Remote work in North America has stabilized at high levels in 2024 to 2025. This report benchmarks the United States and Canada on adoption, job postings, office utilization, productivity, well‑being, and policy. It translates the latest data into practical actions for employers.
Imagine doing great work from anywhere and still growing your career. Browse Remotly’s fresh remote roles and let your next adventure begin.
Contents
- Key numbers at a glance
- What people do vs what they want
- Hiring market signals
- Productivity, performance, and well‑being
- Country drill‑downs
- Office utilization and urban effects
- Compliance, tax, and policy notes
- What to do next
- Methods, definitions, and limits
- FAQ
- References
1) Key numbers at a glance
United States
- Share of paid workdays at home
27.29 percent in July 2025, based on the Survey of Working Arrangements and Attitudes (SWAA) series published via the St. Louis Fed. (ALFRED) - Worked at home on days worked
32.5 percent in 2024 across all employed people, and 50.0 percent among those with a bachelor’s degree or higher. Women 36.4 percent, men 29.1 percent. American Time Use Survey. - Office attendance signal
Kastle’s 10‑city Back‑to‑Work Barometer weekly averages have hovered in the low to mid 50s during 2025, with marked Tuesday to Thursday peaks. Method uses keycard swipes vs a February 2020 baseline. (Kastle Systems, Kastle Systems)
Canada
- Usually working most hours at home
17.4 percent in May 2025, down from 18.7 percent in May 2024, according to Statistics Canada’s LFS supplement. Hybrid commuters rose to 5.1 percent. (Statistics Canada) - Exclusively at home vs hybrid (context)
In May 2024, 13.2 percent exclusively at home and 10.3 percent hybrid. These proportions have moved slowly since 2023. (Statistics Canada)
Region‑level context
- North America remains a global high‑WFH region
Cross‑country survey evidence across 40 nations shows WFH is highest in North America, the UK, and Australia. Post‑2023, levels appear to have stabilized. Employees value WFH roughly 5 percent of pay on average. (EconStor)
2) What people do vs what they want
- Worker interest outpaces employer supply
LinkedIn’s “Remote Work Gap” shows remote roles attract outsized attention relative to their share of postings. This mis‑match persists into 2025. - Trade‑offs around full‑time RTO
World Economic Forum reporting in 2025 highlights that many workers would accept meaningful trade‑offs to avoid a full‑time, five‑day in‑office requirement. (World Economic Forum)
What this means
If your staffing model assumes pre‑2020 location norms, you will face avoidable attrition and longer time‑to‑hire for remote‑capable roles. Calibrate policies to labor‑market reality.
3) Hiring market signals
- Postings in the US
Remote job postings were 7.8 percent of US postings at end of June 2025, per Indeed Hiring Lab’s monthly chartbook. That is well above 2019 but far below peak 2021 to 2022 levels. (Indeed Hiring Lab) - Global benchmark
Broader OECD–Indeed work shows remote shares plateaued internationally by early 2023, with large cross‑country differences. North America sits near the high end. (Indeed Hiring Lab)
What this means
Expect a durable hybrid mix. Fully remote postings will remain scarce in some industries, but candidate preference for flexibility is not fading.
4) Productivity, performance, and well‑being
- Stability, not collapse
Stanford SIEPR’s 2025 synthesis finds WFH levels stabilized after 2023, with North America remaining an outlier at higher WFH intensity. Employees value remote days at roughly 5 percent of pay, reflecting real utility. (SIEPR, EconStor) - The remote work paradox
Gallup’s 2025 “State of the Global Workplace” and topic coverage document a pattern where fully remote workers report higher engagement yet lower thriving than many on‑site peers. Management quality and team practices are the performance lever, not location policy alone. (Gallup.com, Gallup.com) - Practical counterpoints
HBR’s 2025 feature argues many firms see lower collaboration quality under poorly executed hybrid models and need to redesign workflows, not just write stricter attendance rules. (Harvard Business Review)
What this means
Do not treat office presence as a proxy for outcomes. Invest in team‑level operating rhythms, manager training, and role‑based onsite purpose.
5) Country drill‑downs
United States
- How much WFH
27.29 percent of paid workdays were from home in July 2025, per SWAA. That is roughly four times the 2019 baseline and consistent with a stable “post‑2023” equilibrium. (ALFRED) - Who works at home on days worked
32.5 percent overall in 2024, and 50.0 percent among those with a bachelor’s degree or higher, per ATUS Table 6. - Office utilization
10‑city averages in the low to mid 50s in 2025. Peaks mid‑week, troughs on Fridays. (Kastle Systems) - Federal context for 2025
GAO reporting shows federal remote and telework usage increased after 2020 then entered a period of policy adjustment. June 2025 GAO work documents 207,710 remote workers across CFO Act agencies as of June 2024, and calls for clearer OPM guidance on measuring impacts. Agencies are balancing increased in‑person presence with flexible policies. (GAO Files, Government Accountability Office)
Canada
- How much WFH
17.4 percent of workers usually worked most hours at home in May 2025, down from 18.7 percent in May 2024. Hybrid commuters rose to 5.1 percent. (Statistics Canada) - Exclusively at home vs hybrid (context)
13.2 percent exclusively at home and 10.3 percent hybrid in May 2024. Movement since 2023 has been gradual. (Statistics Canada) - Office market signals
Availability and vacancy rates stayed elevated in 2025, with national availability near the mid teens and vacancy around the high teens. Interpretation requires care because availability and vacancy are different metrics. (Altus Group, Cushman & Wakefield) - Cross‑border remote is still limited
StatsCan analyses note that relatively few Canadians who work from home are employed by organizations located in another province or abroad. (Statistics Canada)
Mexico (policy snapshot for the region)
- Telework standard NOM‑037
Mexico’s official telework norm (NOM‑037‑STPS‑2023) sets health and safety rules for telework and took effect in December 2023. Employers must assess risks, provide equipment support, and document arrangements when the majority of work is done remotely. Comparable, current national adoption statistics are limited.
