US policy shockwaves and the potential impact on Australia’s workforce

This moment in sociopolitical history will expose the organisations that truly live their values versus those that change their tune at a moment’s notice, writes David Campbell.

On 20 January 2025, US President Donald Trump issued an executive order to create a new advisory group designed to dismantle several federal diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and workforce operations.

The group, dubbed the Department of Government Efficiency (or “DOGE”), aims to dismantle DEI initiatives within the US federal government, with agencies directed to cease these programs within 60 days.

The order marks a significant departure from policies emphasising inclusivity and equity in federal employment, instead promoting a merit-based approach that focuses solely on individual qualifications without consideration of DEI factors.

Spearheaded by work-from-office advocate Elon Musk, the group is also pushing for a return to in-person work for federal employees, effectively ending the remote work arrangements widely adopted during and after the pandemic. The group cites in-person collaboration, enhanced team cohesion and productivity as the key drivers.

What does it mean for Australian organisations?

The US federal government’s decision to eliminate DEI initiatives may prompt some Australian organisations to reassess their own DEI strategies. However, Australia’s regulatory and cultural landscape is distinct. Initiatives promoting diversity and inclusion remain strongly embedded in Australian corporate and public sectors, backed by laws such as the Fair Work Act and agencies like the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA).

Organisations operating across both markets may face the challenge of balancing divergent approaches, potentially adopting dual strategies to align with local expectations while accommodating US directives.

Workplace flexibility policies

The shift towards mandatory in-office work in the US could influence Australian businesses to revisit their remote work policies. However, Australia’s emphasis on work/life balance and flexibility, reinforced by legislation allowing employees to request flexible work arrangements, suggests a more cautious approach. Companies may adopt hybrid models that prioritise flexibility while ensuring collaboration and team engagement.

Flexibility is a cornerstone of modern workforce strategies. Organisations that double down on flexibility will likely emerge as leaders, attracting a diverse pool of talent and achieving long-term success. Conversely, rigid in-office mandates may erode trust and alienate workers, leading to higher attrition rates and diminished morale.

Employers in Australia might see an opportunity to differentiate themselves by maintaining progressive DEI programs and flexible work options. These policies are increasingly valued by younger, socially conscious professionals. Organisations that double down on inclusivity and work/life balance may gain a competitive edge in attracting and retaining talent.

Strategic implications of office mandates

Often, advocacy for in-office work is not solely about collaboration. By enforcing strict return-to-office mandates, there is an expectation of voluntary resignations from employees unwilling to comply. This outcome aligns with broader objectives to reduce the federal workforce, achieving cost savings without direct layoffs. This approach, while effective in meeting certain goals, raises concerns about employee morale and long-term productivity.

This is a critical moment for Australian and US organisations alike to reflect on their approach to flexibility. The push for in-office mandates may reveal which organisations truly value work/life balance and which see flexibility as a temporary trend. Flexibility is no longer a perk; it is an expectation for many employees, especially in a post-pandemic world where individuals have seen the benefits of remote work firsthand.

Importance of equity and cognitive diversity

Organisations that embrace diverse perspectives are also far better equipped to generate novel ideas and solutions, as inclusive teams draw on a wide range of experiences and viewpoints to achieve more creative outcomes. Cognitive diversity ensures that teams approach challenges from multiple angles, leading to more comprehensive and effective decision making.

This shift will undoubtedly create a ripple effect, revealing a clear divide between organisations that have been ticking boxes and those that truly believe in the power of equity and inclusion. The question remains: will the money saved by removing DEI programs outweigh these long-term benefits? For those truly committed to equity, the answer should be clear: investing in people and creating an inclusive culture is not just the right thing to do; it’s a strategic imperative for organisational success.

Ultimately, this moment will expose the organisations that truly live their values versus those that change their tune at a moment’s notice.

David Campbell is a partner at Brand Rebellion.