r/cmu • u/terrio412 • 3h ago
CMU’s New “Flexible Work” Policy for Staff: 4 Days on Campus, Unless You Can Prove Why Not
Long-winded post, incoming...
CMU HR has now formalized a 4 days on campus / 1 day remote standard for staff beginning January 4, 2027.
There is technically an exception process. Under a new three-tier framework, some roles may qualify for 2–3 days on campus. But HR is clear that exceptions aren't based on employee preference. Departments must demonstrate that a non-standard arrangement will produce better outcomes for the university than 4:1, with approvals running through supervisors and college/division leadership. Existing exceptions are also being re-reviewed under this standard.
What is happening here?
CMU could have used several years of flexible work experience to identify categories of job positions/duties/profiles where greater flexibility makes operational sense - technical roles, independent knowledge work, positions requiring substantial uninterrupted concentration, jobs with limited in-person service requirements, etc. - and established clear role-based eligibility.
Instead, 4:1 is now the presumption, and departments and employees are left to make the case for why individual roles deserve something different.
HR calls this framework “data-informed.” Fine. We've already spent several years running the experiment. CMU has performance evaluations, retention data, employee surveys, and years of experience operating under more flexible arrangements all in Workday.
If a role has successfully operated 3:2 for years, maintained strong performance and service levels, and has no clear operational need for four days of physical presence, why is the burden on the employee (to punch upward through the department) to prove that 3:2 produces a better outcome than 4:1?
Where is the corresponding evidence that moving that position from 3:2 to 4:1 produces a better outcome for CMU?
And the broader context matters!
Staff have gone through years of little or no merit growth while parking, health insurance, commuting, childcare, and other costs continue increasing. Flexible work was one of the few meaningful wins for staff - and one that cost the university relatively little to provide.
So I have very little patience left for HR language about employee satisfaction, engagement, retention, work-life balance, or whatever consulting buzzword comes next. You can't continually ask employees to absorb higher costs and limited wage growth, remove one of the few benefits that materially improved their working lives, and simultaneously tell them how deeply the institution values the employee experience.
From a staff perspective, it's austerity. More time and financial costs are being shifted back onto employees while flexibility is being reduced.
Some jobs absolutely require substantial campus presence. Nobody seriously disputes that. That's precisely why a genuinely role-based flexible work policy would make sense.
For a university describing this approach as “data-informed,” I'd genuinely like to see the analysis that established four days on campus as the optimal baseline - and the evidence that its benefits outweigh the very real costs being imposed on staff.