AIBU to think that if WFH employees aren’t getting their work done, the problem is with their management?

I work in a job where output is pretty easy to measure

What about people who work in a job whose output isn’t easy to measure?

I had a member of my team who only came in the office 1 day a week and spent the whole time chatting on those days. At home, his work was hard to measure but we did log what I call “dirty data” because I know it’s not exact. We logged email requests completed. (Requests can vary from a quick thing to full 6 month project) He would do 50-60 a month, went on leave for 4 weeks for paternity and I covered on top of my full job. I did 88. It’s a specialist job so was hard to know until a did it. I started trying to get him leading projects and was much more involved with him asking questions. I think performance review might have been needed but turns out he hated it so much he quit. I think he had a great gig but just needed to be more productive and he could have kept it.

When I go into an office I'm less productive, so and so wants to catch up and then X needs your opinion on this, etc etc

At home I'm not interrupted so finish the same volume of work quicker like most people I'm sure which frees up that time to pop the kettle on and do a wash whilst that's doing instead of standing in the work kitchen hearing about Justin's renovation or Paul's poorly dog.

I might take a longer break and get the house work done or take a longer lunch and go for a walk in the daylight during winter in or do the shopping but with those chores done during the day I don't mind working later into the evening to make up the hours as long as my 7.5 hours is done at some point between 7am and 7pm.

I used to teach and obviously didn't have that flexibility, for many reasons I left education and purposefully sought out a job with flexibility and agile working practices. If others are unhappy with their career choices they are free to change and change up their working conditions.

I completely agree. I'm flexible with my team as a) they're adults and b) they hit their targets.

I often say that they can work where they like as long as the work gets done and they're there for our customers.

If they aren't working it would be very obvious as our results would deteriorate very quickly, and it would be my responsibility, as the Head of Department, to sort it.

I've also seen a lot of anti wfh sentiment on here, with frequent comments around 'if only nurses/doctors/supermarket workers' can do the same, and insinuating that not being at your desk 100% of the time whilst wfh is slacking off. As if different job types, having flexibility and being trusted are somehow bad things.

I think people who slack at home will also slack in the office. Unless the manager is next to them, monitoring their every move, there are plenty of ways to waste time in the office - wandering around buying coffees and food, chatting to people, taking extended breaks.

I'm way more productive at home as I have fewer distractions, it's much quieter and I'm less tired from commuting. Performance is looked at on an individual basis and managed accordingly.

It’s a two-way street. Yes managers should actively manage, but staff who abuse freedoms risk those freedoms for everyone.

It’s not your boss’s fault if your children are interrupting your work. It is yours. It’s not your boss’s fault if you are working two jobs simultaneously, it’s yours.

Some employees really do take the piss with flexible working, and it has impacts on their colleagues as well. I don’t think it’s enough to say well that’s on the managers. It’s easy in jobs that have work that’s easy to measure - but in other industries/roles it’s often not until things go really wrong that someone outside can see.

If you’re not doing your work - chances are you are the problem. This sounds like trying to weasel out of responsibility for not working.

You can't assume that because you work harder everyone else is. I've seen posts on here from people who freely admit they don't do a full days work, maybe it will catch up with them eventually maybe it wont but of course it's going on

Surely it depends why they are not getting the work done.

If it is because they spend the day getting distracted by things in the home then it is not the managers fault.

It is a difficult one. If you can work well from home I can see why you would not want to give it up. But you will always get some employees who will take the piss and end up ruining it for all.

I agree, but it requires strong management. We have a couple of massive piss takers but instead of dealing with them we have all been ordered back to the office which is incredibly demotivating and will result in the good people leaving.

The piss takers just ring in sick now instead so the problem isn't even solved!

Its the same people that are slackers at work are slackers at home and vice-versa, simples

Therefore and clearly YABU - but you are at your liberty to to think what you like

some don't like WFH as they are alone, don't have space, others in the house and other want to or love WFH and some like a little mix, EG, WFH and possibly a day in the office of their choosing

I work in a fully remote team, and it works really well. My workplace is well managed though.

I think there are still some old school bums on seats attitudes around, and that some people are slightly envious. I'd be interested to see some in depth research around productivity, and employer and employee satisfaction etc.

I agree OP. I also WFH in a similar set up.

We are allowed to work flexible hours, can nip out for appointments in the middle of the day if we need to etc. Most staff know they're onto a good thing with the flexibility so they don't take the piss.

The ones who do take the piss are managed well. If your figures/output are down, you are questioned on it. Plenty of people have been sacked for taking the piss. But the team have never been dragged back into the office en masse.