Horowitz, Julia. “A ‘short, sharp’ global recession is starting to look inevitable”. CNN.com. Archived from the original on 20 March 2020. Retrieved 26 March 2020.
- Lowrey, Annie (9 March 2020). “The Coronavirus Recession Will Be Unusually Difficult to Fight”. The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 24 March 2020. Retrieved 24 March 2020.
- Jenkins, Simon (9 March 2020). “There will be no easy cure for a recession triggered by the coronavirus”. Archived from the original on 24 March 2020. Retrieved 24 March 2020 – via http://www.theguardian.com.
- Palumbo, Daniele (28 March 2020). “Coronavirus: A visual guide to the economic impact”. BBC News. Archived from the original on 27 March 2020.
- “G20 GDP Growth – First quarter of 2020, OECD”. OECD. 11 June 2020. Retrieved 6 September 2020.
- McKeever, Vicky (30 June 2020). “The coronavirus is expected to have cost 400 million jobs in the second quarter, UN labor agency estimates”. CNBC. Retrieved 6 September 2020.
- “Pandemic knocks a tenth off incomes of workers around the world”. Financial Times. 23 September 2020. Retrieved 23 September 2020.
- “Recovery plan for Europe”. European Commission – European Commission. Retrieved 25 June 2020.
- Stevis-Gridneff, Matina (27 May 2020). “A €750 Billion Virus Recovery Plan Thrusts Europe Into a New Frontier”. The New York Times. Retrieved 25 June 2020.
- Hansen, Sarah. “European Union Reveals $826 Billion Economic Stimulus Plan To Battle Coronavirus Damage”. Forbes. Retrieved 25 June 2020.
- “Is Germany’s ‘colossal’ recovery plan a role model for other coronavirus-hit economies?”. France 24. 7 June 2020. Retrieved 25 June 2020.
- Partington, Richard (4 June 2020). “Germany unveils €130bn coronavirus recovery package”. The Guardian. Retrieved 25 June 2020.
- Welle, Deutsche. “France unveils stimulus plan worth €8 billion for car industry | DW | 27.05.2020”. DW.COM. Retrieved 25 June 2020.
- “£73.5 million to boost green economic recovery in automotive sector”. GOV.UK. Retrieved 26 June 2020.
- Laville, Matthew Taylorand Sandra (1 May 2020). “City leaders aim to shape green recovery from coronavirus crisis”. The Guardian. Retrieved 26 June 2020.
- “Lockdown emissions fall will have ‘no effect’ on climate”. phys.org. Retrieved 31 August 2020.
- Forster, Piers M.; Forster, Harriet I.; Evans, Mat J.; Gidden, Matthew J.; Jones, Chris D.; Keller, Christoph A.; Lamboll, Robin D.; Quéré, Corinne Le; Rogelj, Joeri; Rosen, Deborah; Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich; Richardson, Thomas B.; Smith, Christopher J.; Turnock, Steven T. (7 August 2020). “Current and future global climate impacts resulting from COVID-19”. Nature Climate Change. 10 (10): 913–919. Bibcode:2020NatCC..10..913F. doi:10.1038/s41558-020-0883-0. ISSN 1758-6798. S2CID 221019148. Retrieved 31 August 2020.
- Zhou, Emma; Shepherd, Christian (5 June 2020). “China’s Belt and Road urged to take green route”. FT. Retrieved 28 September 2020.
- Business, Hanna Ziady, CNN. “The global economic bailout is running at $19.5 trillion. It will go higher”. CNN. Retrieved 21 November 2020.
- Por Redacción de TVN Noticias (30 March 2020). “PNUD: ‘La pandemia dejará cicatrices muy profundas en el planeta‘“. Tvn-2.com. Retrieved 3 April 2020.
- “US gas prices expected to fall as coronavirus and failed OPEC talks send oil market reeling”. ABC News. Pak, Anton; Adegboye, Oyelola A.; Adekunle, Adeshina I.; Rahman, Kazi M.; McBryde, Emma S.; Eisen, Damon P. (2020). “Economic Consequences of the COVID-19 Outbreak: the Need for Epidemic Preparedness”. Frontiers in Public Health. 8: 241. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.00241. ISSN 2296-2565. PMC 7273352. PMID 32574307