Connect with us

Business

Remote workers actually aren't more productive. Will bosses finally call them back in this year?

Published

on

Remote workers actually aren't more productive. Will bosses finally call them back in this year?

These days, it looks like the bloom is coming off the rose for remote work: Many employers are talking tougher. New research shows employees are actually less productive when they work from home full-time. And, with the tight job market starting to slacken, some predict 2024 will be the year employers finally clamp down.

But don’t be too quick to conclude things are going back to the days of 9 to 5 in the old cubicle.

It’s true that widespread studies based on standard measures of efficiency have found that fully remote employees are 10% to 20% less productive than those working on company premises. Challenges related to communications, coordination and self-motivation may be factors in the decline.

And some employers have been warning that those who fail to meet new standards for being in the office may find adverse effects on their performance evaluations and incomes.

Advertisement

But the new research that showed lower productivity by full-time remote workers also found that those on a hybrid schedule — some days at home and some on site — were about as productive as those in the office full-time. And there’s some evidence that companies offering greater flexibility to workers may achieve better financial results.

Potentially even more important than abstract data are the surprisingly deep feelings of a great many workers about holding on to at least some degree of flexibility. And those personal feelings, which involve such cut-to-the-bone issues as commuting and the cost of child care, are being reinforced by gains in communications technology and the persistent shortage of qualified workers.

Since the pandemic, John Sturr, a 58-year-old social worker for Sonoma County, has been working two to three days a week from his desk in his bedroom. On days in the office he confers with colleagues and responds to walk-ins. He’s come to love the arrangement.

“The commute is beautiful, through vineyards” along the Russian River Valley, he says, “but it’s an hour out of your day.” The time that Sturr saves he uses to put dinner on early and run errands.

“I’ve never been able to telework my whole career. Previous managers were always suspicious. This is kind of amazing.”

Advertisement

Productivity vs. profitability

Today, about 30% of all full-time employees are on a hybrid schedule, according to WFH Research, which monitors remote work trends by surveying thousands of workers every month. Deborah Lovich, who leads Boston Consulting Group’s work on “people strategy,” sees more employers adopting hybrid work as they see the financial and nonfinancial benefits. “I do think people will come around,” she said.

The outlook for fully remote workers, who currently make up about 10% of all employment, appears more cloudy. Those job openings have been shrinking faster in recent months as the job market has slowed.

Many people working full-time from home are in high-paying tech and information industries, which explains why San Francisco and Los Angeles metro areas are No. 1 and 2 when it comes to the share of all full-time workdays done at home, at 46% and 40% as of November.

At the other end of the pay scale are fully remote workers in administrative and more routine functions, like customer service reps at call centers, where many jobs may be further eroded by artificial intelligence.

But even fully remote work has things going for it. For many employers, what may be lost in productivity can at least partly be made up in cost savings from cutting back on office and related expenses. Plus, these companies can hire workers more cheaply anywhere in the world. All told, Nicholas Bloom of Stanford University estimates that those savings may average 10% of a company’s operating costs.

Advertisement

“Firms shouldn’t care about productivity, they should care about profitability,” said Bloom, who is part of the WFH Research group.

Whatever the productivity studies may show, Bloom says, what’s happening is intuitive. “Look at their actions,” he said. “This is no longer a pandemic, and millions of firms in a capitalist economy are doing something consistently [in sticking with remote work]. I can only conclude it’s profitable.”

Santa Monica-based TrueCar decided to go fully remote after the pandemic. “It gives us full access to talent,” said Jill Angel, chief people officer at the firm, which operates a digital platform helping consumers shop and price cars.

TrueCar already has cut back about two-thirds of its office space and eventually plans to get down to just 4,000 square feet, enough for client meetings and team-building events.

The company currently has about 325 employees across the country. And over the last three years, 48 employees have moved out of California to other states, with Texas and Washington as the most popular destinations.

Advertisement

Workers are happier when they have control and certainty over their work schedules, said Angel, and the firm is betting that over time that will help make it both more productive and more profitable.

“I do know we’re not going back,” she said.

Flex Index, which tracks employers’ remote-work practices, and Boston Consulting Group recently teamed up to study the finances of more than 500 public companies. Their key finding: Revenues at fully flexible firms grew on average by 21% from 2020 to 2022 — four times greater than at less flexible firms.

