Return-to-office mandates are changing who uses benefits and how
When return-to-office mandates started rolling out, the expectation across the insurance industry was straightforward: a return to normalcy would bring a measure of stability back to employee mental health, and claims would follow suit. That’s not what happened. Benefits utilization didn’t settle back to a pre-pandemic baseline; it shifted into a different pattern, and employers who are still reading their plan through an old lens are missing where the real pressure has moved.
Key Takeaways
- Mental health claims didn’t ease when employees returned to the office, despite industry expectations.
- Disability and paramedical claims are the two categories most directly affected by return-to-office mandates.
- Remote work didn’t reduce benefits utilization, it shifted usage into different categories.
- Flexible Spending Accounts are becoming a practical way to offset rising commuting costs.
- A broker’s insight into claims data can reveal shifts that aren’t obvious from the numbers alone.
Did return-to-office mandates bring mental health claims back down?
The insurance industry expected a meaningful shift in mental health claims once employees returned to in-office work, on the assumption that the end of the pandemic and a return to routine would create more stability. That expectation didn’t hold. Mental health claims have continued to weigh on employer plans well past the return-to-office transition, rather than easing off as anticipated.
Which benefit categories move first under a return-to-office mandate?
The two categories most directly affected by a return-to-office mandate are disability claims and paramedical claims. The mandate itself introduces new mental health pressures for employees, which continues to drive disability claim volume, while the return of a commute, whether by car or public transit, is putting downward pressure on paramedical utilization as time and energy for those appointments become harder to find.
The biggest misconception employers carry into this is assuming remote work reduced their claims utilization overall. It didn’t. During remote work, mental health practitioner utilization actually increased, driven largely by pandemic-related stress and uncertainty, and compounded by insurers expanding coverage to a broader range of counsellor types. What remote work did wasn’t reduce utilization; it redistributed it into different categories, and that same redistribution is happening again now in reverse.
Are commuting benefits relevant again with return-to-office mandates?
A return to in-office work brings real added cost for employees, particularly around commuting, and that’s a genuine planning consideration for employers, not a minor one. Flexible Spending Accounts have become a practical tool here, letting employees direct funds toward transportation costs based on their own situation rather than the employer trying to anticipate every commuting scenario in the plan design itself. Several employers have already added this kind of flexibility, and a return-to-office shift is likely to push more of them to follow.
Which industries are most affected by return-to-office mandates?
Public sector employers tend to see greater plan utilization overall, largely because a higher share of public sector employers offer comprehensive benefits plans in the first place. Private sector organizations, and smaller corporations in particular, are far less likely to offer that same level of coverage, often for straightforward financial reasons.
Demographics play into utilization shifts as well. During a hybrid work stretch, usage of virtual health care platforms and virtual pharmacies rose significantly among employees working from home, but that shift wasn’t uniform. Older employees are generally less likely to engage with online health platforms, which means the demographic makeup of a workforce matters when assessing whether a plan still fits how people are actually working.
Rising plan cost is what most often brings an employer back to the table to revisit design, more so than the return-to-office shift itself. Employers who focus purely on cost, without also looking at utilization trends or asking employees directly what’s changed for them, risk making coverage changes that miss what their workforce actually needs.
How a broker helps interpret claims data around return-to-office mandates
Claims data can show a shift without explaining it. A broker’s role is in helping a plan sponsor understand the “why” behind a change in utilization, whether that’s a legislative change affecting how a benefit gets used, a broader industry trend, or something specific to that employer’s own workforce. Insurers hold a substantial amount of this knowledge internally, from claims pattern analysis to incidence and occurrence trends, and the broker-insurer relationship is what puts that context in front of an employer rather than leaving them to interpret a data shift in isolation.
What should employers do as return-to-office mandates continue?
Return-to-office mandates didn’t reset benefits usage to what it looked like before the pandemic, and they’re not going to. Employers who treat the current utilization pattern as temporary, or assume it’ll settle back on its own, are likely to keep making plan decisions based on an outdated picture of how their own workforce is actually using the benefits they’re paying for.
Talk to a Westland Benefits advisor to see whether your plan still matches how your team is actually working.
Frequently asked questions
Did mental health claims decrease after employees returned to the office?
No. The insurance industry expected mental health claims to ease once employees returned to in-office work, but that hasn’t been the case, and mental health claims have continued to weigh on employer plans.
What benefit categories are most affected by return-to-office mandates?
Disability claims and paramedical claims are the two most directly affected categories, driven respectively by ongoing mental health pressures and reduced time available for paramedical appointments once commuting returns.
Did remote work actually reduce benefits utilization?
No, a common misconception is that it did. Remote work shifted utilization into different categories, including a rise in mental health practitioner use, rather than reducing overall utilization.
Are commuting-related benefits like transit passes worth reintroducing?
Yes. Return-to-office structures add real costs for employees, and Flexible Spending Accounts have become a practical way for employers to offer support without redesigning the core plan around a specific commuting scenario.
Which industries are seeing the biggest shift in benefits utilization?
Public sector employers tend to see greater utilization, largely because more of them offer comprehensive benefits plans. Private sector organizations, especially smaller ones, are less likely to offer the same level of coverage.
What role does workforce demographics play in benefits utilization?
A significant one. Usage of virtual health care and virtual pharmacy platforms rose notably among remote employees, but older employees are generally less likely to engage with those platforms, so a workforce’s demographic makeup affects whether a plan design still fits how people actually work.
How can a broker help interpret claims utilization data?
A broker helps a plan sponsor understand the reasons behind a shift in utilization, whether that’s a legislative change, an industry-wide trend, or something specific to that workforce, drawing on the broker-insurer relationship and the data insurers hold internally.
