{
  "id": 5624653,
  "title": "RTO mandates are just layoffs that skip the severance check",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/04/rto-mandates-are-just-layoffs-that-skip-the-severance-check",
  "topic": "business",
  "section": "Business",
  "published": "2026-09-04T19:14:22.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Dev.to",
    "slug": "dev-to",
    "url": "https://dev.to/adioof/rto-mandates-are-just-layoffs-that-skip-the-severance-check-2j75"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "The article \"RTO mandates are just layoffs that skip the severance check\" discusses the growing trend of companies using Return-to-Office (RTO) mandates as a means of forced layoffs without offering severance packages. According to a BambooHR survey conducted in June 2024, a quarter of VP and C-suite executives, and 18% of HR professionals admitted to intentionally seeking voluntary turnover as part of their RTO efforts.\n\nWhen fewer people resigned than expected during the RTO push, 37% of managers, directors, and executives resorted to actual layoffs. Anita Grantham, Head of HR at BambooHR, described this as \"a concerning trend of potential manipulation within return-to-office policies.\"\n\nA survey by Enhancv in March 2026 revealed that 72% of employees believe their RTO mandates are designed to function as layoffs, encouraging them to resign and avoid receiving a severance package. Enhancv co-founder Volen Vulkov emphasized that if 72% of the workforce perceives a policy as a trick to get them to quit, the company's culture no longer exists.\n\nThe article highlights that RTO is just one example of a broader strategy called \"quiet firing,\" where companies gradually make the job unbearable to force employees to leave. This approach, known as \"financial engineering in a cultural disguise,\" has been adopted by 53% of companies, according to a Resume Templates report from May 2025. By slowly deteriorating the job, companies can reduce staff without facing exit interviews, media backlash, or paying severance.\n\nThe author of the article, a small startup owner, shares their perspective on why they wouldn't employ this strategy in their company, citing the importance of retaining key talent and the difficulty of replacing them. They emphasize that when employees are left standing after such tactics, they become aware of the betrayal and lose trust in the company, making it impossible to regain their confidence.\n\nThe article concludes by questioning whether companies that announce strict RTO mandates would be perceived as genuinely promoting a culture change or as using a deceptive tactic to avoid severance payments.",
  "summary": "Here's a fun idea to toy with. Remove a person from a job, yet somehow manage to convince them that it was their decision to walk away. No severance. No negative publicity. No uncomfortable company-wide meetings where the CEO cites a \"challenging environment\" in a letter. And many companies are intentionally implementing it. ## The quiet part, said out loud Typically, this lives on vibes and…",
  "key_points": [
    "Companies using RTO mandates as forced layoffs without severance",
    "37% of managers resorted to actual layoffs when fewer resigned",
    "72% of employees see RTO mandates as deceptive layoffs"
  ],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}