Why temporary flexibility now needs clearer guardrails 

The earliest decisions were necessarily immediate and practical, focused on safety, continuity, and giving employees enough flexibility to keep working through uncertainty. That initial response solved an urgent problem, but it also creates a more complex next stage.

The challenge comes from the fact that arrangements introduced quickly in a moment of disruption can become harder to manage if they remain in place for longer than expected. This is particularly true when expectations begin to settle and different parts of the workforce are affected in different ways.

Mercer’s latest HR Readiness research suggests that flexibility remains central to how organizations in the region are managing continuity. Across the markets surveyed, average work-from-home levels remain substantial, including 62% in the UAE, 64% in Kuwait and 86% in Lebanon. Many organizations are also still not requiring employees to return to the office. In the UAE, for example, 82% said they were not currently requiring a return. This suggests remote working continues to play an important role in business continuity. However, it also means arrangements introduced at speed are now lasting long enough to raise practical questions about consistency, communication, and future expectations.

International remote working is also part of the policy landscape for many employers, although it remains an area requiring careful governance because of tax, legal and compliance considerations. Several markets report that most organizations have an international remote working policy in place, including 59% in the UAE, 59% in Kuwait, 57% in Saudi Arabia and 56% in Qatar. For multinational employers, the issue is now about defining the duration, eligibility, return expectations, and review points of these arrangements with greater precision, rather than expanding flexibility indefinitely.

Employees adapt quickly to new patterns of working. When short-term arrangements start to settle in, they can begin to drift into something less clear. Over time, what began as a necessary short-term response can start to feel like an established norm, even where the policy intent was always temporary. If organizations have not been explicit about duration, limits, and the basis for future decisions it becomes harder to unwind arrangements without damaging trust or creating confusion.

The same principle applies more broadly to support measures. Mercer’s research shows that organizations are still relying far more on non-monetary support than on additional allowances. This suggests that employers continue to focus on practical help, wellbeing and continuity rather than broad financial intervention. In the UAE, for example, 77% of organizations reported offering additional non-monetary support, compared with 9% implementing an additional allowance. This pattern reflects a sensible focus on helping employees navigate uncertainty in practical ways. However, it also points to the need for a clearer framework around who the support is for, how long it applies and how decisions will be reviewed if conditions change again.

This is especially important for multinational employers with ties to the region. Many will be managing workforce questions across several jurisdictions at once, while also balancing local realities with broader mobility, compliance and talent considerations. In that context, consistency matters. A temporary arrangement in one market can quickly shape expectations elsewhere if the rationale, scope and review points are not clearly communicated.

In practical terms, several priorities matter:

• Define temporary arrangements clearly, including their duration, scope and review points
• Be explicit about what may trigger a change in approach, even where timing remains uncertain
• Test decisions for consistency across employee groups, locations and business needs
• Communicate with enough regularity and honesty to prevent assumptions filling the gaps
• Treat flexibility and support measures as part of workforce policy, not just crisis response

For employers with ties to the region, the immediate priority is not to withdraw flexibility too quickly but to define it more clearly. In uncertain conditions, clarity does not remove complexity but it does make it easier to act consistently, explain decisions credibly and protect trust while conditions remain unsettled.

Many of the next questions now sit beyond the region itself. As multinational employers consider what this period may mean for mobility, regional hub strategy and future talent decisions, Mercer is gathering wider international perspectives to inform the next stage of this discussion.