Following in the footsteps of other employers, UW has announced its own return-to-office expectations for employees and faculty members in the new year. But what do they think about this change? 

On Wednesday Oct. 1, 2025, an email attributed to president Vivek Goel was sent out to UW employees announcing new “flexible and hybrid work guidelines” that would go into effect on Jan. 1. The guidelines stated that all staff will be expected to work from campus five days a week, with remote work allowed for up to two days a week.

“The University of Waterloo is, and will remain, an in-person institution,” stated Goel in the email. He elaborated that “maintaining a physical presence is… essential to how we teach, research, serve, and support one another to create the kind of experience our students deserve.”

Under the updated guidelines, flexible work arrangements are “short-term, informal changes to schedule or location,” like in the case of personal appointments, “unforeseen circumstances,” and short-term caregiver duties. Staff who need flexible work arrangements only need to seek approval through an informal conversation with their manager.

In contrast, hybrid work arrangements, where an employee would work remotely on a regular basis, must be given formal approval by their manager and leadership. Requests are evaluated “based on performance, job requirements, and operational needs.” Exceptions, like working remotely for more than two days a week, must be approved by the President and Vice Presidents. All hybrid arrangements would be valid for 12 months and subject to review at the end of their effective duration.

While rumours about the changes had been going around for months before the notice, many staff still felt blindsided by the heavy-handed implementation. “The individual requests require so much paperwork and red tape that it’s a barrier,” said one staff member, who asked to remain anonymous. Said staff member notes that at a time when university leadership is claiming to find ways to cut red tape, “they add this entirely new layer, for something that staff have been doing effectively for five years. That, I think, was a shock.”

The University of Waterloo Staff Association (UWSA) has also reported mixed feedback from members immediately following the announcement. “We’ve mostly heard from staff who are disappointed that something that seemed to be working well from their perspective — the ability to work from home a few days a week — has been rolled back so much,” they wrote in an Oct. 7 email statement to Imprint.

UWSA, whose members make up two-thirds of eligible staff at the university, sent an email on Oct. 2 stating that the organization “was not part of any formal approval process for these guidelines, but did share staff perspectives with decision makers.” The association has previously shared results from a member survey conducted in June 2025 on flexible and hybrid work arrangements with university leadership: 91 per cent of the 1,078 responses stated that a regular hybrid work option was “very” or “extremely important” to them. Most responses were in favour of a default hybrid work week: 46 per cent stated 3 days of remote work per week would be the most ideal arrangement (”very ideal”). 32 per cent preferred working from home two days a week. Around 76 per cent stated that working in-person for all 5 weekdays was “not ideal,” the least favorable survey option.

“Overall, what we’re hearing is that staff feel their work-life balance and wellbeing aren’t valued as much as they’d like,” UWSA noted. Out of 776 responses that included comments, two-thirds expressed that work-life balance and health were the biggest reasons for wanting remote workdays. The third most important was productivity; respondents said “reduced distractions” and “better work outcomes” came from being able to work from home at least part of the time. This also allowed staff to “appreciate the days they were on campus… [they could] show up to campus [with] their full selves and really dedicate the time they had there,” remarked the aforementioned staff member.

“I think it’s a slap in the face to the staff who worked through the COVID lockdown and changed our way of working … There’s no recognition of how hard we’ve worked and how effectively we’ve worked,” they added about the new guidelines. According to the employee, many staff also believe that this is “a clear effort to get people to [leave].” They speculate that implementing unpopular practices like the new guidelines is “in the financial interest of the university… so that… the university can reduce headcount while saving money on severance pay.” After working at UW for over a decade, the staff member is now looking elsewhere for a career move with more flexibility and better hybrid and remote work arrangements.

While the guideline changes only apply to staff, faculty members have also seen a push towards enforcing in-person activity, with varying responses. On Sept 23, the engineering faculty council voted on a motion to include in-person presence in faculty performance evaluations: 43 members voted in favour, 6 against, and 8 abstained. On the other side of the spectrum, math dean Jochen Koenemann walked back a proposal to implement a similar change in math faculty performance evaluations after receiving faculty member feedback. In a Nov. 20 email to faculty council members, he stated that he would not bring the notion forward in future faculty council meetings and would “seek other means to promote a vibrant community in the Faculty of Math.” In the arts faculty, dean Alexie Tcheuyap emailed faculty members on Oct. 15, “strongly asking full-time faculty members to maintain regular, in-person campus presence” and requesting faculty members to notify their chair or director if away from campus for longer than two days in a work week.

