NatWest’s Return-to-Office Rule: Organizational Justice and Self-Determination Theory Applied

Return-to-office announcements have become a regular part of the business news. The latest one to catch my eye comes from the UK bank NatWest, and it makes a good case study for students because it isn’t really a story about desks and commuting. It’s a story about fairness and about how much control people feel they have over their working lives.

So in this “Apply the theory” article we’ll take the NatWest announcement and look at it with two well-known ideas from organizational behavior: organizational justice and self-determination theory. If you haven’t met it before, our article on equity theory is a useful starting point, because Adams’ work on fairness sits underneath a lot of what follows.

What Happened at NatWest?

On 20 October 2026, the Guardian and the BBC both reported that NatWest will require its UK staff to be in the office at least two days a week from February 2027.

According to the Guardian, the bank has nearly 40,000 UK staff and serves customers under the NatWest, Royal Bank of Scotland, Ulster Bank and Coutts brands. The biggest change is for its “remote-first” employees. According to figures from the Unite union reported by the BBC, this category, which is being abolished, covers 13,497 workers who currently go into the office around twice a month. A further 17,272 hybrid workers will also have to come in more often.

The two sides see it quite differently.

A NatWest spokesperson said flexible working remains important, but that the bank had “learned more about the value that spending time together brings for our colleagues and customers – helping teams collaborate, share ideas, build relationships and learn from one another.” The bank also said it was giving people time to plan ahead and would support them through the transition. The BBC reported that the bank says exceptions will be made for colleagues who need additional flexibility.

Unite was not impressed. Its general secretary, Sharon Graham, called the change a “kick in the teeth” for workers. The union said many of the affected staff are in lower-paid grades, that they face higher travel and childcare costs, and that the change disrupts arrangements for carers and disabled workers. Graham also said that NatWest was imposing the changes “while reneging on existing agreements”.

That’s what has been reported. Now let’s look at what the theory can tell us.

Theory 1: Organizational Justice

Organizational justice is about how fairly employees feel they’re being treated at work. The term was popularized by Jerald Greenberg in the late 1980s, and researchers usually break it into parts. Jason Colquitt (2001) tested a four-part version that’s now widely used:

  • Distributive justice: is the outcome fair? This comes from Adams’ equity theory. People compare what they put in and get out with what others get.
  • Procedural justice: was the process used to reach the decision fair? Work by Thibaut and Walker (1975) and Leventhal (1980) showed that people care about having a voice, consistency, accurate information and the chance to appeal.
  • Interpersonal justice: were people treated with dignity and respect along the way?
  • Informational justice: was the decision explained honestly and in enough detail?

The important point for managers is that these are separate. An employee can dislike an outcome but still accept it if the process felt fair. And they can resent an outcome they’d otherwise live with, if they feel the process was rigged or rushed.

Applying Organizational Justice to the NatWest Story

Let’s go through the four parts one at a time.

Distributive justice. For someone who currently comes in twice a month, two days a week is roughly a four-fold increase in office days. That’s a real cost in time and money. Unite’s point about lower-paid grades matters here. A daily train fare is a much bigger share of a junior salary than a senior one, so the same rule can feel less fair to the people at the bottom. On the other hand, the Guardian reported that some NatWest staff, such as traders, branch workers and relationship managers, already have to be in four days a week. Those employees may well see the new rule as making things more even, not less. Fairness depends on who you compare yourself with.

Procedural justice. This is probably where the strongest reaction comes from. Unite’s complaint isn’t only “we don’t like the outcome”. It’s that the bank is “reneging on existing agreements”. Whether that’s correct is a matter between the bank and the union, and we can’t judge it from the outside. But notice what kind of complaint it is. It’s a complaint about process. Research on procedural justice has linked processes that feel unfair with lower trust in management and weaker organizational commitment, even when people might have accepted the outcome itself.

Interpersonal and informational justice. The bank has given a reason (collaboration, learning, relationships), a long lead time (February 2027) and a promise of exceptions for people who need extra flexibility. Those are all things the justice research says help. The question for staff will be whether the exceptions process is applied consistently, and whether the reasons feel genuine and specific to their own team.

Theory 2: Self-Determination Theory

Self-determination theory was developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan. It says people have three basic psychological needs at work and elsewhere: autonomy (feeling you have some choice over what you do), competence (feeling capable and effective) and relatedness (feeling connected to other people). When these needs are met, people are more likely to be motivated for their own reasons, not just because they’re told to. We cover the basics in our article on self-determination theory.

