Information contained in this publication is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or opinion, nor is it a substitute for the professional judgment of an attorney.
Just how far can companies go in requiring in-person work?
That is one of the critical questions facing European employers today, according to Littler’s fifth annual European Employer Survey. Drawing on insights from nearly 700 human resources executives, in-house attorneys, and business leaders, this year’s survey finds employers pulled in different directions as their desire to increase in-person work may conflict with the flexibility needed to attract and retain talent.
The majority of European employers responding to our survey are either requiring employees to work fully in-person (30%) or have hybrid schedules where employees work more days in person than remote (27%). In addition, 73% of those who are not already requiring fully in-person work are considering reducing remote work options. As employers strive to increase in-person work, they may encounter roadblocks from employees who are reluctant to relinquish flexibility. While this year’s survey found greater alignment between employer policies and employee preferences for working models, 42% still believe that their employees prefer hybrid or remote work to a greater extent than they offer it.
The survey report covers a range of additional legal and HR issues impacting European employers, including efforts to support employee well-being and combat burnout, difficulties in managing “wandering workers,” how macroeconomic concerns are impacting workforce planning, and the use of artificial intelligence tools in recruiting and hiring. It also breaks out country-specific analyses for Germany, France, Spain, Italy and the United Kingdom.
The survey questions and their resulting findings cover issues that are governed by differing rules from European governments, and certain actions may not be permissible depending on the country. The content does not convey or constitute legal advice, nor is it intended to be acted upon as such.