Fathers’ office returns raise retention risk

King’s College London research has found that full-time fathers increasingly see working from home as part of family life, with more than one in six who currently work remotely saying they would consider quitting if forced back to the office full-time.

The study, based on responses from 8,123 full-time fathers in June 2025, found that 17% of fathers who work from home would consider leaving their employer if required to return to the office five days a week. That compares with 3% in early 2021.

A growing gap has opened between the flexibility fathers want and what they are allowed to use. Fathers said they wanted to work from home for an average of 2.10 days a week, but reported being allowed 1.10 days. The study also found that 41% had formal permission to work flexibly, while 39% used it.

Professor Heejung Chung said: “Flexible working was never a mothers’ issue. It’s time we stopped treating it like one. Post-pandemic fathers have discovered something their own fathers never had: the school run, dinner time, the chance to actually be there supporting family well-being and financial stabilities.

“What is more, when men are involved, not only do their ideas of what it means to be a man changes but so do their children’s. A generation is growing up with a different idea of masculinity. Remote work isn’t just reshaping offices. It’s reshaping families and the future of gender roles.”

The research also found evidence of stigma and career penalty. Fathers working remotely three to four days a week were found to face stronger perceived promotion penalties, suggesting that formal flexibility policies may not be enough if workplace culture continues to equate visibility with commitment.

Shiyu Yuan said: “What employers may have not fully grasped is that working from home is not just nice to have or a cost to be managed, but something must-have and a reason for people to stay. For fathers, it is now a part of the family infrastructures and the coping strategy they rely on to be achieve both their career and family aspirations.

“Taking it away would disrupt family life, increase stress, and damage the engagement and loyalty of their most experienced staff.

“However, simply providing flexibility is not enough. Without tackling the stigma associated with flexibility, fathers may be fear of using it, or feel forced to use it in ways that protect their image at work while damaging their and their family’s wellbeing.”

The findings arrive as employers continue to test the limits of hybrid working. Some organisations have increased office attendance requirements, arguing that in-person work supports collaboration, culture, training, and management visibility. Others have retained flexible models as a recruitment and retention advantage, particularly in sectors where skills remain scarce.

The KCL study shows that return-to-office decisions can affect employee groups in ways many workplace policies fail to anticipate. Flexible working is often framed around mothers and childcare, but the research points to a wider shift in how fathers organise work, parenting, and household responsibilities.

Retention is central to the debate. Experienced mid-career employees often hold institutional knowledge, client relationships, and management capability. Office mandates that create friction for that group can increase replacement costs, weaken engagement, and reduce loyalty, even where the policy is applied uniformly.

As workers’ rights reforms increase pressure on employers, hybrid policy sits within a wider employment landscape shaped by compliance, culture, productivity, and workforce expectations. Flexible working is no longer a temporary pandemic arrangement; it is part of how many employees assess whether an employer fits their life and career.

The research also raises questions about how performance is measured. If promotion decisions continue to reward physical presence, formal flexibility can become a controlled benefit rather than a genuine working model. That risks creating a two-tier workforce, with employees using flexibility seen as less ambitious even when output remains strong.

Offices still have value, particularly for early-career development, collaboration, mentoring, and team cohesion. Yet mandates that ignore commuting time, caregiving, regional labour markets, and employee autonomy may weaken the engagement they are intended to rebuild.

The next stage of hybrid working will be defined less by whether home working exists and more by whether organisations can design it consistently. Clear expectations, team-based coordination, outcome-led performance measures, and manager training will matter more than headline attendance rules. Fathers are now central to that workforce settlement, not a secondary consideration.