Rob Sadow, a Flex Index co-founder, expects more such data to emerge highlighting differences in financial results as well as in employee retention rates. He says his research shows smaller and younger firms are more likely to adopt flexible work policies, so as more businesses get started, and more office leases roll off, the share of employers offering remote work should grow.

“In early 2023, 50%-plus of companies were still sitting on the sidelines with no formal policy or specific work-from-home strategy,” he said. “What’s happened through 2023 is that more and more companies decided to put a stake in the ground — and that’s hybrid.”

Advertisement

Still, a lot of bosses remain wary of even partial remote work, fearing it’ll weaken their company’s culture, mentoring traditions and timely decision-making.

“We’re constantly looking at it,” a top executive at a San Diego media firm said of remote work. He didn’t want to be identified, worrying that anything he said publicly could make it harder to change work-from-home policies later. His firm currently requires everyone to come in two days a week, including one set day.

“We felt value in having everyone in the office at least one day a week because it brought younger team members to intermingle and collaborate with seasoned members,” he said.

But a lot of employees want to be 100% remote, he added. “This is one of the most sensitive subject matters I’ve dealt with.”

Teams know best

Right now, it’s pretty much anybody’s guess which of the many possible models will prevail when it comes to balancing management’s desire for an on-site workforce and employees’ desire for more flexibility.

Advertisement

Clearly, a lot of workers like the hybrid model but want about one day more of working from home than bosses prefer, which now averages two days a week, according to WFH Research.

At many firms, the conflict is only heightened because CEOs have dictated rules and norms for the company as a whole, according to Robert Pozen, a senior lecturer at MIT Sloan School of Management who has written books on productivity.

“Let the team decide what’s best for the team,” he recommended, noting that what’s functional and productive will be different if you’re in IT, customer service, sales or financial analysis.

“Bosses want accountability and they used to get it by counting hours in the office. Hopefully they realize it’s what results they get. We should be focused on what we want to achieve,” Pozen said. “Let’s figure out the goals and let’s customize the success metrics that would best measure productivity.”

That’s pretty much the playbook at Chicago-based law firm Chapman and Cutler. Sarah Andeen heads the firm’s library and research services for attorneys working in several states. The firm’s basic policy on remote work isn’t a one-size-fits-all but rather is based on the department’s and clients’ needs and expectations.

Advertisement

For Andeen and her two research staffers, it worked out to two to three days on site, with at least one of them in the office each workday to open the library and address any in-person requests from attorneys.

“I think it depends on the person, the work they do and stage of career,” Andeen, 54, said of how best to structure hybrid work.

She said the older of her two staff librarians is in her 60s, lives in a Chicago suburb and uses the time saved from the 45-minute commute to get in a little more gardening and other personal projects. Andeen’s other librarian is in her late 20s, lives in an apartment in the city and really likes coming in three days a week to the firm’s new downtown office, designed to be more collaborative.

“I know my staff. I know they’re being productive,” Andeen said, adding that her team has clear goals and productivity measurements. “Are we getting research questions answered in a timely manner? Are the bills getting billed, the research cataloged? Is our web page up and operational? Are our attorneys happy?… I can see the results.”

Advertisement

Business

Video: Unraveling the Mystery Behind Bitcoin’s Creator

Published

on

Video: Unraveling the Mystery Behind Bitcoin’s Creator

new video loaded: Unraveling the Mystery Behind Bitcoin’s Creator

Our investigative reporter John Carreyrou spent 18 months digging through the archives of online cryptography communities in search of the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto, the anonymous inventor of bitcoin.

By John Carreyrou, Sutton Raphael, James Surdam, Coleman Lowndes and Joey Sendaydiego

April 8, 2026

Continue Reading

Business

Commentary: Exploring the moon while cutting NASA? Why Trump’s 2027 budget misfires

Published

on

Commentary: Exploring the moon while cutting NASA?  Why Trump’s 2027 budget misfires

Trump’s budget proposal takes aim at programs that make Americans smarter, healthier and safer. What’s his real agenda?

The oldest, most enduring cliche about government policy is the one about how budgets are political, not fiscal, documents.

