Employee Owners on RTO

I don't mind returning to office, but the accommodations should have been put in place before the announcement. It just felt so forced, without any dialog between leadership and us "employee-owners". Not having assigned work spaces fully equipped with what we need to do our job effectively defeats the purpose of RTO and may even cause a drop in production because of the uncertainty of workspace/conditions each day. This whole thing just seems to go against the BV culture we've had in the past.

I don’t feel like employee owners are being heard and it's extremely discouraging and has made my trust in leadership and the future of BV extremely uncertain.

ESOP loses value without workplace democracy. If they can't influence decisions that affect company performance, employees lose motivation to go the extra mile. We also picked a CEO with the bravery to state in an email that "there is no playbook" for an RTO mandate, but yet double down/disappear when questioned. Would you keep a financial advisor who operated this way? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the 80%+ of the workforce that voted for remote work represents 51%+ of ESOP shareholders. Even if not a voting majority, this is the most internal strife I've ever seen in a non-union company. Is leadership prepared for employees to test their collective bargaining power? What if 3,000-4,000 people just continued to work from home, despite the mandate?

Sad to see the CEO revert back on his word in such a short span.

The announcement for RTO to be in the office 3 days a week and not have my own spot, add in the getting up extra early, adding the stressful commuting back and forth to my workday is causing me a great deal of anxiety and unhappiness. This stress and the need to be in in the office is completely unnecessary because all my work can be completed electronically, which includes collaborating with fellow co-workers and has been that way well before covid.

When I was hired I thought that it was a virtual position. It was advertised as a virtual position but on my first day I got a call asking what time I would be in the office. I now come in to the office and 4 days a week which added expenses like fuel and car maintenance to the picture. With inflation it is really hitting my budget hard.

I am outraged by the new RTO policy. How am I supposed to homeschool my kids, take care of my ailing father, and attend my daily yoga classes if I have to go to the office three days each week?

As Employee Owner, I do not feel that an adequate business case has been presented for making this change. Given the overwhelming negative response, Executive Management needs to re-evaluate the policy for not only WHQ but all BV offices.

The plan to RTO was poorly communicated and implemented, giving little consideration for our employee/owners. Doing things to try and convince people to come back to the office would be fine, but the one large hammer tactic has soured our relationship with the company and contributed to a lack of confidence in the leadership.

The continual change in the model is what is so concerning and disruptive. Change is inevitable but the constant

am also very distressed by the RTO Mandate and do not feel that my opinion is valid at this point. Since we were told that the Mobile positions would be permanent, my family has made some major life-style and financial decisions based on my working from home. I would also request that the mandate be reviewed and lowered to one day per week, two at the most.

Changing the WFH policy after you said you wouldn't, all for the sake of conforming to pre-COVID norms is just plain insulting. With BV also moving to hotel desks and no assigned seating RTO represents more of a workplace shift than management wants to acknowledge. This is not a university class; we are hard working professionals and deserved to be treated as such. We grew BVs profits by a billion dollars during a global pandemic, we've earned WFH. We've shown it works. At best, the RTO plan is poorly thought out and implemented. I can't help but wonder what policy change is next?

I have been able to increase my responsibilities with WFH, and being forced back will tank my productivity. I fear what this would do to my yearly reviews, because they have been Steller in the past.

I don't have as dramatic of financial or life-altering impact from this as others do, but I truly believe working from home is the best choice for SOME (including myself), for the benefit of the individual and the company. I urge BV to compromise with an alternate version of the policy which addresses the shortcomings the company is foreseeing but without requiring ALL able-bodied professionals to change for the benefit of the few. It is closed-minded and inaccurate to believe a constant in-person work environment is inherently the best for everyone.

My quality of life is vastly superior with a work from home environment and I have experienced significant career growth. I do not want to return to the office for reasons that seem unfounded. The COVID experiment has proven to me that the traditional work environment is harmful to mental health and self identity (for myself and I don't doubt many others). The added cost of time, money, resources, mental health etc of returning to office is unnecessary and should be avoided if people choose to.

I was hired as a virtual employee and I live in NM. I took a $30k a year pay cut so I could work from home, and B&V motivated me based on their employee owner values and impressive reviews. Aside from Covid resurging (and it is), the environmental implications are larger than any corporation wants to discuss. The significant difference the world over discovered was disappearance of smog and clean air, you could actually see blue instead of brown from the space station. The environment, including disease control are certainly important facts to consider.

I do not agree with RTO. It is a disruption to our new ways of living and does NOT promote a healthy work-life balance being in office more than not. Even if eliminating one day from three days to two would be a better compromise. Please consider revoking the new policy. B&V will lose valuable people who are not willing to maintain this for long.

Why were we told WFH was permanent?

As an individual who was hired for a remote position, I see no benefit for RTO. If I were to work in the closest office location, I will not be working with any of my team members and I will STILL need to collaborate 100% via teams and email. Forcing me to drive for the exact same work experience seems like a waste of resources.

While I understand the desire for in-office professionals, specifically new hires, to have personal interaction and mentorship, I believe that the RTO mandate is too drastic of a change. If career development, culture, and mentorship are the drivers behind the change, let us look for a different solution before upending the lives of the majority of professionals.