AIBU to apply for hybrid roles even though I'm nowhere near the workplace?

I previously worked in London where people commuted in from all over. Some did 4 days in the office and 1 from home and some did 5 days in the office. The furthest commute was from Spain! People were coming from Belfast, Newcastle, Norwich, Nottingham, Leicester, all over. Some of those had a long commute every day and others had somewhere else to stay during the week, but all at their own expense. So I don't think it's unreasonable to apply, but I guess it's up to the company if they want to interview/employ you. Good luck!

You hire based on experience, skills and interview – none of that is blind. Hiring blind to bias on non-evidentiary assumptions is good practice.

In practice, by the time I am at the final interview stage, any of the candidates could do the job. So other factors will come in e.g. our best estimate of how long we think each candidate might stay if offered the job, because hiring absorbs a big chunk of time in our small team.

I’m glad it works for you.
It clearly didn’t work for him.

We have only had one instance of someone who we recruited who then said now I realise how long it really takes I need to work fully from home. We refused and they left. We had been perfectly clear on requirements at the interview stage. There was little sympathy around the office and a sense that such behaviour could "spoil it for everyone else".

Also to note that on the reliability of commuting, it has often been really difficult for people living in popular commuter belt areas. South Western Trains for example were terrible and we regularly had people turning up 3/4 an hour late. I did hear of companies not recruiting people who commuted by this method but never saw this confirmed. My commute is quite reliable really. I love a do, so happy to stay after work and I can get there early if I need to, but we do do this very often TBH.

Highly niche 🤣 it’s not niche mate. The main employer in several UK towns actually is just one example I can think of.

Oh please stop with the "controlling". Where you choose to live is absolutely their business if they are talking about hiring you to do a job.

They'd rather not hire someone in the first place who they feel it's likely they will have to "get rid" of in a couple of months, which simply wastes everybody's time. if they have another candidate who they don't have to worry about firing later on, they are going to take that one. That's just sensible practice on their part.

Lots of people I work with do this without issue. Not quite the same but I live in Norfolk and regularly commute in 1/2 days a week (1.75 hrs). Works fine. With tethering I can do emails on the way in, so leave a bit early. Just important to make sure that you account for the travel costs when considering the role. Stay down some nights when I can. That being said it is now very expensive to do so compared to 4/5 years ago. In the summer I stop at the LSE student accommodation. Need to book early, but that is cheap and they do brekkie.

A lot of these people with substantial commutes actually have quite 'normal' jobs, ie they're not high fliers or big earners.

Under anonymous recruitment I wouldn’t know where you’d be travelling from until it got to job offer stage, so I wouldn’t be able to compare it to another candidate even if I wanted to.

I have recruited people though who state they will do all kinds of things commute-wise before starting the job and then become increasingly difficult about it once in role. We’re at least 2 days in the office a week, and they’ll do it for the first month, then start coming up with reasons to WFH an additional day. Then another one!

Showing that you’ve thought through the practicalities and the cost would help. I do know other people who do this very successfully.

I'm private sector, OP, and so are many of the people I know who are commuting two hours plus. Don't lose faith.

It's not abstract. It's common place and it's poor practice based on bias.

I don't say that don't have legal rights or that it's illegal. I very clearly say they don't have 'sound rights' and that it's poor hiring practice.

Son has a hybrid civil service job, 2 days per week on site, and his commute is over 2 hours each way - but he stays overnight at his dad's. They didn't ask about this at his interview, so I'd say you were unlucky to be denied a job on that basis.

I'm commenting on the situation described. If you want to take everything into an abstract platonic cave of how the world should be vs how the world is, go for it, but YABU.

Again 'conveniently located' and 'obstacles' and 'not a first choice' are all pre-judgements and based on biased assumptions of 1) a scenario, 2) a person's ability to handle that scenario and 3) previous direct or indirect experience of another individual's ability to handle the location of their work. None of which give an employer sound rights to dictate where applicants or employees live.

and

Employers like this would also likely pull back on hiring women they assume will be having kids soon, women of nursery-aged children who they assume will get sick, people with a disability, people closer to retirement age than others. It's discrimination based on bias and nothing more.

This is what you have said. You say an employer has no right to make a hiring decision based upon the applicants living location and you say that it's is discrimination equivalent to not hiring a disabled person etc. when it's just an employer looking at what would work best for their company and it's nothing illegal or particularly unusual.

I've heard similar stories, although it's been pass probation then made it clear they didn't expect to come in.

I wouldn’t hire someone further away than 2 hours door to door, even if they claimed to be willing to commute. It just doesn’t work in practice. In addition to the risk of moaning and dropping days there’s no flexibility to come in when required, do a breakfast meeting in the office, socials in the evening ect ect. If it’s hybrid you need to be able to attend the office when necessary not on the basis of fixed dates you can book accommodation for.

If you're claiming that people don't have problematic employees who live at any distance from their place of work, the YABU. If you're also claiming to have evidence that those noted employees weren't problematic in any position, regardless of distance, then you are also BU. Poor employees are poor employees.

Look the perfect employee will be perfect from down the road or across the country. A motivated, hard working person will make all sorts of things work. My dad had a 4 hour commute for two years as he was unemployed for a while (massive layoffs so a saturated market) and they didn't want us to change our high schools. It was terrible but he did it and he was never late. He just didn't sleep a lot. So of course people can do lots of hard things.

BUT... it's also totally true that post-covid assumptions about office attendance are very, very different for any sort of office-based job and if you go in with a set of expectations, there is going to be movement from there. And every manager I know has a handful of people who just don't want to go in so will have 1000 reasons why (plumbers, deliveries, childcare failures, pets, broken car, broken bus, etc etc etc etc). So if you have that sort of person 'plus' a long commute you will end up with someone with many extra reasons to have an excuse than others and it's a headache.

Where I work it's almost impossible to fire anyone so whoever you hire is there for potentially a very long time. So it's important to consider the entire picture when you make your choice - and answers to 'how will you make this work from a distance' and 'how flexible can you be for last minute demands' and 'we anticipate everyone is in for 3-5 days a week but it will shift around priorities' can absolutely be considered when deciding who to hire.

Yet one avoided by hiring those people who don't live very far away. Funny that.

Employee issue, not a location issue.

Of course it’s not unreasonable to apply. Go for it!

I advise you to have a practical plan you can describe in the interview, as part of your pitch.

Eg you will stay overnight (or two nights as you need a night train) - so describe how you’ll work from home Monday, catch the train on Monday evening and then what your accommodation will be in the city (hotel, friend, Airbnb etc) and then that you’ll do two full days in the office, taking the teain home at X time on Wednesday night, then working from home Thursday and Friday.

Even mention how much this will cost you if per week and that you’ve factored that into the salary level and take home pay, and you still think the job is financially and professionally worthwhile for you despite these costs.

Note that you’ll be consistently available to work late or do work social activities on the Tuesday night (eg dinner with clients) and also do an early office start Wednesday morning (eg for in person client breakfast meetings) - whatever is applicable to your job.

Finally emphasise your flexibility- eg if you’re occasionally required to come to the office on other days, or for an offsite etc.

If you make a strong pitch that shows a well thought out and costed plan, and do a strong interview, then you certainly had a good chance.

In my large organisation we’ve had several people who lived very far away and it rarely worked out. We need someone in every day for operational reasons.
Whining about extra training days in the office, can’t come in due to various motorway issues or snow or storms or strikes or something else. Can’t be called on last minute when we need someone in.
Always late. Increased sickness because they can’t manage the commute on top of a working day.