The Trump administration’s budget proposal for the 2027-28 fiscal year, unveiled Friday, seems designed to set a new standard for partisan ideology as a spending standard.

You may have seen news coverage of the budget’s top lines, which call for $1.5 trillion in defense spending next year and cuts totaling $73 billion in nondefense spending. But those figures fail to communicate the raw flavor of the budget cuts or how they’re described in the 92-page document.

It’s an extinction-level event for science.

— Casey Dreier, Planetary Society, on budget cuts at NASA

Advertisement

Nor do they provide perspective for the magnitude of the defense increase or the damage that would be wreaked upon crucial social programs.

The defense request, for instance, would be a 42% increase over the current year, but it might be better judged as what Todd Harrison of the pro-business American Enterprise Institute describes unhappily as “the highest level of funding for defense in US history, surpassing even the peak funding during World War II.”

Adjusted to today’s dollars, Harrison calculates, the World War II peak was a bit lower than $1.2 trillion.

Advertisement

The administration minimizes the overall budgetary effect of its spending plans by projecting average growth in gross national product at 3% annually over the next decade.

That’s an ambitious goal, to say the least. Over the last 25 years — that is, in this century — U.S. economic growth has reached or exceeded 3% in only three years, including a pandemic-era surge to 6.1% in 2021. Last year it was only 2.1%.

On the other side of the ledger, the nondefense budget would be cut by 10%. But programs the White House has specifically targeted for being contrary to its ideology would suffer far more devastating cuts. Some scientific programs, such those concerned with global warming or the social and economic implications of science, technology and healthcare policies would be slashed by more than 50%.

NASA may be enjoying a moment just now, as its Artemis II spacecraft rounded the far side of the moon Monday, preparatory to heading back to Earth in the first moonshot since Apollo 17 last landed men on the lunar surface in December 1972.

But Trump proposes slashing the agency’s budget by $5.6 billion, or 23%. It gets worse: Trump would cut NASA’s science division by $34 billion, or 47%, canceling more than 40 projects, of which about 20 are currently underway.

Advertisement

“It’s an extinction-level event for science,” Casey Dreier, chief of space policy at the Planetary Society, told Nature.

Among the programs facing extinction is NASA’s Office of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Engagement, which aimed to interest minority students in those so-called STEM disciplines.

“NASA will inspire the next generation of explorers through exciting, ambitious space missions,” the budget says, “not through subsidizing woke STEM programming and research that prioritizes some groups of students over others.”

The budget leaves unclear how those “exciting, ambitious space missions” will come to pass, since it also cuts $297 million from NASA’s annual spending on space technology.

The proposed cuts to science programs more generally would be devastating. The National Science Foundation, one of the most important scientific grant-making agencies in the world, would lose $4.8 billion, or 55% of its funding.

Advertisement

The language the budget uses to rationalize such cuts speaks volumes about the drivers of its draconian cuts in nondefense spending: It’s an expression of Trumpian culture war hobby horses such as hostility to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The term “woke” or its derivatives appear 32 times in the budget document — as many times as it appears in Project 2025, the far-right roadmap for a second Trump term published by the Heritage Foundation in 2023.

The $8.5 billion in proposed budget cuts to K-12 spending would include the elimination of the $70-million Teacher Quality Partnership, which the budget describes as a program to “train teachers … on divisive ideologies.”

Among those, the budget says, are “inappropriate and divisive topics such as Critical Race Theory, diversity, equity, and inclusion, social justice activism,” and “anti-racism.” Nothing in the document explains why any of those things are considered bad; the terms are merely shibboleths that Trump’s core audience is expected to accept as gospel.

Services for transgender individuals would take a major hit from the budget: Among the $204.5 million in Treasury Department funding for community development initiatives on the chopping block would be support for “gender extremism,” such as for clinics that provide “‘gender-affirming hormone therapy’ and other services to young patients.”

As I’ve reported, Trump has bought heavily into conservative attacks on gender-affirming care, including by spouting claims that I labeled in 2024 as “deranged and despicable,” such as that schoolchildren are being kidnapped by school administrators and subjected to surgery against their will.

Advertisement

Perhaps the most concentrated assault in the proposed budget, as my colleague Hayley Smith reported, is the one aimed at research, development, and construction of renewable energy sources. The budget plan contains no fewer than 20 references to what it calls the “green new scam.”

