Over 30,000 Amazon employees signed a petition telling their employer to back off the 5-day RTO mandate. Amazon went ahead with it anyway.
We’ve had an interesting ride since 2020. Forced remote work became the norm, then companies started clawing people back into the office. Now we’re seeing strict enforcement across major corporations. The Flex Index shows 43% of Fortune 500 companies now have set office schedules—that’s doubled since 2023. You can see clear patterns emerging – finance companies are pushing the hardest, tech companies are somewhere in between, and a few holdouts still offer full remote.
In this article we’re comparing RTO policies across major companies. We’ll show you the spectrum from Amazon’s strict 5-day enforcement through to Google’s moderate 3-day hybrid and even some reversals like Robinhood and H&R Block. For the full picture on return to office mandates and research evidence, looking at specific company approaches shows you what’s actually playing out.
Which Major Companies Have the Strictest Return to Office Mandates?
The strictest RTO mandates require everyone in the office 5 days a week. That’s Amazon starting January 2025, JPMorgan Chase as of March 2025, Samsung with enforcement technology, Goldman Sachs since March 2022, Morgan Stanley, Dell as of March 2025, and AT&T with presence tracking.
Amazon kicks off their 5-day policy in January 2025. That 30,000-employee petition shows just how unpopular the move is with employees. Management ignored it completely. And they’re still dealing with desk shortages in New York and delayed rollout in Atlanta because they don’t have enough space.
JPMorgan Chase went full 5-day in March 2025. They built a massive new Manhattan headquarters but somehow didn’t plan properly – now they’re facing desk shortages, inadequate meeting rooms, slow Wi-Fi, and crowded offices. You can spend billions on real estate and still get the basics wrong.
Samsung enforces 5-day attendance using anti-coffee badging technology. Coffee badging is when employees swipe in, grab a coffee, then leave to work remotely. Samsung built tech to stop this. This is the surveillance end of the spectrum – they’re using technology to enforce rather than trust as the foundation.
The financial sector has gone all-in on 5-day. Goldman Sachs implemented full return in March 2022 – they were earliest among major banks. Citigroup requires 5-day with performance evaluation tied to attendance. Finance is stricter than tech, no question.
These strict mandates are interesting when you look at the research evidence showing productivity maintenance or gains under remote work.
How Do Tech Companies Like Amazon, Google, and Meta Compare on RTO Policies?
Tech companies are all over the map. Amazon requires 5 days (strictest of the major tech firms), Google, Meta, and Microsoft require 3 days (this is the industry standard now), while Shopify, Spotify, Dropbox, and Airbnb maintain full remote (no mandates at all). It’s worth noting that within Meta, Instagram requires 5 days even though other divisions stay at 3 days.
Amazon and Dell are outliers in tech. Amazon’s petition demonstrates resistance is real even at major tech companies. Dell requires 5-day as of March 2025. Both are stricter than what their peers settled on. When you’re making the case against strict mandates, point this out – most tech companies landed on 3 days, not 5.
The 3-day hybrid is tech’s compromise position. Google requires 3-day hybrid (Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday) with enforcement tied to performance reviews. Meta requires 3-day starting September 2023 for most divisions. Microsoft requires 3-day hybrid expanding to all locations, starting at Puget Sound headquarters end of February 2026. Apple requires 3-day (Monday/Tuesday/Thursday or team-chosen days). Three days in office, two remote – that’s where tech has settled. For detailed guidance on implementing effective hybrid work policies, these moderate approaches offer practical frameworks.
The two-tier policy within Meta deserves attention. Instagram requires 5-day office attendance starting February 2, 2026, while the rest of Meta maintains 3-day hybrid. Same company, different rules by division. If 3 days works for Facebook engineers, what’s the logic for making Instagram engineers come in 5? The two-tier policy creates unfairness and retention risk.
Then there are the full remote companies. Shopify maintains fully remote with no mandate. Spotify offers work-from-anywhere. Dropbox maintains virtual-first. Airbnb allows work from anywhere in 170+ countries. These prove you can run major tech companies without office mandates.
Why Do Financial Companies Like JPMorgan and Canadian Banks Mandate Stricter RTO Than Tech?
