Labour ministers have indicated a relaxed approach towards enforcing the three-day office rule for civil servants, a policy originally introduced by the Conservative government.
Although the rule technically remains in place, ministers show little interest in strictly policing office attendance. This shift reflects Labour’s broader effort to expand flexible working rights, which they argue will enhance productivity and drive economic growth nationwide. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds has publicly supported flexible working, asserting that it fosters staff loyalty and mitigates the ‘culture of presenteeism’ that values physical presence over actual performance.
Reynolds has openly criticised his predecessor, Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, for a more rigid stance on working from home, notably his practice of leaving notes on empty desks in Whitehall. Under Rees-Mogg’s direction, civil servants were expected to be in the office 60% of the time. In contrast, Labour ministers, including Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, have adopted a pragmatic approach, delegating decisions about work patterns to individual managers.
Civil service unions have welcomed this flexible strategy, though debates within departments persist over the balance of home and office work. A senior Home Office official recently voiced concerns that remote working could hinder performance in immigration enforcement. Meanwhile, some private sector companies are moving in the opposite direction. Amazon, for instance, has announced that employees will be required to return to the office five days a week starting next year, citing the advantages of on-site collaboration and learning.
Critics of Labour’s flexible working approach, such as Kemi Badenoch, argue that increased office time is essential for skill development. Badenoch cautioned that Labour’s focus on flexibility could result in decreased learning opportunities and productivity. However, business groups have largely endorsed the government’s policy, emphasising that flexibility is crucial to addressing the UK’s labour shortages. The Institute of Directors and the Chartered Management Institute have both stated that flexible working options attract and retain talented staff, though they note that employers should retain the ability to deny requests that don’t align with business needs.
As Labour continues to refine its approach to flexible working, the long-term impact on both public and private sectors remains uncertain. For now, the government appears committed to promoting a flexible work culture while ensuring that essential services remain effective.
Labour’s emphasis on flexible working represents a significant departure from previous policies, aiming to foster a more adaptable and productive workforce. As this approach evolves, its effects on the civil service and broader employment landscape will be closely observed.