This is an infantile reference to what’s typically known as the “Green New Deal,” a raft of policies incorporating a transition from fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal to renewables as well as the concept of “environmental justice,” meaning efforts to ensure that the transition doesn’t overly burden disadvantaged communities.

Trump has consistently called for more development of fossil sources, including a revival of coal despite its unrelenting and inevitable glide path toward extinction as a component of U.S. energy generation. The budget plan doubles down on this policy, calling renewables R&D a “leftist” ideology. This is tied to policies “opening up more Federal land and waters for oil, gas, and clean coal development,” the document says. (“Clean coal,” which is to say nonpolluting coal, is a myth, as I’ve reported.)

The budget plan pays tribute to another Trump obsession, the supposed evils of wind power. Cuts to the Interior Department budget would “put a stop to disastrous offshore wind energy projects that harm hardworking coastal communities, precious wildlife, and American military readiness.” None of these assertions about wind power is supported by reality.

Some cuts appear to reflect a determination to exact retribution from agencies that have thwarted cherished conservative goals. The National Institutes of Health, a consistent target of conservative budget-cutters, would lose $5.9 billion, or 12.5% of its budget. That would include major cuts to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which was formerly headed by the respected immunologist Anthony Fauci.

Advertisement

The budget drafters couldn’t resist taking a swipe at Fauci, who has been the target of smears from Republicans who have tried to blame him, absurdly, for the COVID pandemic. The budget document accuses Fauci of steering government funds to the Wuhan (China) Institute of Virology, which it called “the likely source of the COVID-19 pandemic.”

There’s no compelling evidence that a laboratory was a source of the virus, as I’ve documented: The overwhelming weight of scientific judgment is that the virus reached humans from natural zoologic sources. The budget plan resurrects the long-debunked conspiracy theory that Fauci orchestrated a 2020 scientific paper that judged the lab-leak theory to be “improbable.” The budget drafters assert that Fauci (who retired in 2022) “commissioned” the paper, which is simply untrue.

Another theme percolating through the budget plan is the need to protect our wealthiest taxpayers from, well, taxes. The budget would cut $1.4 billion from the budget of the Internal Revenue Service, reversing a restoration of the agency’s enforcement capabilities undertaken during the Biden administration. Trump cut IRS staffing by 20,000, or 27%. The document asserts that the IRS “has been weaponized against the American people, small businesses, and non-profit organizations.”

According to the Yale Budget Lab, every dollar the IRS spends on audits yields more than $7 in returns. Plainly that’s not coming from average Americans, but from the upper crust.

None of this means that the budget proposal isn’t valuable, to an extent. It’s a convenient one-stop window into Trump’s personal fixations: the elimination of “radical gender and racial ideologies that poison the minds of Americans,” the horrors of “the globalist climate agenda,” the “invasion” of violent criminals from abroad, and so on. In other words, there’s nothing new under the Trumpian sun.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Hypersonic aircraft company moves headquarters from Atlanta to El Segundo

Published

on

Hypersonic aircraft company moves headquarters from Atlanta to El Segundo

Aerospace startup Hermeus is moving its headquarters to El Segundo from Atlanta as it aims to build autonomous hypersonic aircraft for the military, the latest sign of revival in the region’s aerospace and defense sectors.

The company, valued at $1 billion, is opening executive offices and a facility where it will design and build its next prototype, a supersonic plane intended to hit Mach 3 — faster than any modern warplane.

The company’s goal is to eventually develop a hypersonic plane reaching Mach 5, or five times the speed of sound, and Southern California has the engineering talent base to help achieve that, executives said.

“Building a lot of aircraft developmentally very quickly, doing iterative developments, it really doesn’t exist anywhere out in the world other than SpaceX — and we’ve recruited a lot of talent from there over the years,” said co-founder and Chief Executive AJ Piplica, a Georgia Tech alumnus.

“We’re now at a point in the company’s trajectory where we are scaling what the team can do,” he added.

Advertisement
  • Share via

Advertisement

Elon Musk founded SpaceX in El Segundo 24 years ago and later moved its operations to Hawthorne, where the company still maintains a large campus despite relocating its headquarters to Texas in 2024.

