Same Policy, Different Rules?

JPMorgan made headlines again after allowing their EMEA chief to work remotely from New York, while the company’s CEO has been loudly advocating for a full return to the office five days a week for all employees.

Starbucks had a similar case. The CEO lives in California rather than near Starbucks’ Seattle headquarters, even though the company enforces a three-days-a-week office policy for corporate staff.

Why is this a problem? After all, flexibility is often seen as a perk, and those in senior leadership might be expected to have access to different privileges. Or should they?

It is a matter of leadership by example and transparency. When you clearly communicate that a certain level of flexibility is earned, not automatically granted to every new hire, the conversation becomes more balanced.

But there is also as asymmetry between the benefits available to CEOs and those available to employees. There is a big difference between reimbursing transportation costs and providing a private jet paid for by the company.

These double standards are not limited to leadership. They are increasingly visible between employees whose jobs can be done remotely and those whose roles simply cannot.

Think about companies with a distributed workforce. Office teams compared to factory workers, retail staff, front desk employees, or delivery and logistics crews. What does fairness look like when only one part of the organization has access to flexibility?

Can you offer some people freedom and others only strict rules? Should you compensate with higher pay? Better benefits? More autonomy in other ways?

Equity in hybrid work does not mean identical arrangements for everyone, but conditions that make sense based on role, contribution, and context.

These are the real challenges companies are facing today. The story of an executive moving to New York while managing a team in Europe might not impact most of us directly. But the deeper issue is everywhere. 

If flexibility remains a privilege reserved for knowledge workers, the hybrid model risks turning into a new form of inequality instead of a meaningful modern solution.

That is why it is important to consider all employees, not just a few. If you have smaller teams in other cities, do not force them to work exclusively from home. The same goes for colleagues in other countries who might already feel isolated. Flexibility isn’t the problem. The way it’s implemented is.

Anca Serban, Head of Marketing @ Pluria

How Ontop Enabled Flexible Work Across Countries with Pluria

How do remote teams stay truly connected? Ontop used Pluria to enable collaboration in 20 cities, with 67% of bookings used for team meetups. Read the case study to see how flexible work drives real connection.

Thought Leadership

Hybrid work 2025: How leaders can get it right (CISCO)

Future of Work News

Return to office edicts aren’t always what they seem (Financial Times)

Jamie Dimon wants workers in the office. So why is he letting JPMorgan’s European chief work remotely? (MarketWatch)

ING and ABN Amro calling employees back to the office from work-from-hom (NL Times)

Citigroup Is Giving Employees a Remote Work Perk This Summer: 'A Quieter Time' (Entrepreneur)