Nearly half of UK professionals would rather leave their jobs than return to the office five days a week, according to new research from recruitment giant Hays.

Disconnect

The findings of the Hays survey appear to highlight a growing disconnect between employee preferences and employer policies on post-pandemic working models and, it seems, the potential consequences could be severe. With hybrid working now the norm for most office-based staff, businesses pushing for a full return risk not just resistance, but an outright exodus of talent.

Hybrid Working Still Dominates

Since the pandemic reshaped traditional work models almost overnight, hybrid working has emerged as the clear favourite for many professionals. Hays’ Spring 2025 Employment Trends survey, which canvassed over 8,000 workers and employers across the UK, found that a massive 77 per cent of professionals are now working in some form of hybrid setup. The most common arrangement, three days in the office and two days remote, is the one adopted by a quarter of all companies surveyed.

Although the survey highlights how one in five employers now allows staff to choose their own working pattern, this figure has dropped slightly from 26 per cent in the previous survey, suggesting a slight shift towards more structured expectations.

Very Few Companies Plan To Increase Office Attendance

The overall preference, however, is clear, and not just among employees. While a minority of companies are increasing office attendance, only 8 per cent of employers said they plan to enforce a full-time return within the next six months. Meanwhile, 66 per cent admitted they were concerned about potential backlash if they did.

Why Don’t Workers Want To Return To The Office?

According to the Hays survey, the key factor that’s fuelling this resistance to returning full-time is cost. Hays found that 73 per cent of professionals cited commuting expenses as a major factor in their reluctance to come back to the office more often. A full return would lead to higher costs for 88 per cent of workers, and the financial strain is particularly pronounced among women.

For example, 59 per cent of women surveyed said commuting would significantly impact their finances, compared with 41 per cent of men. This gender gap also plays out in the headline figure, i.e. while 48 per cent of all respondents said they would consider quitting over a full-time RTO mandate, that figure rose to 58 per cent for women, and fell to 42 per cent for men.

Pam Lindsay-Dunn, COO of Hays UK and Ireland, has warned that businesses could be on the brink of a talent crisis if they push too hard, saying, “Employers need to realise they are at serious risk of losing top talent if they make a full-time return-to-office compulsory,” and that, “Our research clearly shows how highly professionals still value the option to work from home.”

Other Factors

Although cost was cited as the main reason to resist returning full-time to the office in the Hays survey, other factors known to make a hybrid work model preferable include:

– Work-life balance. Many workers now organise their lives around flexible routines, from school pickups to avoiding rush-hour stress.

– Employee wellbeing. Studies have repeatedly linked flexible working to lower stress levels and improved mental health.

– Productivity. As highlighted by the Hays survey, a majority of employers (52 per cent) said there was no difference in productivity between home and office workers. Another 19 per cent said remote workers performed better, while only 13 per cent believed office-based staff were more productive.

‘Look At The Bigger Picture,’ Hays Urges Employers

Despite the push from some corporate giants to increase in-office time, the data suggests this approach is increasingly out of step with employee sentiment. Recent moves from companies like Amazon, PwC and Santander to tighten RTO rules have already triggered staff unrest, and Hays’ findings suggest the UK workforce may not respond kindly to similar measures elsewhere.

Hays’ Lindsay-Dunn has advised employers to weigh their options carefully, saying: “Before making any significant changes to their current working model, employers must look at the bigger picture,” and “That means factoring in commuting costs, wellbeing, productivity and the benefits that hybrid working brings to both the individual and the business.”

Indeed, previous research by the University of Pittsburgh warns that companies pushing full-time office returns risk triggering a “brain drain”, with high performers, particularly women, more likely to leave in favour of flexible employers.

Retention Risks and Recruitment Challenges

For UK businesses already grappling with talent shortages and recruitment pressures, the findings from the Hays Spring 2025 Employment Trends survey raise red flags. If nearly half the professional workforce is willing to walk over RTO demands, the potential for disruption is hard to ignore. Employers may, for example, face:

– Higher recruitment costs. Replacing experienced staff is expensive and time-consuming.

– Loss of institutional knowledge. Departing staff can take critical skills and insights with them.

– Brand damage. Perceptions of inflexibility may deter top candidates from applying.

At a time when retaining skilled staff is already a challenge, a misstep on working policy could prove costly.

For example, while many companies have increased expectations around office time, in reality, actual enforcement remains rare. This may reflect a broader recognition that rigid models could backfire, particularly when productivity data doesn’t strongly favour office-based work.

Not Everyone’s A Fan of Hybrid Working

While hybrid working is widely embraced, it’s not without its critics. For example, some business leaders argue that in-person collaboration fosters creativity, innovation, and company culture, particularly for newer staff or junior employees. Others raise concerns around remote management, communication gaps, and the long-term impact on team cohesion.

However, it should be noted here that evidence on these points is mixed. For example, research from the University of Melbourne found that companies with flexible working policies performed better on the stock market over the long term. This could mean that while some managers may feel more in control with staff on-site, this doesn’t always translate to better outcomes.

Also, full flexibility may not suit every worker. For example, some employees, especially those in shared accommodation or with limited space, may prefer office environments where they can focus. That’s why some employers still offer office-first policies with optional home working, depending on role, seniority or team dynamics.

That said, Hays’ latest findings suggest that forcing a full return across the board could do more harm than good.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

What this research makes clear is that the conversation around work patterns is far from over. While some employers are moving to reassert control over when and where work happens, many employees remain firmly committed to the flexibility they’ve grown used to since the pandemic. Hybrid working has shifted from being a stopgap solution to a preferred way of life for a large part of the UK workforce, and attempts to reverse that may meet more resistance than some leaders expect.

For UK businesses, the Hays survey figures appear to indicate that poorly handled return-to-office policy may not just lead to internal dissatisfaction, but it could lead to the loss of valued staff, weakened morale, and a dent in employer reputation. In a competitive labour market, especially in knowledge-based sectors, retaining skilled professionals means understanding what motivates them, and right now, for many, that includes the autonomy and balance hybrid work affords.

However, it’s not only employers who have decisions to make. Employees, too, are weighing their priorities, e.g. cost of living pressures, childcare responsibilities, commuting time and mental wellbeing are all influencing what the “ideal” work setup looks like. While not every role or sector can offer the same level of flexibility, the evidence suggests that a one-size-fits-all approach won’t cut it.

The implications may also apply to other stakeholders as well, e.g. from HR teams and line managers tasked with navigating new expectations, to policymakers and transport planners grappling with changes in commuting patterns. Even commercial landlords and local high streets could feel the knock-on effects of long-term shifts in where and how people work.

Overall, the Hays findings could be seen as serving as a timely reminder that workplace culture is evolving, and any business that wants to keep its best people may need to evolve with it.