IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2605.01268.html

Remote work expands pathways to upward career mobility

Author

Listed:
  • Yunhan Zheng
  • Jinhua Zhao

Abstract

Geographic constraints have long structured access to high-growth career opportunities, concentrating upward mobility within a limited set of cities and organizations. The expansion of remote work potentially alters this opportunity structure by decoupling job matching from physical proximity, yet its implications for career mobility remain unclear. Using 48 million U.S. job transitions between 2020 and 2024 linked to employer-level measures of remote eligibility, we estimate how entering remote-eligible jobs shapes career outcomes at job transitions. Workers entering remote-eligible jobs experience significantly higher wage growth and higher rates of upward seniority mobility than comparable workers entering fully on-site roles. These transitions are also associated with greater cross-metropolitan job mobility and moves toward smaller, less prestigious employers. Importantly, effects are largest among lower-income workers and those originating from regions with limited high-skill opportunity density. Together, the findings indicate that remote work relaxes geographic constraints in job matching, reshaping the distribution of upward mobility across places and workers.

Suggested Citation

  • Yunhan Zheng & Jinhua Zhao, 2026. "Remote work expands pathways to upward career mobility," Papers 2605.01268, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2605.01268
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2605.01268
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arthur Acolin & Scott Bernstein & Susan Wachter, 2017. "Opportunity, Housing Access, and Infrastructure," Housing Policy Debate, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 468-471, May.
    2. Tom Kemeny & Michael Storper, 2024. "The Changing Shape of Spatial Income Disparities in the United States," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 100(1), pages 1-30, January.
    3. David Card & Jörg Heining & Patrick Kline, 2013. "Workplace Heterogeneity and the Rise of West German Wage Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(3), pages 967-1015.
    4. Walter Y. Oi & Todd L. Idson, 1999. "Workers Are More Productive in Large Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 104-108, May.
    5. Diego Battiston & Jordi Blanes i Vidal & Tom Kirchmaier, 2021. "Face-to-Face Communication in Organizations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(2), pages 574-609.
    6. Shoya Ishimaru, 2025. "Geographic Mobility of Youth and Spatial Gaps in Local College and Labor Market Opportunities," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(4), pages 1251-1294.
    7. Longqi Yang & David Holtz & Sonia Jaffe & Siddharth Suri & Shilpi Sinha & Jeffrey Weston & Connor Joyce & Neha Shah & Kevin Sherman & Brent Hecht & Jaime Teevan, 2022. "The effects of remote work on collaboration among information workers," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 43-54, January.
    8. Michael Storper & Anthony J. Venables, 2004. "Buzz: face-to-face contact and the urban economy," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 351-370, August.
    9. Cevat Giray Aksoy & Jose Maria Barrero & Nicholas Bloom & Steven J. Davis & Mathias Dolls & Pablo Zarate, 2025. "Working from Home in 2025: Five Key Facts," EconPol Policy Brief 73, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    10. Barrero, Jose Maria & Bloom, Nick & Davis, Steven J., 2020. "Why Working From Home Will Stick," SocArXiv wfdbe, Center for Open Science.
    11. Michael Gibbs & Friederike Mengel & Christoph Siemroth, 2023. "Work from Home and Productivity: Evidence from Personnel and Analytics Data on Information Technology Professionals," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 7-41.
    12. Jonah B. Gelbach, 2016. "When Do Covariates Matter? And Which Ones, and How Much?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(2), pages 509-543.
    13. Dingel, Jonathan I. & Neiman, Brent, 2020. "How many jobs can be done at home?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    14. Nicholas Bloom & Ruobing Han & James Liang, 2024. "Hybrid working from home improves retention without damaging performance," Nature, Nature, vol. 630(8018), pages 920-925, June.
    15. Jaison R. Abel & Richard Deitz, 2019. "Some Places are Much More Unequal than Others," Liberty Street Economics 20191007, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    16. Alexandre Mas & Amanda Pallais, 2017. "Valuing Alternative Work Arrangements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(12), pages 3722-3759, December.
