To think people applying for hybrid roles while living nowhere near the office - then refusing to come in - are part of why the job market feels so broken right now?

That doesn’t sound like “I’m seeing jobs advertised” 🤔

Way before “hybrid” was the in thing, I applied for roles that were fully office based and at in applications and interviews made it clear I needed 2 WFH days. My view was, they either want me or they don’t. The reality is, if an applicant is the best, most employers will work with them to be able to hire them. I work for a company who had never offered WFH pre-covid. My CV was gold dust, because of the experience I have. They are able to win work they wouldn’t have had a chance of getting without me. They interviewed other candidates who would work in the office 5 days a week but didn’t have my experience. Post Covid, I’m the only one permanently on a 3 WFH/ 2 office based and actually they don’t even enforce that. They know I’m worth keeping.

If people only applied for jobs where they tick every single box, nobody would ever apply for a job. The employer is free to choose which boxes are most important to them. The job market is always evolving. This is no different.

Have you ever recruited?

At least 50% of applicants are completely unsuitable for basic reasons. This is nothing new and no, it isn't why the job market is "broken", whatever that means.

I often recruits for roles in my team. You cannot stop people from applying! It's up to the recruiter to look at every application on its merit. I have offered positions to people who had to commute a long way and it is part of the interview process to clearly state that office presence on certain days is mandatory.

I'd be interested to see the evidential support for that statement.

@YourRealMauveSnake I employ people who can do the job, if they can do the job from home they are not required in the office.

I advertise hybrid working to appeal to all, my recruitment team can filter out the best candidates. I think you need do do your own job and move with the times, it just shows how inflexible you are and if your threatened by a colleague who choses to work from home and if you consider your only advantage is you want to work in the office for a few days or more then I suggest you train harder at your role and become more flexible.

Wining on a public forum, is not a good luck for someone claiming to be above others and says a lot about you.

It's not the 1950s!

There are people of both genders and of all ages, races and family set ups in management these days.

Anyway, it's up to the employer to decide what their business 'requires' or not. If you refuse to leave your home for work then obviously you should not apply for a job which requires some time in the office.

Perfect response.

Interviews should be down to a mix of the candidates experience and the interviewer’s judgement, not about who scores more points based on using the most buzzwords.

This happens at my large employer, people applying who live at the other end of the country. They say they’ll come in, do a couple of times then just stay home and wait to see if we sack them. Generally not.

Im really not keen on hybrid. Networking is important. If everybody wfh then you set up a network, if everyone’s in the office then it’s easy. In hybrid nothing set up properly for wfh but also not everyone in the office at the same time so the networking element doesn’t work.

if employers want people in then fine, waste of money in my view but they will have their reasons.

Most roles don’t actually require it though. It’s just employer preference. Usually a decision made by a straight white male in his 50s/60s who has no childcare responsibilities and is rich so can live in a 4 bed house in London.

If somebody advertises a job, giving their clear requirements, it doesn't matter whether you think they should or shouldn't pay somebody to do the job that they want doing, in the way that they want it doing.

If that's not the job that you want to do, or not the way that you want to do that job, nobody is forcing you to apply for it.

Don’t expect others to lower their expectations for a decent family life just because you’ve decided to be a martyr / slave to the workplace!

i was always told if you think you can do a job apply for it even if you don’t tick every box. I don’t tick the box of being prepared to do hybrid work, but if I am the best or most qualified candidate the employer may well be willing to compromise so why shouldn’t I apply?

It has always been said men will apply for jobs if they tick most of the requirements, whereas many women think they need to tick everyone.

I also see a lot of jobs advertised as remote and then in the last paragraph it says that there is a requirement to go into the office x-days a week- so it swings both ways

It's a management problem – they need to be more robust with sticking to policy.

What is happening is that at interview people say they will commute for 2 days a week then they do it for a month then negotiate because it’s too difficult. At interview stage we are not allowed to say no based on where they live, it has to be how they perform at interview.

That must be infuriating. How could an employer somehow weed this out? I agree you can't based purely on distance.

Whether it's right isn't the issue. If the company has made a business decision to make attendance at the office a requirement people shouldn't apply for roles they're not prepared or able to fulfil.

Is this in your workplace, @YourRealMauveSnake? Or are you in recruitment?

I keep seeing jobs advertised as hybrid (e.g. 1-2 days in the office) but loads of people applying clearly have no intention of ever commuting.

Can I ask how you are seeing this information (people's location/ intentions when applying)? Are you in a hiring role?

I agree - if it's a hybrid role, you need to come in. I have no idea about who applies though!

I don’t understand, if it is in your contract to do certain things, how can you ‘refuse’?
and if you refuse, surely you are sacked?

This is entirely the employers call, they don’t have to justify it to you!
if you don’t like their rules……don’t work there.
A place of work is not an adult day care setting, nor a place to pander to employees.

@cadburyegg that seems very unfair about the parking permits. It should be based on how many times you’re in, not just distance

I agree with you.

Some of my colleagues live 100+ miles away. We are supposed to come in to the office 2 days a week. 1 of them negotiated just coming in 1 day and tbf does do so. 1 of them comes in 2 days a week but moans continuously about having to do so. 1 of them is supposed to come in every other week but I haven’t seen him in weeks.

What is happening is that at interview people say they will commute for 2 days a week then they do it for a month then negotiate because it’s too difficult. At interview stage we are not allowed to say no based on where they live, it has to be how they perform at interview.

Parking is also allocated on priority need and those living further away get priority so now people who are hardly ever in the office will get a parking permit so they can get a space every time they come into the office even if it’s once every 3 months. Those of us who live closer (and who have paid a fortune to live commutable distance) won’t get a permit even though we are coming into the office more often. People with children used to get priority too but now we don’t.