Safer at home? Associations between working from home, workplace mistreatment, inclusion, and well-being in a sample of Canadian hybrid workers.

BackgroundThe move to working from home necessitated by COVID-19 gave way to debate among employers and employees over return-to-office mandates and the merits of remote work. Amidst these discussions, employee narratives emerged centering on the improved work experience at home, including minimized mistreatment, stress, and emotional exhaustion.ObjectiveWe investigate whether working from home presents an unacknowledged benefit by buffering employees from experiencing incivility and microaggressions, thus affecting their sense of inclusion and well-being.MethodsThe sample comprised 428 Canadian hybrid workers, who completed an online survey. Data were analyzed through qualitative and quantitative techniques.ResultsOur findings demonstrate that circumstances for hybrid workers tend to be better the more they work from home and worse the more they work in the office. The extent to which employees worked in the office was associated with higher rates of mistreatment, lower inclusion, and higher stress and emotional exhaustion. The primary pathways for these effects were through incivility for the general hybrid workforce, and through microaggressions for equity-deserving employees. Employees from equity-deserving groups thus might benefit from reduced exposure to both incivility and microaggressions while working from home.ConclusionsWe demonstrate how being 'out of sight' may present an erstwhile unacknowledged benefit of hybrid work and offer a nuanced discussion of the common perception that remote work prompts feelings of isolation. Organizations seeking to support employee well-being might consider offering flexible remote work opportunities alongside meaningful initiatives to promote inclusion and career progression among all, regardless of one's preferred work location.