    17. Haoran He & David Neumark & Qian Weng, 2021. "Do Workers Value Flexible Jobs? A Field Experiment," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(3), pages 709-738.
    18. Jaison R. Abel & Richard Deitz, 2019. "Why Are Some Places So Much More Unequal Than Others?," Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, vol. 25(Dec).
    19. Kemeny, Thomas & Storper, Michael, 2020. "Superstar cities and left-behind places: disruptive innovation, labor demand, and interregional inequality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103312, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Claudia Goldin, 2014. "A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1091-1119, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rost Vincent & Erdsiek Daniel, 2026. "Gekommen, um zu bleiben: Homeoffice verstetigt sich auf hohem Niveau," Wirtschaftsdienst, Sciendo, vol. 106(3), pages 221-225.
    2. Li, Huiyu & Sauvagnat, Julien & Schmitz, Tom, 2026. "The Work-from-Home Wage Premium," CEPR Discussion Papers 20996, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    3. Vij, Akshay & Souza, Flavio F. & Barrie, Helen & Anilan, V. & Sarmiento, Sergio & Washington, Lynette, 2023. "Employee preferences for working from home in Australia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 782-800.
    4. Piotr Lewandowski & Katarzyna Lipowska & Mateusz Smoter, 2026. "Mismatch in Preferences for Working from Home: Evidence from Discrete Choice Experiments with Workers and Employers," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 79(1), pages 142-172, January.
    5. Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh, 2023. "The remote work revolution: Impact on real estate values and the urban environment: 2023 AREUEA Presidential Address," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 51(1), pages 7-48, January.
    6. Nicholas Bloom & Gordon B. Dahl & Dan-Olof Rooth, 2024. "Work from Home and Disability Employment," NBER Working Papers 32943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Essbaumer, Elisabeth, 2022. "Home Office is here to stay? Access to Home Office and Remote Work Potentials across Swiss Industries," Economics Working Paper Series 2213, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    8. Nicholas Bloom & Gordon B. Dahl & Dan-Olof Rooth, 2026. "Work from Home and Disability Employment," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 179-195, June.
    9. Arntz, Melanie & Ben Yahmed, Sarra & Berlingieri, Francesco, 2022. "Working from home, hours worked and wages: Heterogeneity by gender and parenthood," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    10. Burdett, Ashley & Etheridge, Ben & Tang, Li & Wang, Yikai, 2024. "Worker productivity during Covid-19 and adaptation to working from home," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    11. Duanyi Yang & Erin L. Kelly & Laura D. Kubzansky & Lisa Berkman, 2023. "Working from Home and Worker Well-being: New Evidence from Germany," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 76(3), pages 504-531, May.
    12. Guillaume Gueguen & Claudia Senik, 2023. "Adopting telework: The causal impact of working from home on subjective well‐being," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 61(4), pages 832-868, December.
    13. Feuillade, Mylène & Goux, Dominique & Maurin, Eric, 2025. "Rise in Home Working and Spousal Labor Supply," IZA Discussion Papers 17997, IZA Network @ LISER.
    14. Masayuki Morikawa, 2024. "Productivity dynamics of work from home: Firm-level evidence from Japan," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 465-487, April.
    15. Jean-Marc Bourgeon & José de Sousa & Alexis Noir-Luhalwe, 2022. "Social Distancing and Risk Taking: Evidence from a Team Game Show [Distanciation sociale et prise de risque : Les résultats d'un jeu d'équipe]," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-03792423, HAL.
    16. Markus Nagler & Johannes Rincke & Erwin Winkler, 2024. "Working from home, commuting, and gender," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 37(3), pages 1-23, September.
    17. Christos A. Makridis, 2025. "The Allocation of Time and Remote Work," CESifo Working Paper Series 12363, CESifo.
    18. Benjamin Lochner & Christian Merkl, 2026. "Gender-Specific Application Behaviour, Matching, and the Residual Gender Earnings Gap," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 136(673), pages 97-124.
    19. Filippo Boeri & Riccardo Crescenzi & Davide Rigo, 2025. "Work from Home and Firm Productivity: The Role of ICT and Size," CESifo Working Paper Series 12253, CESifo.
    20. Lee, Kangoh, 2023. "Working from home as an economic and social change: A review," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2605.01268. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.