Only 7% Would Quit Over RTO, But Tech Firms Are Still Watching Your Productivity

For years, return-to-office (RTO) mandates were framed as the breaking point. The assumption, especially in tech where remote and hybrid arrangements are the norm, was that forcing people back into offices would trigger mass resignations. But recent reporting tells a different story. According to a survey by MyPerfectResume, only about 7% of workers say they would quit outright over mandatory RTO policies.

That doesn’t mean workers are thrilled. Many are frustrated, disengaged, or quietly resentful, but still complying for job security. In a tighter job market, the reality is pragmatic; people need stability more than leverage. As a result, RTO hasn’t become the great resignation trigger many expected.

That raises a more interesting question. If companies aren’t losing talent en masse over RTO, what are they actually optimizing for now? Increasingly, the answer isn’t just physical presence, but, more importantly, productivity visibility. As such, measurement is replacing mandatory RTO as the real pressure point across industries, including tech.

In tech, RTO has become a baseline expectation rather than the end goal. Being in the office is no longer enough; what companies are focusing on next is proof of productivity.

Business Insider reports that major tech firms are increasingly tying performance reviews, productivity expectations, and even AI tool usage to measurable outputs. As covered in a previous article on Amazon’s RTO policy, the company has reportedly rolled out internal dashboards tracking badge swipes and flagging employees with low office presence (tagged as ‘low-time badgers’).

Other companies mentioned in Business Insider’s reporting include Meta, Google, and Microsoft, all of which are tightening expectations around measurable contribution as they invest heavily in AI and operate with leaner teams.

What’s changing isn’t necessarily widespread time-tracking software or minute-by-minute surveillance. Although it’s subtler, it’s arguably more impactful. For example, the same workers’ survey cited above found that two in five respondents (40%) believed that on-site workers are more likely to be considered for raises and promotions.

As dashboards, metrics, and performance signals become more standardized and visible, trust-based evaluation is giving way to structured proof. In essence, productivity is increasingly shifting from something assumed to something documented and reviewed, to the extent of impacting workers’ stability and career progression.

It’s not hard to see why this makes people uneasy, with common reactions ranging from outcry about surveillance to arguments that presence and productivity cannot be equated.

The concerns go deeper than discomfort. Many tech workers worry that metrics oversimplify complex, creative, or long-term work. Like the survey respondents, others fear that there’d be a lack of opportunities, such as missing promotions, slower raises, or weaker performances, if they don’t signal productivity in the right way. There’s also anxiety about lost autonomy and trust, especially for workers who previously thrived under flexible or remote setups.

The worry extends among candidates, too. Similar to 74% of workers who expect to have less bargaining power to demand flexibility in 2026, candidates may no longer encounter remote work as a major perk and negotiation level. It will be harder to defend in an already tight job market.

From the employer side, the logic is clear even if it’s uncomfortable. Companies are operating under economic uncertainty, cautious spending, and intense pressure to justify large AI investments. Leadership wants defensible ways to evaluate performance in light of leaner teams and higher expectations.

Metrics offer that defensibility. They standardize evaluation, reduce ambiguity, and make performance decisions easier to explain internally. At scale, data-driven management feels safer than subjective judgment.

It’s important to note that this isn’t unique to tech. Across industries, companies are moving toward measurable outputs and standardized reviews. And so emerges the tension: what’s efficient for organizations can feel dehumanizing to workers, especially when metrics fail to capture real impact or context.

For tech workers and candidates, the next step isn’t to panic but to treat this ongoing trend as a moment of clarity. No matter the specific role or level, RTO compliance may increasingly be assumed. Visibility and measurement matter more than ever.

That means asking better, more practical questions during interviews and meetings: How is performance evaluated? What metrics matter most? How are AI tools used in reviews?

So while this shift isn’t about being anti-office or anti-accountability, there’s a greater need to understand how modern work is evaluated. Companies may not lose workers over RTO policies alone, but how they measure productivity will shape their talent pipelines and the overall work culture for years to come.