Financial companies overwhelmingly require 4-5 day office attendance. U.S. banks like JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley mandate 5 days, while Canadian banks (RBC, BMO, TD Bank, Scotiabank) standardise on 4 days. Tech companies average 3 days or less, with many offering full remote.
U.S. banking leads the pack on strictness. JPMorgan Chase went 5-day full return March 2025. Goldman Sachs required 5-day since March 2022 – they were the earliest major bank to go full return. Citigroup requires 5-day with performance evaluation linked to attendance.
Canadian banks coordinated on a slightly less strict standard. Royal Bank of Canada requires 4-day starting September 2025. Bank of Montreal requires 4-day starting September 15, 2025. TD Bank requires 4-day with phased regional rollout starting October 2025. Four days, not five – but still stricter than tech’s 3-day standard.
What’s behind the difference between finance and tech? Financial culture puts a lot of weight on in-person supervision and hierarchical visibility. They’ve got massive real estate investments in major financial centres creating sunk costs. Client-facing roles get used to justify broader mandates. Traditional corporate culture that’s less adapted to distributed work.
There are exceptions, of course. Amazon (tech) at 5 days is stricter than the tech norm. Deutsche Bank (finance) at 3 days is more flexible than the finance norm. Sector patterns have outliers.
The financial sector’s strict approach is particularly interesting when you look at research showing productivity maintenance under remote work.
What Can Companies Learn from Robinhood and H&R Block’s RTO Policy Reversals?
Robinhood’s CEO publicly stated their RTO call was a mistake and reversed course. H&R Block reversed their RTO mandate and now allows teams to set their own policies. Both show that course correction is possible when companies recognise their mandate failed.
Robinhood’s CEO admission is a rare example of executive accountability for a policy failure. Most executives don’t admit mistakes, especially public ones affecting thousands of employees. The CEO walked back the mandate and restored flexibility. This matters because it reduces the perceived risk of policy reversal for other companies.
H&R Block first called corporate staff back three days a week in 2021. Then they reversed. Now individual teams set their own office attendance policies. Bottom-up decision-making rather than top-down mandate. These reversals demonstrate successful hybrid work implementation frameworks that serve as alternatives to strict enforcement.
AT&T provides another reversal example. AT&T uses presence reports combining badge data, network connections, and device location. The CMO admitted the system hasn’t been fully accurate and is “driving people to the brink of frustration”. AT&T reduced reliance on the tracking system after the cultural backlash. Comprehensive tracking created distrust and privacy concerns – more problems than it solved.
When you’re presenting alternatives to leadership, cite these reversal examples. Reference Robinhood’s CEO admission to show that admitting error is acceptable. Use H&R Block as a model for trust-based team flexibility. Point to AT&T’s tracking failure when leadership proposes surveillance systems.
How Does Instagram’s 5-Day Mandate Contrast with Meta’s 3-Day Policy?
Instagram requires 5-day office attendance starting February 2, 2026, while the rest of Meta maintains 3-day hybrid implemented in September 2023. This creates a two-tier system within the same company. Identical roles have different attendance requirements based on division.
Here’s what creates internal tension. Perceived unfairness – same company, same parent organisation, different rules. Logic inconsistency – if 3 days works for Facebook engineers, why not Instagram engineers? Retention risk – Instagram employees may transfer to other Meta divisions for flexibility. Recruitment challenge – harder to hire for Instagram versus other Meta properties.
Two-tier policies show a lack of data-driven approach. If RTO benefits exist, why vary by division? This reveals the policy as management preference rather than business necessity. It creates internal comparison and resentment.
Key implications: Two-tier policies prove that strict mandates aren’t universally necessary even within one company. Use this as an argument against blanket mandates: “If Instagram needs 5 but Facebook works with 3, maybe it’s role-specific?” The internal inconsistency highlights broader issues with RTO mandate logic and evidence.
What Does Amazon’s 30,000-Employee Petition Reveal About RTO Resistance?
Over 30,000 Amazon employees signed a petition opposing the company’s 5-day RTO mandate announced for January 2025. This is the largest documented employee resistance to a corporate RTO policy. Amazon proceeded with the mandate despite the petition.
