How to Solve Your Organization’s Conflict about Remote Work

To me, the conflict about remote work is, at its core, a conflict about control and structure.

Two sides. Each, a different side of the same coin.

The side with power wants structure.

A container to keep the work confined, predictable, and clear.

This side believes that by requiring in-person work, they can create a structure that feels impermeable and thus ensure that everyone meets their responsibilities.

The other side wants a different type of confinement.

The sort that can best be attained by having control over how the work is structured.

This side believes that they can better meet their work responsibilities if they are afforded the choice in designing how those responsibilities will be met.

Sometimes this sort of conflict is a larger symptom of disconnection.

My first real job out of law school was at the Legal Aid Society in Brooklyn, New York (LAS). I think fondly about that job from time to time.

I had survived a grueling time in law school. Not because of the work, but because I was financially struggling.

My job at LAS was water in the desert.

It was in some ways the perfect job.

First, because it allowed me to meet my physiological needs, and second, because it was unionized. Which meant power could always be checked and rebalanced.

The result was flexibility.

It was not remote, but it had the sort of flexibility that gave you choice, structure, and control.

It taught me that it was okay to honor both an institution and myself.

On the days when I didn’t have “court,” I would come in a little late, allowing myself a little more sleep and a little more play.  

I would occasionally run into my supervisor, Reggie Haley, who would give me the eyes, but I accepted it as a consequence of choosing the sort of morning I wanted to have.

The flexibility looked different for everyone.

Some attorneys were at the popular bar before 4 p.m.

Others went to court only on specific days or in specific weeks of the month.

On the nicest summer days, you would see even the goody-two-shoes outside.

However you structured your days, you understood the unspoken rule: as long as you took care of your responsibilities, your time was yours.

As an attorney, I have always found myself closest to those in power. This has been the privilege of my position.

This means that I have often had choice—especially the choice to structure my day as I please.

In the workplaces where I have been among those holding the least power, I’ve had less choice.

In most workplaces, the practices and policies most desirable to those in power are the ones that reign.

In a unionized workplace, it is whatever both sides can come to terms with.

This is how I recommend my clients approach all conflicts.

If you are having a conflict with your team about remote work, the first step is understanding that each side has merit.

The second step is to approach this conflict (and all conflicts with your team) as an opportunity to reach fair agreements.

The third and final step is asking: What would it look like if both sides’ needs could be met?

If the answer is  “it cannot,” then your conflict may not be about remote work.