Return-to-office conversations are picking up again.
But this time, the pressure isn’t coming from culture debates or flexibility preferences. It’s coming from something more practical.
Cost.
Gas prices are rising fast. The average price per gallon recently jumped more than 15% in a single week, and the cost of filling a tank now exceeds $50 in much of the country, according to GasBuddy.
The International Energy Agency just listed “work from home where possible” as the number one recommendation in its emergency demand-reduction plan. That’s not a lifestyle suggestion. It’s an economic signal.
For many employees, these numbers are changing the way they think about their jobs. Whether they say it out loud or not, the question becomes simple: Does this still make sense for my life?
That’s the part many employers aren’t fully accounting for. And it’s where risk starts to build.
From the employer’s side, return-to-office policies are about productivity, collaboration, or culture. For employees, it’s much simpler and more immediate. A daily equation: time, cost, and energy.
A recent report by MSN says that, across the United States, workers now spend an estimated $6,700 per year on travel costs related to commuting, including fuel, maintenance, and other transportation expenses.
None of these costs feel overwhelming on their own. But together, they start to change how sustainable a role feels and how long someone is willing to carry the tradeoff.
What We’re Seeing in the Market
We’re seeing this play out in real hiring conversations across Central Indiana.
Temp roles that used to be straightforward are taking longer to fill. Candidate pools are tighter. Interest drops off for reasons that aren’t immediately obvious.
And when we take a closer look, it’s often not about compensation or responsibilities. It’s about what it takes to show up consistently.
In one recent situation, a client was struggling to maintain consistency with temporary staff. Attendance was unpredictable, and turnover was higher than expected for roles that should have been stable.
At first, it looked like a typical hiring issue, but it wasn’t. The work itself wasn’t the problem. The barrier was smaller and easier to overlook.
Parking.
For many temporary roles, margins are tighter by nature. When you layer in daily costs like parking or gas, even modest expenses can start to influence whether the job feels worth it day to day.
That was happening for a client located in downtown Indianapolis. Parking costs were adding just enough friction to affect attendance and consistency.
So instead of pushing harder on recruiting, we addressed the real issue. We recommended a parking stipend.
That one change made the role more sustainable. Open positions were easier to fill. Attendance improved. The position started working the way it was supposed to, for both the employee and the employer.
This isn’t an isolated situation. We find that this is where a lot of hiring efforts stall – when the focus stays on finding more candidates, instead of understanding why the right ones aren’t sticking. We look for those disconnects early because they’re easier to fix before they become retention problems.
Employees Are Pushing Back, Taking Employers Off Guard
Most employees won’t make a sudden “stay or go” decision because gas prices go up. But they notice and they adjust. Over time, those adjustments add up.
A Workhuman survey found that 41% of employees feel burdened by the higher cost of living and cite it as a factor in how they think about returning to the office. That tracks with what workplace consultants are reporting: as gas prices rise, employees are using those costs to push back against in-person requirements.
A longer commute feels less justifiable. A closer opportunity becomes more appealing. A role that once felt manageable starts to feel like a tradeoff.
The misalignment is that many organizations are still making decisions based on internal priorities: how teams collaborate, what leadership prefers, what feels right culturally.
Meanwhile, employees are making decisions based on their day-to-day reality of living.
That disconnect doesn’t show up immediately. It shows up later, in smaller candidate pools and in turnover that feels unexpected. By that point, the underlying issue has been building for a while.
The IEA estimates that if workers with the ability to work from home did so for just three additional days a week, national oil consumption from cars could drop by two to six percent. For individual drivers, the savings average around 20%. That’s a meaningful number, and it tells you something about how much commuting actually costs people, both in dollars and in the mental math they’re doing about their jobs.
The Solution Isn’t Just About Perks
Some companies are starting to respond with commute stipends, gas cards or other incentives. Those can help. In the right context, they make a meaningful difference.
The real question, however, is whether the role itself is sustainable.
Candidates aren’t just evaluating salary anymore. They’re weighing the full cost of doing the job: time, money, and energy included.
- What does this role actually require from me?
- And is that realistic long-term?
When there’s a gap between those answers, it doesn’t stay hidden for long.
The companies navigating this well aren’t overcorrecting. They’re paying attention. They’re asking better questions: What’s making this role harder than it needs to be? Where are we adding friction without realizing it? What would make this more sustainable over time?
Sometimes the answer is flexibility. Sometimes it’s compensation. And sometimes, it’s something simple, like removing a daily cost that shouldn’t be there in the first place.
Return-to-office policies aren’t the problem.
But ignoring how those decisions play out in real life can be.
The companies that get this right won’t just fill roles more easily. They’ll build teams that last, because the roles and working environments they offer actually work for the people doing them.
How Can Milliner Help?
We don’t just source candidates, we help HR teams keep the hiring process moving in a way that actually works. That means setting expectations early, keeping feedback from stalling, and having honest conversations when hesitation starts to slow things down. Our goal isn’t to rush decisions or push hires through. It’s to make sure good hiring decisions don’t get stuck. Because when clarity and momentum are built into the process, roles get filled faster, teams stay healthier, and hiring feels far less stressful for everyone involved.
Let us know how we can assist.