What the petition reveals: Tens of thousands willing to publicly oppose a leadership decision shows mass discontent. Employees organised large-scale opposition despite company resistance – that shows coordination capability. Signers willing to attach names despite potential career consequences demonstrates their risk tolerance. Amazon leadership either didn’t anticipate or didn’t care about the resistance – failed engagement either way. Even 30,000 signatures couldn’t change the policy, showing the limits of employee voice. This scale of resistance signals the employee turnover and organisational performance impacts that strict mandates can trigger.
Amazon’s response: Proceeded with January 2025 implementation despite the petition. CEO Andy Jassy defended the decision in internal communications. No meaningful policy changes or accommodations. Desk capacity issues delayed some locations (New York, Atlanta) but didn’t change the policy.
Most RTO mandates face resistance but it’s rarely documented at this scale. Coffee badging represents passive resistance. Amazon’s petition represents active, organised, public opposition.
Strategic considerations: Even massive employee opposition may not change executive decisions – prepare for that reality. Document employee concerns before mandates to show leadership you anticipated resistance. Use the Amazon example to show your board or executives the reputational risk of strict mandates.
Employee resistance at this scale contradicts claims that workers prefer office environments.
How Are Companies Like Samsung Using Technology to Enforce RTO Compliance?
Coffee badging – employees briefly badging into the office to show compliance then leaving to work remotely – prompted Samsung to deploy enforcement technology preventing this practice. AT&T uses presence reports combining badge swipes, network connections, and device location data to verify office time.
Coffee badging works like this: employees swipe their badge to show office presence, stay briefly (about as long as a coffee run), then leave. The purpose is satisfying attendance tracking while maintaining remote work flexibility. It became widespread enough for Samsung to invest in prevention technology.
Samsung’s tracking systems prevent brief badge-in practices – the specific technology details are limited in sources. It’s surveillance-based compliance rather than trust-based. This represents an arms race between employee evasion and employer monitoring.
AT&T presence report uses laptop network connections and mobile device location data to infer hours at your assigned office. Employee response: privacy concerns and distrust. AT&T eventually reduced reliance on the system after cultural backlash. These surveillance approaches reflect the control motives underlying return to office mandates despite productivity data.
Other enforcement mechanisms companies use: Badge tracking – basic entry/exit recording, though it can’t distinguish 1-hour from 9-hour presence. Performance review linkage – Google and Citigroup tie attendance to performance evaluations. Manager oversight – direct team visibility, with variable enforcement. Network monitoring – laptop connectivity infers your location. Disciplinary action – escalating consequences from warning to termination.
More than two-thirds of employers track employee compliance with attendance policies, and more than a third have taken enforcement action.
The surveillance tradeoff looks different from each side. Management view – ensures policy compliance, provides accountability data. Employee view – destroys trust, feels like micromanagement, invasion of privacy. Cultural cost – surveillance signals distrust, damages the employee-employer relationship. AT&T’s lesson – even after deploying tracking, the company reduced usage because of cultural damage.
Strategic considerations: Technology enforcement creates an adversarial relationship with employees. Coffee badging signals the policy lacks purpose – employees see no value in office time. If you need tracking to enforce the policy, question whether the policy makes sense.
What Do Flex Index Trends Show About RTO Policy Evolution from 2020 to 2024?
Flex Index tracks Fortune 500 RTO policies and shows 43% now have set office schedules in 2024—double the 2023 rate. The trend shows clear progression: 2020 emergency remote work, 2021-2022 initial voluntary returns, 2023 moderate mandates, 2024-2025 strict enforcement.
2020 saw emergency remote work normalisation. Companies discovered operations could continue remotely. Technology infrastructure got rapidly adopted. The baseline was established: remote work is operationally possible.
2021-2022 brought initial returns and hybrid experiments. Voluntary return options emerged. Goldman Sachs was an early mover with March 2022 5-day mandate. Most companies were cautious, offering flexibility.
2023 entered the moderate mandate phase. More companies implemented the 3-day hybrid standard (Google, Meta, Microsoft). Flex Index showed roughly 21-22% of Fortune 500 had set schedules. This was the shift from voluntary to required attendance.
2024 saw tightening and enforcement. 43% of Fortune 500 have set schedules, doubling from 2023. Fully flexible work options dropped to just 25% by late 2024. More companies added mandates or increased required days. Technology enforcement emerged (Samsung, AT&T tracking).
