to be tired of the jealousy towards people who WFH?

Depends on the job though. I manage my own time, and I don't have customer/client calls. So if I "disappear" at 330 to do a pick up, that's fine, because I can make up 30 mins by working through lunch or logging on later. I am allowed to be flexible.

It's different if you're supposed to be customer/client facing and aren't available to do that work because you're doing drop off/pick up or popping to the gym.

I think that's the kind of person who gets easily distracted when around other people.

When I used to work in an operational role, we were measured on numbers. My numbers in the office were usually double the majority of the rest of the team, because I can work quickly to a high quality. They increased slightly when we started WFH in COVID but not to the same scale of increase of other diligent people now they weren't chatting half the day (I could work and talk, not everyone can and by this point I could also do the job in my sleep).

If you gave me the same workload (volume wise, if measured on numbers( as some of the "slower" people, it'd take me 2-3 hours compared to their 7, in the same conditions. But WFH, the diligent "slower" people would do more work in the day, whereas the less diligent "slower" people would do the same across the same time period despite less distractions. I always had a higher workload cos that's what I could get through.

I'm not measured on numbers now, it's output. So there are some days where I might be done in a couple of hours if it's the start of a project, and others aren't available or I'm waiting on work being done. But mostly I'm busy all day.

The people who say they're done in 2-3 hours when WFH are the less diligent, slower people. They have less distractions but aren't willing to take on more than they did with the distractions. And they give WFH a bad name.

So you work from home but do school drop offs, chores and exercise... then you wonder why people don't think your working hard. You just answered your own bloody q!

@Fizbosshoes but it’s a full time job because you need to be available and ready during business hours.
So you might have a few quiet hours doing nothing all afternoon, but if someone urgently needs you at half past 4 then you need to be there! Whether that’s in person or phone/email.
You can’t just do your work in a couple of hours and finish for the day, and leave people hanging.

But the posters I'm talking about aren't saying they're doing 2-3 hours work a day because work ebbs and flows eg this is a quiet period but they work 10 hours a day during a busy period. (Of course I understand this, my own industry has busy and less busy periods - none as quiet as 2 hours a day unfortunately)
They are saying they are regularly working 2-3 hours a day because they are super efficient when WFH
....in which case I'd think it wasn't actually a ft job....

I don’t think I understand this

True I personally couldn't think of anything bloody worse than WFH. My home is a place to relax not a workplace

I understand all that - but again, artificially making other jobs less appealing is not the way to handle it. Just like forcing people back to the office to keep cafes and bars in traditional business areas going is false economy.

And it still doesn’t address the fact that an awful lot of people can’t just say “Ooh, I know - I’ll take a WFH job instead”. They need the right skill set and experience.

I think you’re the ludicrous one.

Of course no one is trying to suggest that people could just as easily be putting a wash on or peeling potatoes if they were in the office. It isn’t physically possible. But the point about how people use the time is perfectly valid.

A poster on the first page described it perfectly when she said being in the office involves “busy work”. The jobs you do to look busy when it’s quiet - deleting old emails, clearing out your desk drawers, rereading company policies etc.. It wouldn’t matter if you didn’t do any of it - and at home, you don’t have to for appearances sake. If I’m not busy, why wouldn’t I just stick the washing machine on? It doesn’t stop me getting my work done, because if I’m busy, I simply don’t do it. There is zero incentive for me to “skive”, because the work has to go somewhere - it would soon be spotted if I wasn’t pulling my weight. I’d only be making life hard for myself.

Have you won any awards OP?

If they've been able to become lazy then it's not being managed properly. They were likely always lazy but having visibility meant that was managed. Managers have to adapt to WFH and more remote working too.

And not all people who would prefer to remain WFH don't want to go back to the office because they can't skive anymore. I don't skive. I'd rather not go back full time because I can work more effectively without having to deal with all the in person drop ins. I can manage my hours better when I'm not trying to walk out of the office at the end of my shift and having people ask me "just one more thing" and am instead able to just close my laptop and handle those queries tomorrow.

I definitely am able to manage home life better but it's because I can use my lunch break and my previous commute time to do housework, not because I'm doing things when I'm being paid to work.

DH is on site 5 days a week, he WFH once a month or so to write up reports or because the company car needs changing or servicing or something. He has issues with lazy people not pulling their weight on site.

Basically, whatever your role, organisation or location, there will be people who take the piss. It's not unique to WFH and it should be managed appropriately by line managers or heads of department. A blanket "WFH is making the workforce lazy so they should all be on site" isn't the way forward.

Totally agree

Not read the full thread, so apologies if I’ve missed anything, but I think there are pluses and minuses of both, and I think your view on it is definitely influenced by who you work for, what you do, and I think to some extent, your level of experience in your job.

