Working From Home, Mental Health & The Choice Makes All the Difference

A UK study reveals that giving employees autonomy over remote work arrangements fundamentally transforms its impact on their wellbeing. The COVID-19 lockdowns proved this point.

Bender from Futurama finding out that all robots has a slot for a free will chip at a robot monastery

Organizations worldwide grapple with post-pandemic work arrangements. New research demonstrates that the mental health benefits of working from home hinge on whether employees can choose it freely rather than having it imposed upon them. The findings explain why previous studies on remote work and wellbeing have yielded such conflicting results.

Mental health issues impose economic burdens through reduced productivity, increased healthcare costs, and diminished workforce participation. Businesses navigating tight labor markets need to understand how work arrangements affect employee mental health.

Big picture

The paper (Working from Home and Mental Health: Giving Employees a Choice Does Make a Difference) by Uwe Jirjahn and Cinzia Rienzo analyzed data from Understanding Society, a comprehensive UK household panel survey.

The study examined over 106,000 observations from nearly 40,000 employees aged 16-64, tracking both job-related mental health (anxiety and depression at work) and overall mental health problems using the validated General Health Questionnaire. The analysis covers 2010 to 2024, controlling for occupation, firm size, education, performance pay, commuting time, family structure, and regional variation.

What they found

The research distinguishes between three employee groups: those who use work-from-home arrangements, those who have the option available but don’t use it, and those for whom remote work isn’t available.

Before and after the pandemic, both using remote work and having it available as an option were associated with improved mental health outcomes. Employees who worked from home reported lower overall mental health problems, reduced job-related depression, and decreased job-related anxiety compared to those without any remote work option.

Even employees who had remote work available but chose not to use it showed better mental health than those lacking the option entirely. Simply knowing flexibility exists provides psychological benefits.

During the COVID-19 crisis (March 2020 to July 2021), the picture reversed. When government lockdowns eliminated choice and mandated remote work, using work-from-home arrangements became associated with worse overall mental health. Employees who worked from home during lockdowns reported increased mental health problems rather than the improvements seen in normal periods.

The pandemic period itself showed no direct effect on mental health once the interaction with remote work was accounted for. The lockdowns and enforced remote work, rather than the pandemic itself, drove the mental health deterioration.

Previous research underestimated the benefits

Most studies compared employees who work from home against those who don’t, creating a reference group that lumps together people who have the option but choose not to use it with people who have no option at all.

When the researchers replicated this conventional approach, the positive effects of using remote work appeared much smaller or disappeared entirely. For overall mental health problems, the estimated benefit dropped by approximately 49 percent and lost statistical significance. For job-related depression, it fell by about 20 percent.

Existing research may underestimate remote work’s benefits by failing to account for the psychological value of simply having flexibility available.

The gender stuff

Women working full-time who both used remote work and had it available showed better job-related and overall mental health. All measures improved: anxiety, depression, and overall mental health problems.

Women continue to bear disproportionate responsibility for family and household management even when employed full-time. Remote work helps them reconcile these competing demands. During the pandemic, women experienced the negative reversal: the use of work-from-home became associated with increased mental health problems as the elimination of choice and intensification of caregiving demands (including school closures) overwhelmed remote work’s typical benefits.

Men working full-time who used remote work reported lower job-related anxiety and depression, but using remote work showed no association with their overall mental health during normal periods.

Having remote work available (without using it) was associated with better overall mental health for men, a benefit that vanished when they actually worked from home regularly.

Men appear to overestimate remote work’s benefits for their overall wellbeing, perhaps not anticipating that working from home would require taking on additional family responsibilities. They underestimate remote work’s benefits for job-related wellbeing, discovering through actual use that it reduces workplace anxiety and depression.

Men cannot fully assess remote work’s qualities before trying it. Women appear to more accurately anticipate both the work-related and personal benefits.

Why choice matters

Employees have different preferences. Remote work involves both demands (blurred work-life boundaries, potential isolation, reduced social support) and resources (reduced commuting time, fewer workplace interruptions, greater ability to integrate work and family). When employees can choose, those who benefit self-select into remote work while those who would experience net disadvantages opt out. Forced remote work eliminates this beneficial matching.

The need for self-determination and autonomy is a fundamental human motivation. Giving employees control over their work arrangements enhances their sense of self-determination, which independently contributes to wellbeing regardless of which option they choose.

Organizations that offer remote work as an option signal that they care about employee wellbeing. This contributes to a work climate characterized by procedural fairness, influencing employees’ beliefs about whether workplace demands are threatening or manageable.

Implications

Policy design: Frame remote work as an option rather than a mandate. The pure availability of flexibility provides mental health benefits even for employees who choose not to use it regularly. The cost of offering the option may be lower than the cost of widespread use (in terms of coordination challenges), while still providing psychological benefits.

Talent management: The mental health benefits of having remote work available help attract and retain talent, particularly female employees and those who value work-life balance.

Gender differences: The gender differences suggest value in tailored approaches. Women may benefit from explicit messaging about work-life balance support. Men might benefit from trial periods to help them accurately assess fit.

Hybrid arrangements: The positive effects when choice existed versus the negative effects during mandated lockdowns suggest that hybrid arrangements (where employees have control over when they work remotely) may optimize outcomes better than either full-time remote or full-time office mandates.

Crisis management: When remote work becomes enforced rather than optional, its mental health effects can reverse. Organizations facing future disruptions should consider how to preserve employee autonomy even in constrained circumstances.

By the numbers

Key findings:

• Using remote work reduced overall mental health problems by 0.25 points before/after pandemic

• Using remote work reduced job-related depression by 0.20 points before/after pandemic

• Remote work availability alone (without use) reduced overall mental health problems by 0.27 points

• During pandemic, using remote work increased overall mental health problems by 0.21 points (net effect)

• Previous studies underestimated benefits by 10-50% by not accounting for availability

Full-time women:

• Using remote work reduced overall mental health problems by 0.59 points

• Using remote work reduced job-related depression by 0.30 points

• Availability alone reduced overall mental health problems by 0.33 points

Full-time men:

• Using remote work reduced job-related anxiety and depression

• Using remote work showed no effect on overall mental health

• Availability alone reduced overall mental health problems by 0.35 points

Sample:

• 106,932 employee observations from 38,706 individuals

• 2010-2024 study period

• 9.1% regularly used remote work; 9.3% had it available but unused

• 81.6% had no remote work option

Bottomline

The mental health effects of remote work depend on whether it’s offered as genuine choice rather than mandated. The pure availability of flexibility, even when unused, provides mental benefits by signaling organizational support and enhancing employee autonomy.

The reversal of effects during COVID-19 lockdowns provides real-world validation of this idea. Organizations designing post-pandemic work policies should maximize employee choice over work arrangements. Offering options provides value even for those who don’t use them. Remote work affects men and women differently due to persistent household responsibility “differences”.

The path forward isn’t about mandating remote work or demanding office presence, but about providing genuine choice and giving employees more “free will” to make decisions that optimize their own wellbeing and performance.

Note : Expect tomorrow’s post be a bit of a read (6000+ words and counting)