Deci and Ryan also distinguish between autonomous motivation (I do this because I value it) and controlled motivation (I do this because I have to). Both can get people into the building. Only one of them is likely to get their best work once they’re there.

Applying Self-Determination Theory to the NatWest Story

What’s interesting is that the theory cuts both ways here.

The bank’s own reasons are really about relatedness and competence: building relationships, sharing ideas and learning from one another. Those are exactly the needs Deci and Ryan say matter. A junior analyst who never sits near an experienced colleague may well miss out on the informal learning that builds competence.

But the way the change is delivered can reduce autonomy. Thousands of people organized their lives around remote-first arrangements, including (according to Unite) carers and disabled staff. A rule that takes away that choice is likely to feel controlling, even if the purpose is good.

So the risk for any organization in this position is that people comply (controlled motivation) without buying in (autonomous motivation). They turn up on the required days, but the collaboration the policy was meant to create doesn’t really happen.

A Hypothetical Example: One Team Leader’s Version of This

This is a hypothetical example. It is not about NatWest or any real organization.

Imagine you’re Sam, a team leader in a bank’s data team of eight. Five of your team have been remote-first for years and come in about twice a month. Head office has just announced a two-days-a-week rule starting in four months. You didn’t make the decision, but you’ll be the one living with the reaction.

What can Sam actually do? Quite a lot, as it turns out, even without changing the policy.

  • Explain the reasons properly (informational justice). Not the corporate line, but what the office days are for in this team. For example, Tuesday could be the day for code reviews and pairing junior and senior analysts.
  • Give people a voice on the details (procedural justice and autonomy). The rule is two days. Which two days, and what happens on them, can be a team decision.
  • Treat exception requests consistently. If one parent gets flexibility and another doesn’t, the whole team will notice.
  • Make the days worth the trip (relatedness and competence). If people commute 90 minutes to sit on video calls with colleagues in other buildings, they’ll quickly decide the policy is about control, not collaboration.
  • Pass feedback upward. If travel costs are a genuine problem for junior staff, the team leader is often the person best placed to raise it.

None of this makes the change painless. But it gives Sam a better chance of keeping the people who might otherwise start looking for a fully remote job.

What Can Managers and Students Learn from This?

The first lesson is that the same policy can be seen very differently depending on the starting point. For staff already in four days a week, two days for everyone might look fair. For remote-first staff, it’s a big change to their working lives. Good managers think about who is comparing themselves with whom.

The second lesson is that process matters, sometimes as much as the decision itself. Consultation, clear reasons, a reasonable lead time and a consistent exceptions process won’t make everyone happy. But they make a decision easier to accept. That links to job satisfaction and to whether people stay.

The third is that “be in the office more” is a means, not an end. If the goal is relatedness and learning, managers need to design the office days around those things. Otherwise they get attendance without the benefits.

And for students, this is a nice example of using more than one theory. Organizational justice explains why people may feel the change is unfair. Self-determination theory explains why even a well-intended change can reduce motivation if it feels imposed.

What Are the Limits of This Analysis?

We need to be careful here. We’re applying a framework from the outside, using news reports.

  • We don’t know what consultation happened inside NatWest, or the detail of the agreements Unite says are being broken. We’ve only got each side’s public statements.
  • The union and the bank are both making their case publicly, so neither statement is a neutral account.
  • The policy doesn’t start until February 2027, so we don’t yet know how staff will actually respond.
  • Theories like these describe tendencies across many people. They don’t predict how any one employee will react.

So treat this as a way of thinking about the situation, not a verdict on whether NatWest has made the right call.

Key Points to Take Away

  • In October 2026, NatWest announced that UK staff must be in the office at least two days a week from February 2027, ending its remote-first category. Unite strongly opposed it.
  • Organizational justice has four parts: distributive, procedural, interpersonal and informational. Return-to-office disputes are often as much about the process as the outcome.
  • Self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan) says people need autonomy, competence and relatedness. A policy aimed at relatedness and learning can still reduce motivation if it takes away autonomy.
  • Line managers can’t change the policy, but they can influence how fair and how useful it feels in their own team.
  • Applying a theory to a news story is useful practice, but we’re working from public reports and should be cautious about conclusions.
Sources

Related Posts

Scroll to Top