The forgotten workforce : Delivering a high-performance workplace for frontline workers

• Despite working in purpose-built facilities, frontline workers consistently report lower satisfaction across all workplace aspects compared to office workers, with significant disparities within frontline segments.

• Frontline workplaces excel at supporting productivity and customer service (7 in 10 workers confirm effectiveness) but fall short on human-centered aspects like supporting wellbeing, enabling social connections, cultural immersion and professional development – all key drivers of modern job satisfaction.

• Schedule flexibility emerges as the critical quality-of-life factor. 47% of frontline workers would like to have access to flexible scheduling but only 37% currently have this, creating a disconnect between employee needs and organizational frameworks.

• 45% of frontline workers do not consider their company a great place to work and 44% report burnout calling for urgent improvements in HR policies, employee experience and workplace design.

While hybrid work policies still dominate workplace discussions, a crucial segment of the workforce – frontline workers - continues to operate under entirely different rules. JLL's Workforce Preference Barometer 2025 highlights that frontline workers face distinct challenges which require workplace strategies that are fundamentally different from those aimed at their office-based counterparts.

Our research surveyed 3,411 frontline workers in 26 markets across the globe and revealed a paradox: despite working in purpose-built facilities designed for their specific functions, frontline workers – from retail and bank branch employees to those working in factories and warehouses – consistently report lower levels of satisfaction across all workplace aspects compared to office workers.

Moreover, significant disparities exist within the frontline worker population itself. While one in two employees in warehouses or bank branches feel very positive about their workplace, fewer than one in three in retail stores or scientific laboratories express similar sentiment. These stark differences highlight how workplace experience and it’s alignment with worker needs vary among various frontline environments, indicating the need for more thoughtful attention to worker-specific requirements to achieve satisfaction.

Fundamental workplace functions falling short of expectations

Frontline workplaces are good at delivering external service excellence. They effectively support core productivity needs and excel at enabling customer-facing responsibilities: 7 in 10 frontline workers think that their workplaces help them to be productive in their job and serve customers, patients or students.

However, more fundamental workplace functions that foster employee engagement are currently not well-addressed in frontline workplaces. In comparison to office staff, frontline workers consistently put a lower score on the human-centered aspects of their workplace: socializing, cultural immersion, inspiration and professional development - all key drivers of job satisfaction in the modern workplace. Again, the gap with office workers is more pronounced for some specific segments: employees in retail stores and healthcare and teaching facilities are the ones that feel the least well-looked after, compared to those working in warehouses, factories and bank branches.

Well-being expectations: the human-centered design gap

While fundamental health and safety needs at work are well-addressed overall, the ‘well-being deficit’ becomes more pronounced when examining the specific conditions under which frontline workers perform their daily responsibilities. This functional gap manifests differently across workforce segments: bank branch workers seek dedicated spaces for focused work without interruption, retail workers require basic amenities like ‘proper seating areas’, and warehouse employees would like to work in cleaner, more attractive environments ‘with a calmer atmosphere’. Additionally, access to automation that reduces physical demands on workers represents a critical concern, particularly among factory employees, 32% of whom consider it a key criterion when evaluating potential employers.

Even more telling is frontline workers’ strong need for a workplace where they can really be themselves at work (45% versus 37% among office workers). For example, some expect access to ‘quiet spaces during shift breaks’, for meditation and environments that don't feel overly regimented or restrictive. This suggests that many frontline environments still fail to deliver the personal agency and psychological safety that today’s workers expect. Employers are struggling to create supportive, empowering environments that enable employees to ‘recharge’ and maintain sustainable well-being.

What high-performing frontline environments get right

Our analysis of responses from workers who consider their environment close to ideal reveals the critical features that distinguish exceptional frontline workplaces:

• They provide better automation and ergonomic design - 67% of satisfied workers have access to well-automated work environments that require less physical effort, compared to 49% overall.
• They foster an empowering organizational culture, with environments where employees feel more immersed in company culture and are encouraged to take initiative.
• They excel at supporting well-being – securing the wellness standards in terms of acoustics and access to daylight, while delivering better health and concierge services.
• They foster a better social experience, offering superior food services and benefiting from locations in neighborhoods with greater vibrancy (typically the privilege of employees working in bank branches).
• Finally, they ensure accessibility and safety, with locations in safer neighborhoods and better proximity to public transport - a critical consideration especially for women working outside of standard hours.