2025 brought the strict mandate wave. Amazon announced 5-day for January 2025. JPMorgan implemented 5-day March 2025. Dell moved to 5-day March 2025. The trend toward stricter policies continues. But reversals also emerged (Robinhood, H&R Block).
Key pattern observations: The direction is generally toward stricter policies over time. But there are exceptions – some companies (Airbnb, Shopify) maintain full remote throughout. It’s not uniform – some go strict, others stay flexible.
Three days per week is the most common in-office requirement. More than 1 in 4 paid workdays in U.S. were done from home in 2024, up from just 1 in 14 pre-pandemic.
The tightening trend is interesting when you look at accumulating evidence on remote work productivity.
How Do Small Companies Compare to Large Corporations on Remote Work Flexibility?
Small companies generally offer more remote work flexibility than large corporations. While 43% of Fortune 500 companies now have set office schedules, nearly 70% of small companies (under 500 employees) still let teams work fully remotely if they choose.
Small companies have advantages. Lower real estate investment makes remote financially easier. Fewer middle management layers reduce oversight concerns. Faster policy adaptation without bureaucratic approval chains. Competition for talent drives flexibility as a differentiator.
The recruitment implications matter. Small companies with remote policies can compete for talent against larger firms. Amazon’s 5-day mandate disadvantages them versus remote-first startups for AI talent.
Counter-examples exist, of course. Some large companies maintain flexibility (Airbnb, Shopify, Spotify). Some small companies mandate office presence. Sector matters more than size in some cases.
What Are the Key Differences Between US, Canadian, and European RTO Approaches?
U.S. companies, especially in finance, tend toward the strictest policies (5-day mandates). Canadian banks standardise on 4-day requirements. European companies generally offer more flexibility, with Deutsche Bank at 3 days and many UK/Netherlands firms maintaining hybrid or remote options.
United States shows strict finance, mixed tech. Banking: JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley 5-day mandates. Tech: Amazon/Dell 5-day (strict), Google/Meta/Microsoft 3-day (moderate), Airbnb/Shopify remote (flexible).
Canada shows banking coordination on 4-day. RBC, BMO, TD Bank, Scotiabank all 4-day. It’s a coordinated sector standard, slightly less strict than the U.S. 5-day.
Europe demonstrates greater flexibility. Deutsche Bank 3-day, more flexible than U.S./Canadian peers. Generally more employee-friendly than North American counterparts. European work culture traditionally favours employee protections.
Regional pattern insights: Real estate costs – higher costs in NYC/San Francisco may drive strict U.S. policies. Labour laws – European employment protections may limit RTO strictness. Cultural norms – North American corporate culture more hierarchical.
Regional variations show RTO mandates reflect choices, not universal necessities. These patterns form part of the comprehensive picture explored in our guide to return to office mandates and the productivity research companies ignore.
Company Comparison Summary
The strictness spectrum runs from 5-day mandates (Amazon’s 30,000-employee petition, JPMorgan’s desk shortages, Samsung’s surveillance) to 3-day hybrid (Google, Meta) to reversed policies (Robinhood CEO admission, H&R Block team policies).
Sector patterns show finance generally stricter (U.S. banks 5-day, Canadian banks 4-day) than tech (3-day standard with full remote exceptions). Two-tier inconsistencies like Instagram 5-day versus Meta 3-day reveal internal policy contradictions.
Flex Index shows 43% of Fortune 500 have set schedules in 2024, doubling from 2023. Reversals prove course correction is possible – Robinhood, H&R Block, AT&T tracking walkback.
Strategic takeaways: Peer benchmarking data shows a wide range of approaches – strict mandates aren’t inevitable. Sector norms provide “industry standard” arguments for or against strict policies. Failed implementations (JPMorgan desk shortages, Amazon petition) offer cautionary tales. Reversals demonstrate policy changes are acceptable. Two-tier policies (Instagram/Meta) reveal inconsistent logic in mandate rationale.
The diversity of company approaches to RTO shows that strict mandates reflect management choices, not operational inevitabilities or evidence-based decisions.
From Amazon’s 30,000-employee petition to Robinhood’s CEO admission of error, from JPMorgan’s desk shortages to Samsung’s surveillance technology, the range of company responses reveals more about corporate culture and real estate pressures than about productivity requirements. You now have concrete peer data showing the spectrum from strict to flexible to reversed – and the outcomes each approach generates.