6) Office utilization and urban effects
- US metros
Access‑control data indicate a durable hybrid pattern, with weekly averages in the low to mid 50s, strong Tuesday to Thursday peaks, and weak Fridays. This tells you about footfall, not productivity. (Kastle Systems) - Canadian markets
Brokerage and analytics reports point to persistent slack, slow construction pipelines, and flight‑to‑quality dynamics. Interpret with caution and align to how your own workforce actually uses space. (CBRE, Altus Group, Cushman & Wakefield)
7) Compliance, tax, and policy notes
- United States
Federal agencies continue to rebalance in‑person expectations with telework and remote work. GAO’s June 2025 report recommends OPM update guidance so agencies can evaluate effects on mission delivery, recruitment, and retention. Private employers should separate federal policy headlines from local business needs and performance data. (GAO Files) - Canada
There is no single national telework law. Employers should align remote policies with provincial employment standards and health and safety requirements, and with Statistics Canada definitions for reporting and benchmarking. (Statistics Canada) - Mexico
NOM‑037 imposes concrete obligations when more than half of work hours are remote. If you employ staff in Mexico, ensure your telework policy and ergonomic risk assessments meet that standard.
8) What to do next
- Design hybrid around tasks, not days
Use onsite time for collaboration that truly benefits from co‑presence. Do not mandate commutes for work that can be done independently. (Harvard Business Review) - Invest in manager capability
Engagement and thriving hinge on expectations, feedback, strengths alignment, and workload clarity. Train managers to lead distributed teams. (Gallup.com) - Be explicit about where flexibility lives
If a role is remote‑capable, say so. Posting transparency reduces mismatches and shortens time‑to‑hire. - Measure outcomes, not keycard swipes
Occupancy is not a performance metric. Combine people, productivity, and space data to guide decisions. (Kastle Systems) - Localize for policy
Align US, Canadian, and Mexican practices to local employment standards and, for Mexico, NOM‑037 documentation requirements.
9) Methods, definitions, and limits
- ATUS (US) measures whether people worked at home on days they worked. It does not directly measure hybrid schedules across weeks. Use it to benchmark prevalence across demographics.
- SWAA (US) tracks the share of paid days at home and updates monthly. Use it to understand hybrid intensity over time. (ALFRED, WFH Research)
- Statistics Canada LFS supplements classify workers by where they usually work most hours and identify hybrid commuters. Use them for Canadian prevalence and commuting impacts. (Statistics Canada)
- Job postings data (Indeed, LinkedIn) reflect employer supply and candidate demand in the market, not headcount. (Indeed Hiring Lab)
- Office utilization from access systems shows workplace entry vs a historical baseline. It is not an output metric. (Kastle Systems)
10) FAQ
What share of days are remote in the US right now?
27.29 percent of paid workdays in July 2025, per SWAA and the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis series. (ALFRED)
How many US workers work at home on a typical day they work?
In 2024, 32.5 percent worked at home on days they worked. Among college graduates, 50.0 percent did.
How many Canadians usually work most hours at home?
17.4 percent in May 2025. Hybrid commuting rose to 5.1 percent. (Statistics Canada)
Are offices “back” in North America?
Attendance has plateaued around the low to mid 50s of pre‑2020 levels in major US metros, with strong mid‑week peaks. Canada’s office availability and vacancy remain elevated. Utilization is not the same as performance. (Kastle Systems, Altus Group, Cushman & Wakefield)
Does hybrid help or hurt performance?
It depends on management and job design. Gallup finds higher engagement but lower thriving for fully remote workers, while HBR argues many firms still have not redesigned processes for hybrid. The fix is leadership and workflow, not blunt mandates. (Gallup.com, Harvard Business Review)
What policies do I need to worry about in Mexico?
NOM‑037 defines required safety, health, equipment, and documentation for telework arrangements where most hours are remote. Ensure compliance if you employ staff there.
TLDR
- Remote work in North America has stabilized rather than disappearing. In the United States, about 27 percent of paid workdays were done from home in July 2025. In Canada, 17.4 percent of workers usually worked most of their hours at home in May 2025. (ALFRED, Statistics Canada)
- On days when Americans worked, 32.5 percent worked at home at least some of the time in 2024. That share rises to 50.0 percent for workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher.
- Employer demand for fully remote roles is far below worker interest. Remote job postings in the US were 7.8 percent of postings in late June 2025, while interest remains elevated, creating a persistent demand‑supply gap documented by LinkedIn. (Indeed Hiring Lab)
- Office attendance in major US metros has plateaued near the low to mid 50s as a share of pre‑pandemic baselines, with large mid‑week peaks and weak Fridays. (Kastle Systems)
- Engagement and well‑being are not the same thing. Gallup’s 2025 data and analysis describe a “remote work paradox” where fully remote employees report higher engagement but lower thriving than many on‑site peers. Good management practices are the lever. (Gallup.com, Gallup.com)
- Bottom line for employers in North America: hybrid is sticky, remote days are valuable, and performance depends more on how work is designed and led than on location policy alone. (SIEPR, Harvard Business Review)
