Manager wants us to have in-person meetings of 15 from next week

[Wilker]

As in the title really... Apparently we are going to be having in person indoor meetings of 15 people from April 12th, and 30 people from May 17th.

Absolutely no business need for these meetings to be happening in person. We are all admin/office staff and have been working fine from home.

I wanted to check whether they are even legal? Aren’t the 15/30 people gatherings permitted for weddings only?

@CuthbertDibbleandGrubb

The guidance is still to work from home if you can. It has not changed. As per the updated government website on Covid 19.

But it’s not up to the employee to decide if they can. It’s the job of the manager/director etc to decide. They will have a much better idea of whether wfh is effective or not.

@pointyshoes

From what I’ve seen on other threads, it really seems that a lot of people who wfh are really enjoying the extra benefits they personally get from doing so. Understandably, they don’t want to return to commuting. It also seems they will seek any excuse not to return to work.

It would be interesting to know if these people who are so keen to avoid returning to their offices have decided to keep their children at home as well or whether they have decided that schools are ok, workplace not

Or have used shops, healthcare, energy etc where others have had to go into work.

Not to mention SD, that’s a guideline that many have broken yet when it’s work related many don’t feel the same.

@saraclara

Basically a lot of people who've been WFH have gained a false sense of being in control of their working lives. Understandably they like that element of it, and who wouldn't?

But basically you're an employee and your boss can run things as they see fit. Before Covid it wouldn't occur to people to question that, but the freedom they feel they've had over the last year, has made
what used to be normal suddenly seem unreasonable to them.

I agree with this. We have team members who were happy to travel 200miles to visit their family over Christmas when it was forbidden, visit their family 100miles away over Easter when it was forbidden, meet their friends when it was forbidden but then when it comes to going into the client's office they are suddenly all nervous about covid!

pointyshoes

It would be interesting to know if these people who are so keen to avoid returning to their offices have decided to keep their children at home as well or whether they have decided that schools are ok, workplace not

Yes I know lots of people in well paid jobs who can wfh and claim it's not safe to go back to the office - yet are keen to send children to school. I think that there's a sense of denial on MN about schools & that if there's a 'bubble' it's somehow not going to spread covid.

I don't know where we would be if food production staff, factory workers, shop workers, Amazon warehouse staff etc were so wary about going to work in person.

It's interesting that key workers in the UK aren't that well paid - yet have just had to get on with it.

I don't know where we would be if food production staff, factory workers, shop workers, Amazon warehouse staff etc were so wary about going to work in person.

Exactly. The people who've been working in the food factories and processing plants throughout the whole year, must think that the professionals working from home who are whinging about (eventually, maybe) having to go to the office sometimes, are spoiled brats.

@saraclara

Teachers, nurses, NHS staff in general, factory and food production workers, supermarket staff etc have all been working with others throughout or through much of the last twelve months. Other workers haven't, in order to keep community case numbers down.

But I'm going to guess that OP and those others who are going to be expected to start meeting in person aren't posting because they think their employer is risking the community in general. They're posting because they're worried about their own risk. Well I'm afraid it's time to step up and, in the safest way possible, get on with it. Just like all these other workers have been doing in order for you to stay home.

And what benefit will this 'stepping up' have for anyone

@pointyshoes

From what I’ve seen on other threads, it really seems that a lot of people who wfh are really enjoying the extra benefits they personally get from doing so. Understandably, they don’t want to return to commuting. It also seems they will seek any excuse not to return to work.

It would be interesting to know if these people who are so keen to avoid returning to their offices have decided to keep their children at home as well or whether they have decided that schools are ok, workplace not

Surely it's more that schools are essential for children's education and mental health, working in an office in a job you could be doing perfectly well from home isn't essential at all.

But the point is that it’s not the employee that gets to decide whether they are wfh efficiently. It’s the manager/director/owner etc who decides. They will be much more aware than the employee of any problems. Many people on Mumsnet seem to think that they can decide that they are wfh efficiently so don’t need to return to the actual workplace, but it’s not necessarily their decision.

@GreenSlide, the benefit is that a gradual return to work for the occasional meeting is part of what's necessary to eventually return to normal. It's not like the govt can have no-one working in offices/commuting one day, and the next day have everyone back. It's baby steps all the way. Schools are back, shops will start opening, and they'll be watching to see what effect that has on the virus. Gradually having the trains become busier, and office blocks re-opening, will give them extra data to eventually say yes to normal working for everyone.

Beyond that, it's up to the various companies to decide what works best for them, and direct their employees accordingly.

