I’m a longtime employee of King County. In light of County Executive Girmay Zahilay’s recent return-to-office directive, I want to make an argument for remote work.
Like many of my colleagues, on most days I work harder and longer than required. We are committed to the county’s success; we want our departments and the region’s residents to flourish. But we are also parents of dependent children and children of dependent parents. We are humans with complex and demanding responsibilities beyond those we manage at work. A meaningful nod to genuine work-life balance is overdue.
After being told for decades that the advanced information technology our society had developed would soon set them free, most workers merely toiled harder as that technology supported greater productivity and profit. The gains always seemed to accrue to others. Then, in 2020, as terrible as the COVID-19 pandemic was, many discovered that — finally! — IT could now benefit them.
Through remote work, many regional employees discovered better health and stronger families. With a few extra hours each day that were previously devoted to lengthy, unpaid commutes, employees now had more time to care for the children and elders dependent on them. More time to organize their families’ lives, to plan and cook meals, to rest at the end of the day. Routine struggles of daily life became a bit easier. Employees’ lives and those in their households improved.
The region will benefit if remote work continues. These benefits include lighter traffic and less pollution; lower health care costs as employee health improves in the aggregate; reduced employee absences as stress-related illnesses decline; and lower transmission rates of seasonal flu and colds.
Fairness and equity also require a more expansive remote work policy. As a recent Seattle Times FYI Guy article demonstrated, return-to-office policies, and the burdens they produce, are impacting most those who earn the least with the least protective buffer (“Remote work transformed King County, but not evenly, census data shows“). The less one earns, the more likely one is to be ordered back to the office, even if work-related duties would suffer no harm if continued remotely.
Housing costs have exacerbated this inequity. Over the past several decades, many residents of King County — including its employees — were priced out of the county or into its rural towns. When required to commute to Seattle, they now travel from Pierce, Snohomish and other counties, with round-trip times that may be three or four hours a day. Forcing unnecessary returns to the office to subsidize the businesses of downtown Seattle amounts to a regressive tax on time.
This region can do better. Employers in every sector should permit employees to work remotely on any day they are able to complete their work without affecting performance. In this way, employees’ dollars can support the micro-economies of their neighborhoods and towns, and the time they save each day can be devoted to the well-being of their families.
Any advanced society or any business leader or politician seeking to promote progressive policies should jump at the rare opportunity to make genuine, meaningful improvement in the lives of their employees and constituents. It may seem reasonable to support employees with slogans and wellness emails when no better option exists. To decline a real opportunity when it finally appears, however, is inexcusable. This is not the time to become entrenched in old ways of managing employees.
Public service is the mission of every King County employee. The work requirements of their positions must always come first. But after those requirements are met, the location of where the work is done — whether fully remote, fully in-person or a hybrid — should be an arrangement that supports the broader goals of employee and community health.
