PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 18, 2025Industrial and Organizational Psychology5 citationsOpen Access

Presidential memorandum on return to in-person work: Implications for the federal workforce

View Full Paper
TATammy D. AllenALAlyssa LezcanoMSMolly Schoffel

Key Points

  • The return-to-office mandate threatens workforce stability and may increase turnover, particularly in skilled professions.
  • Research indicates remote work does not negatively impact productivity, challenging the rationale behind the in-person policy.
  • The shift away from remote work jeopardizes efforts in diversity, equity, and inclusion within the federal workforce.
  • Broader implications of this directive indicate potential long-term negative changes in federal employment practices.

Abstract

Abstract On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump issued a presidential memorandum that mandated all federal employees return to in-person work full time. Implementation guidance from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) required rapid policy revisions. The order marks a sharp departure from prior federal telework policies, including longstanding efforts to expand flexible work as a tool for recruitment, retention, productivity, and inclusion. Contrary to claims that in-person work boosts efficiency, research shows remote work generally has no adverse impact on productivity and supports performance in both public and private sectors. The return-to-office mandate is likely to lead to turnover, particularly among highly skilled workers, creating risks of brain drain and diminished capacity to compete with the private sector for talent. It also threatens diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts by disproportionately burdening women, caregivers, individuals with disabilities, workers of color, and LGBTQ+ employees. These changes, alongside parallel executive actions undermining DEI programs, reflect a broader return to traditional, centralized models of work built on outdated “ideal worker” norms. These changes have the potential to negatively reshape federal employment for years to come.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Allen et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68af453fad7bf08b1ead2d19https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2025.10017
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1A dual pathway model of remote work intensity: A meta‐analysis of its simultaneous positive and negative effects2024 · 159 citations
  2. 2Measuring Work from Home2025 · 21 citations
  3. 3Return-to-Office Mandates2024 · 24 citations
  4. 4Cultural Schemas, Social Class, and the Flexibility Stigma2013 · 735 citations
  5. 5Breaking the mold: women, men, and time in the new corporate world1994 · 376 citations