Q: Is it crazy to ask to be laid off?
New leadership at the nonprofit where I have worked for 17 years has announced a return-to-office policy to be applied without exception, starting early 2024. This policy violates a promise my director made to me in writing.
The company will be tracking our badge swipes, which is a complete culture change. Out-of-state workers are now required to fly in once a quarter. The announcement was met with so much hostility that I have doubts the policy will be implemented as planned in the coming months.
In my opinion, the employees who should be in person are our call center workers, who really benefit from knowledge-sharing and camaraderie. But they are the only workers not required to come in; we couldn’t find anyone willing to do the job unless they had the benefit of working at home.
Before the new rule was announced, I had already been feeling taken for granted and was considering “quiet quitting.” Instead, I’m considering a career change that would require more education. My state has a program that, in theory, allows you to receive unemployment for 28 weeks without looking for work if you’re in training. If I asked to be laid off, it could send a message about the new leaders’ error, and I could collect unemployment and go to school full time.
Individual layoffs are not unusual at my company. I am 50 and have a good retirement account. I also have kids and don’t want to be completely irresponsible. Is there anything I’m not considering?
A: Your proposed solution turns on a lot more “ifs” than I would be comfortable with.
If your employer agrees to lay you off, instead of treating your request as a resignation or a dare; if you can get by on unemployment benefits; if the training will enable you to make a lateral reentry instead of starting over at the bottom; and if the job market seven months from now is favorable — it could work out. And it might even let leaders know they’ve made a mistake — if in fact it was a mistake and not a strategic gambit to encourage voluntary attrition.
As counterweight to those airy ifs, let me offer these recent cautionary tales from other readers in your (our) approximate demographic:
— A 50-something nonprofit consultant who went back to law school for additional credentials is now “unhappy, in debt and frustrated” in a legal practice far removed from the environmental conservation work they hoped to be doing.
— A business owner who retired and moved for their spouse’s new job and retrained for a new career is struggling after the spouse lost the job, the backup career sputtered and a series of setbacks burned through their retirement savings.
Given those prospects, I would recommend a more gradual and practical transition, continuing in your current job while pursuing the degree you want part-time and building your network. But I understand your current employer’s mandate probably has you feeling a bit panicked.
Your experience reflects the ongoing workplace tug of war that I expect we’ll be seeing more of in 2024 between employees accustomed to flexibility and employers whose policy on remote work has been succinctly summarized by the CEO of chip manufacturer Broadcom: “You get your butt in here.”
Employer enforcement of return-to-office mandates is running the gamut from carrots — 87% of CEOs in a KPMG survey said they will probably reward in-office employees with raises, promotions and favorable assignments — to sticks, such as threats by Amazon to terminate workers who do not comply. (KPMG is my full-time employer, and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.)
In response, employees are either grudgingly complying with badge-swipe quotas while putting in the bare minimum of face time or offering their skills to more flex-friendly employers. Some are fighting back with lawsuits, claiming that strict return-to-office mandates discriminate against workers with disabilities. (See also: older workers, caretakers and moms.)
Since you note the mandate at your workplace is meeting significant resistance, it might be worth it to stand your ground with your colleagues and see if the new management blinks while you quietly lay plans for an alternative future.
Incidentally, I would spend less time thinking about which of your colleagues should be forced to comply with a policy no one likes and think more about the example they have set for the rest of you: “We couldn’t find anyone willing to do the job unless they had the benefit of working at home.”
Has your workplace imposed in-office work requirements? How are they being enforced? How have employees responded? Let me know at karla.miller@washpost.com.