The Folly of Forcing Social Security Administration Employees Back to the Office
In a misguided push against modern workforce realities, some legislators are advocating for a complete return to the office for employees at the Social Security Administration (SSA). Senators Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), among others, have questioned the SSA’s hybrid work posture, which currently mandates that field office employees work three days on-site and two days remotely each week. The agency’s leadership, however, has pointed to the effectiveness of this balanced approach. By insisting on a full return to the office, these lawmakers not only undermine the demonstrated benefits of hybrid work but also risk reducing the efficiency and effectiveness of a critical public service agency.
The Success of SSA’s Hybrid Model
The SSA’s hybrid model, in place since 2022, has proven its worth. The agency has implemented a flexible work arrangement that aligns with the varying needs of its workforce. As SSA leadership articulated during a recent committee hearing, field office employees have diverse responsibilities that require both in-person interaction and quiet, focused time away from the public eye to process claims and handle complex tasks. A rigid full-time office requirement disregards the nuance and flexibility needed for these roles.
The numbers speak for themselves. SSA Deputy Commissioner O’Malley reported a 5.7% increase in productivity over the last year as a result of the current hybrid work setup. This improvement underscores how well the hybrid model accommodates the demands of the job. For an agency responsible for managing millions of claims, the productivity boost is not just a statistical gain; it represents real-world improvements in the speed and quality of service delivered to the American people. The agency has found a way to balance customer-facing responsibilities with the detailed work that must occur behind the scenes, achieving better outcomes for the public it serves.
Remote Work: A Proven Strategy for Employee Retention and Engagement
The benefits of remote work for federal employees are not unique to the SSA. The White House Office of Personnel Management’s annual report revealed significant advantages of telework for employee retention and engagement across government agencies. A striking 68 percent of frequent remote federal workers expressed intentions to remain in their roles, compared to only 53 percent of those who do not telework. Engagement levels are also significantly higher among frequent teleworkers, with 77 percent reporting high levels of engagement, versus just 59 percent among their office-bound counterparts.
Moreover, the performance benefits of remote work are hard to ignore. Over 84 percent of employees and managers across various federal agencies acknowledge improvements in work quality and customer satisfaction due to remote work. This data underscores that telework is not merely a temporary solution but a powerful tool that enhances employee retention, engagement, and overall performance.
Furthermore, the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey found that more than 62 percent of federal employees report being “very satisfied” with their current work schedules, and 26 percent indicate they are “satisfied,” for a total of 88 percent satisfaction. Ninety percent either “strongly agree” or “agree” that their current work schedules enable them to work productively. The evidence is overwhelming: remote and hybrid work arrangements lead to more effective and satisfied federal employees.
Misguided Legislative Interference
Despite these clear advantages, some legislators seem fixated on forcing employees back to the office full-time. Senators Scott and Grassley’s line of questioning during the committee hearing reflects a misunderstanding—or worse, a disregard—of the data and insights presented by SSA leadership. Their calls for a complete return to the office suggest a desire to revert to pre-pandemic norms without considering the unique and evolving needs of both employees and the public they serve.
The push to reduce telework lacks empirical support and disregards the positive outcomes demonstrated by existing data. A survey by the Federal News Network of 6,338 federal workers revealed that, despite stated intentions to foster enhanced collaboration and productivity, over half of these employees report that the rationale behind returning to the office has not been clearly communicated by senior leadership. More than one-third strongly disagree with the reasons they have been given for returning. Furthermore, 64 percent of respondents working on a hybrid schedule find themselves less productive in the office compared to their remote setups.
The Broader Implications for Public Sector Work
The push to dismantle effective hybrid models like SSA’s has broader implications for public sector work. Government agencies are often criticized for being slow to innovate, yet when they do embrace modern, effective workplace strategies, they face political backlash. This contradiction stifles progress and undermines efforts to make public sector work more appealing and sustainable for current and future employees.
Forcing a return to full-time, on-site work could lead to several unintended consequences. Employee morale could decline as workers who have adapted to and thrived in a hybrid environment are suddenly forced back into rigid office schedules. The public sector is already facing challenges in attracting and retaining talent, and such a move could exacerbate these issues. Additionally, the quality of public services could suffer as productivity gains from remote work are lost, and employees become more stressed and less engaged.
Time to Embrace, Not Erase, Progress
The insistence by some lawmakers on a full return to the office is a reactionary stance that fails to account for the evidence in front of us. The SSA’s success with a hybrid model shows that flexible work is not just a temporary response to a crisis but a viable, effective long-term strategy. Instead of pushing for a regression to outdated work models, legislators should support policies that foster innovation, adaptability, and efficiency in government agencies.
Public agencies like the SSA have a unique opportunity to lead by example in demonstrating how flexible work arrangements can benefit both employees and the public they serve. A rigid, one-size-fits-all approach is ill-suited for the complexities of today’s work environment, particularly in sectors where varied tasks require varied settings. It’s time to stop clinging to the past and start building a future of work that works for everyone.
Conclusion
The debate over the Social Security Administration’s hybrid work policy reflects a larger, ongoing discussion about the future of work in America. Legislators who push for a full return to the office are missing the bigger picture: flexibility and adaptability are not just trends—they are essential components of an effective, modern workforce. The SSA’s experience proves that hybrid work can drive productivity and improve service delivery. Policymakers should take note and encourage such progress, rather than resist it. The real folly lies not in hybrid work but in refusing to recognize its benefits.
Key Take-Away
The push to force employees back to the office undermines the Social Security Administration's successful hybrid model, which boosts productivity and satisfaction. Policymakers should embrace flexibility to enhance workforce efficiency and public… Share on XImage credit: Tima Miroshnichenko/pexels
Dr. Gleb Tsipursky was named “Office Whisperer” by The New York Times for helping leaders overcome frustrations with hybrid work and Generative AI. He serves as the CEO of the future-of-work consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts. Dr. Gleb wrote seven best-selling books, and his two most recent ones are Returning to the Office and Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams and ChatGPT for Thought Leaders and Content Creators: Unlocking the Potential of Generative AI for Innovative and Effective Content Creation. His cutting-edge thought leadership was featured in over 650 articles and 550 interviews in Harvard Business Review, Inc. Magazine, USA Today, CBS News, Fox News, Time, Business Insider, Fortune, The New York Times, and elsewhere. His writing was translated into Chinese, Spanish, Russian, Polish, Korean, French, Vietnamese, German, and other languages. His expertise comes from over 20 years of consulting, coaching, and speaking and training for Fortune 500 companies from Aflac to Xerox. It also comes from over 15 years in academia as a behavioral scientist, with 8 years as a lecturer at UNC-Chapel Hill and 7 years as a professor at Ohio State. A proud Ukrainian American, Dr. Gleb lives in Columbus, Ohio.