El Segundo and other South Bay cities have witnessed explosive growth in recent years, with scores of startups in aerospace and defense tech — many founded by former SpaceX employees.

Advertisement

Hermeus announced its move Tuesday at the same time it disclosed its latest $350-million funding round, which it said values the company at $1 billion.

The round was led Khosla Ventures, founded by prominent Silicon Valley venture capitalist Vinod Khosla. Other participants included billionaire Peter Thiel‘s Founders Fund.

Sam Altman, the CEO and co-founder of OpenAI, led a prior $100-million funding round in 2022. The company said it has now raised $500 million in equity and debt.

Hypersonic planes and weapons are at the cutting edge of military research and development. China and Russia have developed the weapons, which are viewed as strategic threats, with Russia deploying them in Ukraine.

Missile development also is taking place in the United States, including at legacy defense contractors Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin, as well as Torrance startup Castelion.

Advertisement

Hermeus is developing supersonic and hypersonic aircraft that are not only autonomous but also reusable, like any modern jet. The aircraft would have multiple uses, including as a strike fighter, conducting reconnaissance and transporting cargo.

“What we are building here is not just an airplane, it is a platform,” Piplica said.

The company, founded in 2019, flew its first prototype, Quarterhorse Mk 1, in May 2025 during a short low-speed flight at Edwards Air Force Base in the Mojave Desert.

Hermeus' headquarters in El Segundo.

Hermeus’ headquarters in El Segundo. The aerospace firm has begun moving into its 67,000-square-foot offices and will take full occupancy early next year.

(Hermeus)

Advertisement

It flew its first second aircraft in February at Spaceport America over White Sands Missile Range airspace in New Mexico. The Quarterhorse Mk 2.1 plane is three times larger than the initial prototype and about the size of an F-16. The goal is to reach supersonic speeds.

Hermeus plans to continue testing aircraft at the isolated missile range, where it can fly faster while not endangering structures or anyone on the ground.

Since 2021, the firm has operated out of a 110,000-square-foot facility in Atlanta, where it has its offices as well as design and production operations.

It will retain the site and use the entire space for production.

Georgia is the home of multiple aerospace manufacturing facilities, including Northrop Grumman.

Advertisement

“That talent base [in Georgia] is extremely aligned to large-scale aerospace manufacturing. Prototyping is a whole different world — different skill sets, different capabilities,” said Piplica, who had been an executive at Atlanta hypersonic research company Generation Orbit before co-founding Hermeus.

The aerospace firm has begun moving into its 67,000-square-foot offices at 888 North Douglas St. in El Segundo and will take full occupancy early next year. The Southern California operation will employ more than 200 people by next year, adding hundreds more in the coming years, executives said. Hermeus currently employs about 300.

The company is currently building its third Quarterhorse aircraft, which it expects will fly faster than Mach 2, in the Atlanta facility. It is expected to fly later this year. The fourth Quarterhorse will be built in El Segundo — with the goal of hitting Mach 3. It should fly next year with the military showing interest in a plane flying at that speed, Piplica said. .

Its hypersonic plane, designed for defense and national security missions, is farther off and dubbed the Darkhorse. Reaching Mach 5 involves the use of a so-called ramjet, which is similar to a traditional jet engine but doesn’t have any moving parts.

Hermeus does engine testing in Jacksonville, Fla., and has engineering offices in Hawthorne that it plans to retain.

Advertisement

In El Segundo, it’s leasing space in two buildings in a 30-acre complex Hackman Capital Partners acquired from Northrop Grumman in 2017 and spent $100 million making over into modern offices.

The complex includes the West Coast offices of L’Oreal USA, the headquarters of alternative protein company Beyond and labs that El Segundo aerospace company Varda Space Industries recently subleased from Beyond.

El Segundo Mayor Chris Pimentel said the city helped market the Hermeus space.

“We spoke loudly about the opportunity over there for a couple different players. I thought frankly that Hermeus had passed us by and that they were going to stay in Atlanta, so we’re delighted,” he said.

The city counts more than 40 aerospace and tech companies as having headquarters or major operations in El Segundo. In addition to contractors Boeing and Northrop Grumman, they include startups Picogrid and Sift. There are other companies, including suppliers.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending