New manager want me in the office. I wfh-help!

Exactly - you are remote and so can claim.. If your place of work is listed as an office and you are paid expenses or provided with accommodation when you visit the office, then it is a benefit in kind.

WFH is destroying our economy. It was fine before covid to go into the office, and suddenly it's not. Even though you live 5 hours away, you still signed a contract to work at HQ... Why? How did you think you would work? If it's now inconvenient, you should find work closer to home. Your employer shouldn't be held accountable for your lifestyle choice. Sorry, but that's life, and it ain't easy.

Not correct.

My job (that I’ve been in for over 10 years), is field based, so I WFH. My one and only head office is 100 miles away from where I live. I was hired as a remote worker.

I claim expenses (mileage) if I have to go there. Or if I have to travel anywhere else.

It’s not classed as benefit in kind. It’s a reimbursement, not an additional benefit.

^^ I think this is great advice to which I would add:

** how much your employer is prepared to make accommodations for you and to what extent they will bend the rules for you, depends on how good a job you do op, and how much you put yourselves out for them and how replaceable you are. That sounds harsh but it’s been true of every job I’ve had.

Wow, what a hostile comment. I always find it amusing that when someone disagrees it must be because ‘it was in the daily mail’ too. Such a weak insult to hide a lack of ability to debate appropriately. Good day to you.

What's your qualification for making this statement exactly? It's utter rubbish. Did you read it in the Daily Mail?

All the arguing on here and it's this simple:

• Have a discussion with the employer and see what they are ameanable to
• If they are not ameanable then get some legal advice on your stance
• Your contract dictates your working terms and you signed it. There may be clauses such as grandfather rights that you can dispute on the basis of however but i'm not an employment lawyer and I can't see that anyone else here is either.
• At the end of the day the EMPLOYER and what they want for their employees (who they pay to do a job as per the terms they set out) is what actually counts here, not YOUR personal circumstances.
• Yes, you may win a legal argument with them or get them to back down for fear of employee action against them, however that does not and will not stop them from using a number of other tactics to get you to leave if you don't do what they want. You can be cut out of major workstreams subtly, you can be made redundant (especially as you are singling yourself out as "I should have what i've always had") and the job can be re-advertised with different terms under a different title legally, you can be managed out.

Qualifications: Senior manager at a very large international corporate who had to do this exact thing when I had problems in my team with people who refused to come into the office because they "were allowed to work at home in the pandemic and why shouldn't they be allowed now".

I'm aware this isn't a discussion around the pandemic and you've been working at home longer than that, however that is not the point, the point is that the company dictate how they want it to run, not you. If you don't like it then be aware of the above points and be flexible, if you aren't then you may well find yourself in a dead end job and have to find a new one which frankly I'd do anyway - at a company who are happy to employ "those" employees who seem to think their personal life should be catered to and employers should be grateful they rolled out of bed this morning.

I'm saying all of this while i'm guess what? Working from home.

The answer is about balance, and asking you to go in once a month isn't exactly being unreasonable, it's perfectly reasonable and flexible on their part so why can't you compromise with them instead of coming here moaning. I would never hire anyone with this attitude ever, and I am absolutely sick of the noise around the home working "entitlement" people have.

Get legal advice basically. I'm not being "anti-employee" - I just know who pays me, and it's my employer who I agreed to work for, nobody held a gun to my head and not everything is about me me me which seems to be the attitude of many people these days. It was the same way with people refusing to get their covid vaccinations because of "their rights". Fuck everyone else though apparently.

Many people now expect flexible working
The OP is not being asked to switch from home to office though, it's such a straw man argument being raised. Coming into the office just one day each month IS flexible working as most people would understandi t. I'm not expected to regularly go anywhere, and have no office in my contract. It's still reasonable for clients to expect that I will go somewhere on occasion, whether to an office or to another country, if gathering in person is likely to be more effective for meeting their business objectives.

Well firstly, after 2 years the contract would have been changed by custom. Have a think about it.

I don't have expertise in this but I have been offered contracts with place of work as the London office with the expectation (from their side) that I would actually work from home 200 miles away and travel in once every couple of months.

I think this was the norm for some companies around 2021-2022.

What always gets me is the way so many people who disapprove of remote working will try and give legal advice based on their preferences. There have been multiple gleeful posts telling OP she'll have to suck it up because her contract says so, from people who must know full well that they've no expertise in employment law. It's bizarre.

But they advertised the role as remote, gave her equipment to work remotely and have paid for her to travel to HQ as that isn't her place of work.

So yes, the idiotic 'you knew where you lived when you applied for the job' posters are being anti employee.

@wutheringkites

''The anti-employee sentiment on Mumsnet always surprises and depresses me.''

Agreed.

