New research suggests that on-site entry-level jobs offer substantially lower salaries than hybrid jobs and may be less transparent about the experience they require.
getty
Return-to-office mandates are back in the headlines. California recently ordered approximately 90,000 state employees to work in person four days a week, while private-sector employers continue reducing remote flexibility and requiring more time at company offices. The trend has been described as “hybrid creep”—the gradual expansion of in-office requirements despite employees’ continued preference for remote and hybrid flexibility. What may begin as one or two required office days can slowly become three, four or even a full-time return.
The 40% Price Entry-Level Workers Pay For RTO Mandates
For entry-level workers returning to the office, that shift carries costs beyond commuting, parking, professional clothing and buying lunch. Despite high-earning, entry-level positions, new research suggests that on-site entry-level jobs may offer substantially lower salaries than comparable hybrid or remote roles. They may also be less transparent about how much prior experience employers actually expect, raising questions about whether some positions labeled “entry-level” truly deserve the designation.
An analysis by JobLeads of more than 1.2 million active U.S. job listings found that hybrid entry-level positions offered a median salary of $77,020. That was over 40% higher than the $54,900 median for on-site roles. Remote junior positions offered a median salary of $69,860—about 27% more than on-site jobs, although still less than hybrid positions.
One of the most common frustrations among job seekers is finding a position advertised as “entry-level” that requires several years of experience. The assumption is simple: Entry-level should mean a candidate can enter the profession without already having worked in it.
But the JobLeads analysis, which also examines behavioral data from more than 18,000 job seekers, paints a more complicated picture. Whether a job truly welcomes inexperienced candidates may depend less on the industry than on where and how the employee is expected to work.
Only nine percent of on-site jobs categorized as entry-level carry titles clearly identifying them as junior or entry-level positions. Remote jobs were more than three times as likely to use an accurate designation, with 33% clearly labeled as junior or entry-level.
Many on-site jobs instead used titles such as “associate,” a word that can conceal substantial differences in seniority, compensation and expected experience. That ambiguity matters. A candidate may skip an associate position because it appears too advanced. Another may spend time applying, only to discover during an interview that the employer expects experience that was not clearly stated. For candidates navigating a difficult labor market, vague titles create another barrier.
The Return-To-Office Pay Gap
The difference between a median salary of $54,900 for on-site entry-level work and $77,020 for hybrid work exceeds $22,000 a year.
On-site employees may also face costs their remote and hybrid colleagues can reduce or avoid—including soaring gasoline prices, parking, public transportation, restaurant meals and work clothes. In other words, the employees receiving the lowest median salaries may also face the highest costs of getting to work.
The figures do not prove that office attendance directly causes lower pay. Hybrid positions may be concentrated in higher-paying professions, larger metropolitan areas or employers competing for specialized talent. But the size of the difference raises questions about who benefits from flexibility and who bears the cost when it is withdrawn.
Employers Still Want Human Skills
Many early-career candidates assume they are losing opportunities because they lack advanced technical expertise. Yet the most commonly requested capabilities in junior listings remain distinctly human. Communication appeared in nearly 31% of the listings analyzed, making it the most frequently requested skill. Customer service appeared in approximately 28%. No single technical skill appeared in more than 10% of junior listings.
Employers appear to value whether a new hire can communicate clearly, listen to colleagues, work with customers, resolve problems and function effectively as part of a team.
The findings suggest that job seekers should make these qualities visible. Instead of simply listing “communication” on a résumé, candidates can describe how they presented a university project, handled a dissatisfied customer, coordinated a volunteer initiative or resolved disagreement within a team.
The Double Squeeze On Junior Workers
The findings arrive as artificial intelligence is reshaping tasks traditionally assigned to junior employees. Entry-level workers have historically learned by completing routine assignments, conducting basic research, preparing initial drafts and supporting experienced colleagues. Generative AI can now perform parts of that work quickly, leading some organizations to reconsider the junior roles they need.
Workers beginning their careers generally have less leverage to negotiate salaries, schedules or workplace arrangements. They may accept lower-paying on-site jobs because they need experience, references and a first opportunity.
That vulnerability makes transparency especially important. An organization should not advertise a position as entry-level while quietly expecting candidates to arrive with years of professional experience.
They should also examine whether requiring junior employees to work on-site is necessary. In-person work can provide valuable mentorship, but placing a new employee in an office does not guarantee meaningful mentoring.
If attendance is required, employers should provide regular manager contact, structured learning, access to experienced colleagues and opportunities to participate in important conversations.
What Entry-Level Job Seekers Can Do
Candidates should not automatically disqualify themselves because they do not meet every qualification in a job description. Many postings describe an employer’s ideal candidate rather than the minimum requirements.
Job seekers can also broaden their search terms. Looking only for “entry-level” positions may exclude jobs labeled “junior,” “assistant,” “coordinator,” “trainee” or “associate.”
Candidates should evaluate the complete value of an offer. A hybrid job with a higher salary and lower commuting costs may provide substantially greater financial value than an on-site position, even when the titles appear similar.
It’s important for applicants to ask direct questions during interviews: How much experience is required? What training will be provided? How often will the employee work in the office? What mentoring is available? How is success measured during the first six months?
The answers can reveal whether an employer is prepared to develop early-career talent or is seeking experienced labor at an entry-level price.
A Final Wrap
The JobLeads findings suggest that on-site junior roles carry lower median salaries and are less likely to be clearly labeled as genuine entry-level opportunities. Meanwhile, the skills employers request most often—communication and customer service—can be demonstrated through many forms of experience.
The results conclude that if companies want the next generation of workers to return to the office, they must offer more than a desk. They need transparent expectations, meaningful training, active mentorship and compensation that acknowledges the financial cost of showing up. Otherwise, return-to-office mandates risk becoming another barrier for workers who have the least power—and the most to prove.
