Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase, two of Wall Street's most vocal advocates for a full return to the office, are temporarily easing their attendance policies during the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The banks have informed employees that they may request approval to work remotely on days when matches are scheduled in host cities such as New York, citing anticipated transport congestion, according to individuals familiar with the matter.
JPMorgan's policy applies to all employees across the United States, Canada, and Mexico, as detailed in an internal memo. Goldman Sachs has issued similar guidance for staff in affected locations. The moves come as workforce management firm UKG projects the 39-day tournament could cause $17 billion in lost productivity globally, with the United States accounting for $11.7 billion of that figure.
The concessions are notable given the firms' longstanding opposition to flexible work. Goldman CEO David Solomon has previously called remote work "an aberration," while JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon last year delivered a profanity-laced critique of work-from-home policies during an internal town hall. Citigroup, which has maintained a more hybrid-friendly stance since the pandemic, has also encouraged staff in host cities to work remotely, sources said.
A UKG survey of 8,000 employees across eight countries found that more than a quarter of workers expect to arrive late, leave early, or skip work entirely during the tournament. Fourteen percent admitted they plan to stream matches covertly during work hours, while one in five anticipate showing up tired or exhausted. Eleven percent said they would report to work hungover.
"When absenteeism and presenteeism hit at scale, the effect is immediate and expensive," said Suresh Vittal, chief product officer at UKG. "Productivity drops, customer experience suffers, and morale takes a hit as the rest of the team is left to cover the gaps."
The survey also flagged a retention risk: nearly one in five workers said they would consider seeking new employment if their schedule interfered with their World Cup experience. That finding may bolster the case for proactive flexibility planning over rigid enforcement, even at firms that have pushed hardest for office attendance.
Legal considerations may also be driving the policy shifts. Attorneys at Ogletree Deakins have noted that OSHA's General Duty Clause, which requires employers to maintain workplaces free of recognized hazards, does not pause for sporting events. Firms with offices near stadiums, fan zones, or transit hubs face heightened obligations to assess crowd-related risks. Transit officials in New York and New Jersey have separately urged commuters to work from home on match days and limit ride-share use.
The OSHA crowd management framework traces back to a retail worker being trampled during a Black Friday event, but the underlying duty to anticipate and mitigate surge hazards applies broadly. For financial firms concentrated near affected transit corridors, remote work approvals may carry a compliance dimension alongside operational convenience.
The temporary policy shifts underscore that remote work, despite executive rhetoric, retains value as a contingency tool. UKG's Vittal argued that employers need not choose between productivity and flexibility but must plan for disruption as the tournament unfolds across an unpredictable bracket. For advisors and wealth management firms, the episode serves as a reminder that even the most office-centric institutions can adapt when logistics and liability demand it.
