This article is part of a recurring series highlighting recent talent mobility industry reports. If you would like the WERC editorial team to consider covering a specific industry report, email mobility@talenteverywhere.org.
Recent headlines about return-to-office mandates across corporate America may sound like a death knell for remote work, but the recent JobLeads report, U.S. Remote Work Statistics and Trends [2026 Study], suggests a more nuanced shift. The report, based on more than 5.2 million U.S. job listings and responses from 426,000 job seekers, reveals regional differences across the country, the misalignment between supply and remote-work demand, and the shift of remote work into a premium workplace advantage. One thing is clear, however: Remote work availability has not vanished completely from the workplace.
The Supply and Demand Mismatch
According to the study, 87% of job openings are fully in-office, and just 6% are fully remote. At the same time, 23% of job seekers would prefer to work remotely, and another third are open to any work arrangement if there is flexibility. This mismatch has consequences for both workers and employers, with higher competition among job seekers for remote work and some employers missing out on top talent because they don’t offer enough flexibility.
JobLeads also found that the availability of remote and hybrid work in the United States is uneven, with Oregon leading the nation with the most remote work opportunities (10%) and Mississippi, West Virginia, and South Carolina having the least. In fact, 94% of job openings in South Carolina, West Virginia, and Mississippi require an on-site presence, which is 7% higher than the national average. Washington, D.C., and San Francisco, on the other hand, stands out as the locations with the highest number of hybrid job openings (18% and 11%, respectively), a blend of in-office and remote work. Regional variations are partially due to the main industries in those areas. Knowledge economy sectors support flexible work arrangements more often than regions with industries that require primarily on-site work, including manufacturing, logistics, and energy.
Drilling down to major U.S. cities, similar disparities exist. For instance, in Detroit, 8% of job openings are fully remote, which is higher than tech-heavy hubs like San Francisco (6%). San Francisco, like Washington, D.C., has embraced hybrid options, with 18% of job openings offering that flexibility. With many companies requiring a return-to-office, 92%, 89%, and 88% of job openings in San Antonio, Houston, and San Diego, respectively, are on-site. Even job openings in New York are mostly on-site or hybrid, with just 4% of jobs being fully remote.
Who Has Access to Remote Work Opportunities?
There are other differences that emerge in the data based on job focus, income, and industry. The study found that the most flexible job role is consulting. It is also the most time-consuming and travel-heavy. Job seekers looking for remote or hybrid work would find it readily available in this field, with 14% of the roles being remote and 18% being hybrid.
Finance, legal, marketing, and IT fields also offer higher levels of flexibility, with 24% of job openings being either remote or hybrid. But the least likely sectors to offer remote or hybrid work are health, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology, where 92% of jobs are on-site. Eighty to 90% of the job openings in human resources, sales, and engineering are also mainly on-site.
According to the report, flexibility also correlates strongly with income, with remote work opportunities peaking in the mid-career salary band of $125,000 to $150,000 annually, where 9% of roles are remote. In the $60,000 salary bracket, remote work opportunities drop to just 3%. For high-income earners (salaries above $250,000), just 4% of roles are fully remote.
Flexible Work: An Opportunity for Snagging Talent
All of this is unfolding against a backdrop of employer-driven change. Since 2023, on‑site roles have grown 21%, while hybrid roles remained stagnant at 7% of job openings—less than half the share offered by employers just two years earlier. Companies widely cite collaboration, culture, and mentoring as the leading reasons for return-to-office policies.
Yet this shift contradicts worker sentiment: 61% of remote employees report higher productivity at home, while employers continue to benefit from retention gains, reduced absenteeism, and savings of up to $37,000 per employee per year. The tension is only expected to climb as 2026 is not forecast to have any increases in remote work opportunities, according to the study. At the same time, more job seekers want remote work than any other arrangement. With fewer remote work opportunities available, skilled workers will face greater competition for those roles, and employers will miss out on talent that is unwilling or unable to commute or relocate.
What emerges is not a collapse of remote work, but an evolving hierarchy of workplace flexibility, shaped by economic pressures, industry needs, and regional disparities. The result is a labor market where flexible work still exists, but as a premium opportunity that has been redistributed among income levels, regions, and industries.