These features suggest that traditional frontline workplace investment strategies, primarily focused on operational efficiency, need to better address the human-centered design elements and workplace policies that sustain frontline worker comfort and long-term engagement.

Our survey highlights that one in three frontline workers currently operates outside standard working hours, with 9% operating on night shifts and 25% rotating between various schedules. Since hybrid work arrangements are incompatible with their operational responsibilities (except for employees in bank branches and scientific laboratories), schedule flexibility becomes even more critical for frontline workers as their only avenue for achieving a better work-life balance. This is their top quality-of-life expectation today.

The flexibility gap is stark, especially in the healthcare industry: 52% of those workers want flexible scheduling but only 29% have access to this benefit. Similarly, the ability to take paid time-off on short notice is a big expectation, especially in retail stores where 46% of workers want to have access to this flexibility but only 32% benefit from it today. This represents a critical disconnect between employee needs and organizational frameworks.

Our research reveals significant variations in workplace satisfaction levels and expectations across industries, each presenting unique challenges and opportunities.

Perhaps most concerning is the burnout crisis among frontline workers. Despite reporting more burnout risk than office workers (44% among frontline workers vs 39% among office workers), their intention to leave aligns closely with office workers (22%). This suggests that some frontline workers may have stronger commitment to their jobs, but also more limited mobility and negotiating power, meaning they face stronger barriers to changing their employer or their workplace conditions.

This paradox becomes more complex when examining AI preparedness and future readiness. More frontline workers view AI as a threat compared to office staff, while fewer see it as a valuable tool for career advancement. This technology anxiety may compound existing burnout as workers feel increasingly disconnected from workplace evolution and future opportunities. Moreover, AI training access remains unevenly distributed: managers and younger staff are more likely to receive AI training, creating additional disparities within an already stressed workforce.

Employees experiencing high burnout demonstrate clear patterns: 48% consider leaving within a year (versus 22% overall) and they feel significantly less empowered and more isolated than their peers. Notably, 57% of frontline workers suffering from burnout have caregiving responsibilities and 63% hold management positions, indicating that those shouldering multiple responsibilities face the greatest risk.

The combination of burnout, limited AI preparedness and restricted mobility creates a particularly vulnerable population that may struggle to adapt to rapidly changing workplace demands in an increasingly automated future.

While each segment of the frontline worker population will have its own specific expectations, our research points to five key areas of investment for addressing frontline worker needs:

• Design infrastructure that supports flexible scheduling, including digital shift management hubs and 24/7 support amenities.

• Prioritize physical environment upgrades such as ergonomic zones, acoustic solutions, air-quality control systems and comfort-first design.

• Integrate well-being infrastructure into operational design, embedding health services, stress recovery spaces and mental well-being resources into core workplace planning.

• Provide AI-ready learning environments with dedicated training spaces, simulation environments and digital learning hubs for frontline-specific AI education.

• Create spaces that foster managerial empowerment, including recognition walls, decision-making spaces, career development centers and peer collaboration zones.

The future workplace must move beyond the traditional office-versus-frontline divide to recognize the diversity of workforce segments. Our research reveals that successful workplace strategies will embrace granular, specific place-of-work approaches, treating each segment as a unique combination of operational requirements, professional identity and human needs.

Understanding these nuanced workforce differences becomes both a competitive advantage and an operational necessity. As automation advances and human workers remain essential (even in highly automated operations), talent retention and operational excellence increasingly depend on creating environments where every worker can perform and thrive in their specific role and context, especially as many frontline workers directly interact with clients, students or patients.

Success requires recognizing workforce complexity and investing accordingly, ensuring workplace strategies serve all employees across the full spectrum of work environments. Understanding and addressing segment-specific needs is not just a matter of equity - it is a fundamental business imperative that drives productivity, engagement and organizational performance over the long run.