For years, working from home was considered one of the greatest symbols of the new labor market. Fewer traffic jams, more flexibility, a better balance between career and personal life, and sometimes also a sense of freedom that did not exist before. After the pandemic, many employees no longer saw remote work as a temporary benefit, but as a basic standard.

But new data published by Gallup, the veteran American research and advisory company, raises a less comfortable question: Are those who work fully from home also more exposed to layoffs?

According to Gallup, among employees in the United States who are currently not employed due to layoffs, 25% said that in their last role they worked fully remotely. For comparison, among currently employed workers, only 13% work fully remotely. In other words, remote workers appear at a rate nearly twice as high among those laid off compared to their share among the employed.

It is important to emphasize: This figure does not prove that working from home causes layoffs. It does point out that remote workers are disproportionately represented among those who lost their jobs. For employees and employers, this is already a warning point worth pausing over.

According to Rehabilitation Department data presented at the conference, in the last academic year more than 2,000 wounded IDF soldiers studied in institutions of higher education in Israel. This represents an increase of hundreds of students within three years and nearly three times as many compared to the beginning of the war. Approximately 800 of them are wounded from Operation Swords of Iron.

But the encouraging numbers tell only part of the picture. More than 1,100 of the students cope with mental injuries, and over 1,000 cope with physical and other injuries. The leading fields of study among them are law, business administration, economics, and computer science, while according to the data presented, Ono Academic College and Reichman University are among the institutions where a particularly high number of wounded IDF soldiers currently study.

The main problem is that entering academia is only the beginning of the road. Many wounded cope with rehabilitation treatments, pain, post–trauma, sleepless nights, bureaucratic burden, social difficulty, and a lack of awareness from the environment. In such a situation, an exam, class attendance, or meeting deadlines do not look like they do for any other student.

Another interesting detail in the data: Gallup did not find the same anomaly among hybrid employees. Employees who combined working from home and the office appeared in similar proportions among those laid off and the employed.

Even employees who come to the office in roles that can be performed remotely did not stand out exceptionally. That is, the problem is not necessarily the very option of working outside the office. It is possible that the gap lies precisely in working fully remotely, where the employee is barely physically present in the organization.

The Gallup figure is particularly interesting because it arrives precisely at a time when most of the discourse about layoffs centers on artificial intelligence. Almost every wave of cuts in technology, finance, services, or content companies is accompanied today by one question: Has AI replaced the workers?

But according to Gallup, only 1% of laid–off employees cited AI or automation as the main reason for their layoff. Most of them spoke about other reasons: Organizational change, budget cuts, market conditions, closure of operations, or elimination of a role.

In simple words, it is possible that the immediate threat to some employees is not a robot replacing them, but a manager who looks anew at the structure of the organization and asks which roles are truly required, who is close to the core of activity, who is more visible, and who is easier to "remove from the equation" when cuts begin.

Here, remote work might become a problem. Not necessarily because employees from home are less good, less efficient, or less committed, but because in an organizational world that is downsizing, visibility, proximity to the team, direct connection with managers, and daily involvement can become more significant factors than the employees themselves estimate.

The meaning is not that all employees must immediately return to five days in the office. Remote work can still be efficient, productive, and essential, especially for certain roles, experienced employees, global teams, and organizations that know how to manage it correctly.

But for employees, especially in a period of employment uncertainty, this figure requires a rethink. Anyone who works fully remotely needs to ask themselves a few difficult questions: Do my managers truly see my contribution? Am I sufficiently connected to what is happening in the organization? Am I proactive, present in important conversations, influencing decisions, or mostly executing tasks remotely?

In the bottom line, employees who continue to work from home need to invest more in professional visibility: Update on achievements, initiate conversations, be involved in key projects, arrive from time to time for meaningful meetings if possible, and above all ensure that their contribution does not remain behind a screen.