“There’s definitely been a much greater shift even over the past year… to have more of the meetings be in person and making a point that we’re having these meetings in person,” noted Anna Drake, associate professor of political science from the faculty of arts. Health and safety are major concerns with in-person presence, especially since courses in areas like political science and gender and social justice touch upon controversial topics. Drake cited how lecture rooms and instructor names were removed from public view after the 2023 Hagey Hall attack. “There are people who teach on structural justice, on abortion, on Palestine… some of us get death threats and rape threats,” she said of her department. If instructors are asked to hold in-person office hours, “having it be advertised that we will be in this spot at a specific time is really unsafe.”

Drake also adds that the stated motive of reducing “inequitable experiences across campus” feels disingenuous, especially regarding the formal request process. “The policy itself doesn’t prioritize accommodation — if you are the one who can’t come in to work, who can’t work on campus… then you have to figure out what to do,” she commented. She stressed that the burden of proof then falls onto staff, who “are asked to justify why they can’t be there,” rather than being accommodated under a policy that gives staff the room and support to succeed, whether or not they have documented accessibility needs. The guidelines also illustrate the larger institutional problem at UW of inconsistency and inequity in accessibility, an issue reflected not only in the treatment of staff but also students. “If you have a professor who’s understanding, then, great, you don’t have to deal with all of that. But if you don’t, then the burden is offloaded to you … that’s part of an equity problem the university is not dealing with … They’re not confronting that.”

David Porreca, president of the UW Faculty Association (FAUW) and associate professor in classical studies, also has concerns about accessibility. Speaking to Imprint from his personal perspective (unaffiliated with FAUW), “there’s a lot of concern for anyone who does have an accommodation to remain remote …[if] a particular unit or faculty decides to go back to being all in person, that effectively outs the person who has the accommodation … That runs contrary to confidentiality concerns.” UW clarified in a statement that “accommodations are distinct from hybrid work arrangements and may involve different criteria and supports,” and directed employees who seek accommodations for accessibility reasons to contact the Employee Health and Accommodations office, who also handle confidentiality concerns regarding accommodations.

Porreca added that about “40 per cent of our job at a minimum doesn’t involve being on campus … for many of us, it involves, quite pointedly, not being on campus.” Most faculty teach courses for 2 terms per year, and are also expected to pursue research, professional development, and pedagogical development when not teaching – most of which happens off-campus, like traveling to participate at academic symposiums or to conduct field research. The university noted in its statement that “while the formal guidelines apply to staff roles, we also expect that faculty members actively engage in the life of our campuses and increase their on-site presence where appropriate.”

And what about the students, who are cited as benefitting from the change? Third-year communication arts student Haya Kharouba feels that students are apathetic, or, in many cases, afraid this is the start of a slippery slope: “I didn’t see [students] care that staff have to be here, but I saw the panic of, ‘what if the good ones leave?’” Kharouba worked as a co-op student doing administrative work alongside staff in the Faculty of Math during the spring term. While she does not mind coming in-person to work if expected to, she feels that the guidelines show “disloyalty to the Waterloo staff community” who take the time and effort to give students the best service possible for their education. 

“Good staff that connect with students are most [of the] ones that I see targeted … I see students getting the anxiety of, ‘I don’t want to lose this staff member or this professor because of this change that [the university] is pushing onto them.’” From personal experience, Kharouba states that faculty members’ departure also “breaks the motivation, the discipline and the overall morale of students … If a professor wants to do their own thing, just let them do their own thing… why do we want to lose educators?”

Above all, a resounding common concern is the future impact as the guidelines come into force this year and the ripple effects on the rest of the institution. “Students are going to feel the hit [in service] in terms of reduced headcount already… And now the staff who remain are upset, [bitter], and they’re not bringing their best selves to work anymore,” stated the anonymous employee.

Drake stressed the critical need for UW to follow through on promised support to staff well-being and agency, in addition to giving concrete commitment to equitable practices. “If we’re not giving institutional support, then we just cannot meet the need. And there’s clearly a need,” emphasized Drake. “I think staff are perfectly capable of doing their jobs very well working from home. I don’t think it is a prerequisite to do your job well.”