Truly is sad how the default setting seems to be that the employer is always right and that the employee has no agency whatsoever over what happens to them and should just blindly obey. Seems to be a 'master and servants' view of the world where work rules your life and where no employment laws exist.

I think that on this WFH threads there are either a lot of people who are bitter because they are not able to work from home and resent anyone else who might have that opportunity or a lot of really shitty, dinosaur managers....

Frankly Covid showed that remote working was perfectly possible in many jobs and gave employees a better work-life balance.

Many people now expect flexible working and employers who just dig their heels and want to turn back the clock just because they can't accept that people don't have to be glued to an office chair to do a decent job will simply find that people vote with their feet and seek more enlightened employers.

Ask her if the commute will be In work time and how she sees this working, as the position was recruited as remote, and attach the documentation proving it.

if it means nearly 2 days a week off travelling, and she can’t demand you do it on your own time, she will back down.

@DocOck

'@Startingagainandagain But how the employee gets to the job is not the employers problem. They don't need to care how long it takes you, that's on you when you apply for the job.'

Common sense please...

If someone lives 5 hours away of course any sensible employer will query how they intend to commute to the office when required at the interview stage or discuss whether they are applying because they are planning to relocate if they get the job.

I am a manager and have conducted many interviews and I would make sure that people live a reasonable distance from the office if regular attendance is expected.

You can't hire someone who lives hours away and then act surprised if they struggle when you suddenly change their work pattern to require office attendance. That's just bad management.

This! I can't believe anyone would use analogies like the poster has used but not mention that it depends on your contract! Why does the poster think companies issue contracts - for the benefit of their health? No, usually it's because they want to cover as many eventualities as they can - and mostly in their favour! If you only want to WFH, then make sure your contract is watertight to this effect!

There's no 'surely' no. This is why OP needs specialist legal advice pronto. Contracts can be changed by custom and practice, ie how a person has been treated so far. But it's a complex area and nobody in this thread has seen the relevant paperwork.

Surely regardless of how they have treated her thus far, if the contract states hybrid then it's hybrid and they have every right at any point to request some office working.

They shouldn’t but they appear to be treating her like someone who works from home full time and pay to go the office. Unless OP is just booking this herself (we can on our system and my manager is never alerted to what trains I book) it appears the company is content with this. So that will go in her favour if they are challenged. They shouldn’t be paying for hotels and trains but if they do then they are accepting her as a home worker. They need to review their contracts etc urgently

OP must have read her contract. Or did she just sign it blindly? Why didn’t she get it corrected at the time? It’s a bit odd. I can’t believe someone who has an office named in her contract didn’t say “hang on, the job ad said WFH”. I think OP is very lucky to only be expected to go in once a month.

plenty of people decided to unilaterally upsticks and move city/ country during Covid. Without real consent.

i wouldn't sign a contract that named my place of work an office if i was meant to be WFH. Did OP not raise it at the time?

They have been paying for OPs travel for the last two years, though. Its in the updates. The fact that the contract says one thing but the job advert and how they've actually wanted the role performed until now differ is rather the point here.

Hybrid means both home and office so why would they pay you to go where you're supposed to be and why would they struggle?

There's nothing "anti-employee" about stating the fact someone willingly signed up to a contract. She's not being asked to go in 5 days a week so there is still a massive degree of flexibility there.

I've worked from home for about 12 years but the level of entitlement people seem to feel these days is outstanding.

There's dozens of reasons why managers will want staff in the office at times and presenteeism is rarely one of them. People who can't see or understand that are either not managers or bad managers.

Exactly. I’ve seen so many posts on here where mums and dads are saving on childcare and caring for young babies and toddlers at home and working. Totally out of order and actually dangerous to the child but most of all it’s unfair on the employer and it’s things like this that are the reason many companies are now pedalling backwards and realising actually we want our staff back in. I get more done at home, I spent a lot of time on teams calls and it’s hard in the office as a senior leader as many of those calls are things that you can’t talk about in the office. But my employer wants everyone in 2 days a week, soon to be 3. So I’ll do that because I do what I’m asked and my contract doesn’t mention hybrid at all. It’s in the FAQ on hybrid working that it’s a privilege not a right and can change at anytime. Of course now we are getting lots of applications for adjustments etc because people are clearly doing other things when meant to be working. Like caring for elderly relatives. I guess their family see they work at home and think they can do whatever did needed instead of employing someone or whatever people did pre covid.

I think as you’ve got the advert and the company pay for you to travel to the office you should be ok. As companies don’t pay for their staff members travel when they come into the office for their 2 days a week. So this should go in your favour and I’d imagine they’d pay for a hotel too if you went once a month and did 2-3 days. If they’ve recruited everyone on a hybrid basis they are going to struggle if staff bring in the unions