In an internal memo, U.S. Bank has introduced a new mandate requiring its employees to work from the office at least three days a week, a change reported by the Star Tribune. This development modifies the previous approach where office attendance was optional, following a period where CEO Andy Cecere had expressed a preference for in-office work to bolster collaboration and culture within the company. Initially mentioned in November 2022, Cecere highlighted concerns about the erosion of collaboration, engagement, and the bank’s unified culture due to the predominant work-from-home setup.
Starting this quarter, employees assigned office space must adhere to this three-day minimum office presence, which will now be considered in their annual performance evaluations. According to Axios, HR Chief Elcio Barcelos and Transformation Chief Mark Runkel explained that this policy aims to ensure a consistent work experience that fosters the bank’s culture, promotes inclusivity, and supports a productive environment.
Jeff Shelman, a spokesperson for U.S. Bank, elaborated on the move to AOL, stating the bank’s intention to strike a balance between offering flexibility to its employees and enhancing collaboration and relationship building, which are more naturally facilitated in an office setting.
Furthermore, the bank plans to focus on 24 U.S. markets as key hubs, investing in and upgrading office spaces there. Employees residing within 30 miles of these hub cities will be required to comply with the office attendance mandate.
The shift to mandatory office attendance reflects a broader trend among banks trying to navigate post-pandemic work dynamics. For instance, Deutsche Bank has set a policy for managers to work in-office four days a week and all other staff at least three days, explicitly prohibiting a remote work arrangement that includes both Monday and Friday off. Similarly, Bank of America has been issuing “letters of education” to employees falling short of its attendance policy since the previous fall, with the warning that non-compliance could lead to disciplinary action, as evidenced by a letter shared by an employee online in January.