Pre Covid I was predominantly office based and spent 90mins per day commuting. If I had to attend meetings, that might mean anything from an hour to 5 hours getting to and from that meeting. All of that was unproductive time, as in general driving would be the only option due to lack of public transport. I’m 25 years into my career, so I can work very independently, and am probably the most experienced and well qualified in our team, despite not being the most senior. My kids are both at school, so the move to home working for me has been an absolute godsend, in terms of being at home when they get home. Does that mean I think it’s great for everyone? well as all the posts above demonstrate, not everyone works in the same way. My own DH is very much an advocate of collaborative office based work, and his company expect staff in the office most of the time.

do I think some people are jealous? Not sure if jealous is the right word, but I think some people genuinely do not understand how people can be paid for being at home all day. But it works well for me, and the rest of my team. We still deliver significant output, and are happier because we are not commuting hours on end to sit in an awful office (our actual base was recently condemned to demolition!)

I think lots of jobs can be done remotely, I notice the trains are much quieter on Mondays and Fridays, and pubs in London are busier on Thursdays because its the new Friday.

I'm sure most people work just as well from home but I'm intrigued by the volume of people on MN who insist they can get all their work done to the accepted standard in 2 or 3 hours a day, regularly , at home, leaving time for childcare, laundry, cooking, the gym etc. Surely that is a pt job? When they were in the office I get that there are breaks, chatting etc but were they actually only working for 25-30% of the time?

One person on AMA said they had 2 (high paying) "FT" jobs that they did from home while looking after a toddler, and spent 1-2 hrs a day on each!

And others thinking it's a huge imposition if they are asked to go back to the office even once a month, and making a thread asking what they can do to avoid it.

I'm sure hybrid works well for lots of businesses and employees though, and that seems pretty common.

I don't think WFH is the reason TA's are leaving. They are hideously underpaid, yet taking on more and more work outside of their original remit. Pay them a fair salary and many more will stay, I am sure.

@IpsyUpsyDaisyDoos

It's not WFH that makes people lazy. Lazy people are lazy wherever they work. Productive people are productive wherever they work.

You may have a point there, but I do think SOME people have become lazy and entitled from 4-5 years of 'working' from home. And you can tell who the lazy fuckers are. They are the ones who don't want to go back to the office. They know they won't be able to do all the shit they do in work hours if they're in the office!

As long as you admit that you have privileges that others don’t and that you have it easier, it’s fine. Some jobs can’t physically be done from home and we trained before wfh was widespread. Yes I’m jealous of my friends who have all this flexibility and their homes run like clockwork.

In our organisation the SOME (as you noted, not all) people who are lazy when WFH are the ones who when we were in the office 5 days a week would disappear for ages, sit at their desks chatting, refuse to check there was adequate phone cover before just walking off for their break, take 30 minutes to make a cuppa, and were generally slow at doing their jobs anyway.

Those of us who are productive at home were productive in the office. I'm actually more productive at home because people wanting to chat have to actually call me (and I can ignore them if it's not essential) instead of just plonking themselves by my desk.

I used to have a queue at my desk of people wanting help or answers to a question. They have to message, email or call now and I can more easily prioritise.

It's not WFH that makes people lazy. Lazy people are lazy wherever they work. Productive people are productive wherever they work.

This again. Those people that keep the country afloat during Covid couldn't work from home.

The sense of entitlement is ridiculous. Civil servants particularly.

This. ^ Just like I said. Unfortunately, some work from home people have become lazy and unproductive and entitled. THIS is why they are wanted back in the office now. Bosses have cottoned on them.

The party is over you shirkers! 😆

(Not ALL work from home people are lazy shirkers of course, but some are. Especially the ones who are whining and crowing and moaning about being asked back into the office! People admitting they do washing and ironing and childcare and walking the dog, and have afternoon naps, and go outside sunbathing when they are meant to be working - along with 2 hour lunch breaks - has done them NO favours!)

Nonsense. 😆

People do washing, prep for dinner, walking the dog, have haircuts, do housework, make private phone calls, and all manner of shit when 'working' from home (and some even do also childcare/have their kids at home, when they are 'working.')

NO-ONE can do this if they are in the workplace, and some WFH people have proven again and again that they are lazy and unproductive at home, and have admitted they swing the lead half the time they're meant to be 'working' by doing all this extra shit. And this is why they are complaining about being asked to go back into the office, because 'wah wah wah, I won't be able to do it anymore. waaaaaaaaaahhhh!' 😖😢 THIS is why bosses want them back.

Don't even TRY to pretend that the things people do in the office environment - like going to the loo, or chatting to another colleague is anything like the things people who work from home do. They take the piss. (Not all but many!)

Your answer is ludicrous.

I don't think anyone would want to swap with me quite honestly. I've been working from home because I can't walk or do anything really while I wait for a major operation which is taking forever.
My job involves triaging and literally being stuck to the screen all day long trouble shooting for staff, solving problems and foing paperwork and letters clinicians are too busy to do. I also do online clinics for patients who don't actually need to be seen in person.
It's pretty mind exhausting znd I'd rather be in clinic quite honestly as there is a limit of 9 people a day I can treat. I have no limit and have to keep going until I'm done.
I can't go for a nap or put some washing on. There is no time.