Other groups of workers have done their bit to provide the services that those WFH need in order to do what they do. Now it's the turn of the rest to gradually, meeting by meeting, add to the gradual return to normal, and revitalise the towns and cities..

I get that the longer you are off the more anxiety you may have about returning to work but if that's the requirement by your employer you can't argue about it.

Plenty of teachers in my school argued to stay teaching online due to their anxieties about returning to face to face teaching whilst seeming unconcerned about the TAs/HLTAs teaching the key worker and vulnerable pupils in school since Christmas. Those working throughout are far less anxious whilst the returners are adapting.

I’m all for having in-person meetings when the time is right, by the way. I just don’t think it appears to be legal for another couple of months yet.

@Wilker

I’m all for having in-person meetings when the time is right, by the way. I just don’t think it appears to be legal for another couple of months yet.

It is legal. It's been legal for some time. As long as Covid safe rules are followed, it's legal.

It's up to your bosses to decide when the time is right. Case numbers are vastly down. Many people are now vaccinated. They're not asking you to come back full time or even part time. Just for some meetings.

I just don’t think it appears to be legal for another couple of months yet.

Of course it’s legal
Work from home if you can has only ever been guidance.

@JeanClaudeVanDammit

I just don’t think it appears to be legal for another couple of months yet.

Of course it’s legal
Work from home if you can has only ever been guidance.

Exactly. It's bizarre that after all this time, people don't understand this.

Exactly. It's bizarre that after all this time, people don't understand this. People understand to the point of what suits their agenda.

It's fine, it's legal, and it will be good to go to a real meeting with colleagues. Normal working life.

Meanwhile, this is the message from the Government, from the weekend papers.

Keep working from home if you can.

Limit the number of people you come into contact with and only go into work if you have to.

Been doing in person meetings of 30 different people every hour between September and December and since March 8th.

@Wilker

I’m all for having in-person meetings when the time is right, by the way. I just don’t think it appears to be legal for another couple of months yet.

You have had countless people explaining to you why it is legal OP. Read your own thread!

@BarbaraofSeville

Meanwhile, this is the message from the Government, from the weekend papers.

Keep working from home if you can.

Limit the number of people you come into contact with and only go into work if you have to.

Exactly! Surely it is safer for those who do have to go to work in person if the ones that can WFH limit their interactions as much as possible

You are fortunate to have the opportunity to go into work and see people face to face. I am desperate to get back! More and more offices around me are getting staff back in, albeit on a reduced numbers basis. We have to move forward now.

Isn't it interesting that "I should work from home because I'm just as good at my job - and bugger the employers thoughts on that matter - but the people that educate my children or provide my food must carry on working as normal and all these shortages are very disruptive to my life". That "it's not fair that I have had to work throughout but others have been paid loads of money to not work and swan around doing DIY". That "I shouldn't have to go out to work at all, but why can't the pub open now as I want to see my friends for lunch". I mean, God forbid we create a two tier society where some people get X whilst others get Y. Oh, but when it comes to Covid passports creating a two tier society and reducing cases whilst being able to reopen the economy - well that's utterly not on.

FWIIW, I am in favour of hybrid working and we have had such working practices since long before any pandemic. But it is simply not true in any shape or form that people are entirely as effective working solely from home, except for a very, very small minority. They might do 90% of the job 100% as effectively as in the office. But there are some things that they simply cannot do from home. The creativity and mutual support is not as effective via Teams or Zoom. Plus there is growing evidence that these methods of communications are having their own adverse impacts on people after this prolonged period of usage. We cannot ensure that people are working in safe ways - I know for a fact that many are not, and as employers and managers we still have legal obligations in respect of health and safety at work. There are many many small but important things that we do when in "the office" that simply cannot be done as effectively at home. What might work because it must for several weeks (in the first lockdown) is simply not good enough over a year later.

And, to be ruthlessly blunt, working for an employer with over 16,000 employees (many of whom had to attend work throughout) we have found that there is a correlation between those who shout loudest about not wanting to go back to the office, and those whose managers are very clear that their work efficiency is not as good as it is in the office.

@Wilker

I’m all for having in-person meetings when the time is right, by the way. I just don’t think it appears to be legal for another couple of months yet.

Are you still saying this after a hundred posts telling you it’s not illegal?!

My husband has been having in person training days with around 30 others since last September. He is a teacher and his head refused to hold training days on zoom or in smaller groups.

My office had a spot check covid inspection from HSE last week. They were happy for us all to be in the office (we don't wear masks) but wanted to know about ventilation and 2m distancing.

@BarbaraofSeville

Oh, and if someone brought covid into the meeting and it was transmitted to colleagues, that would be reportable under RIDDOR so at risk of being investigated by HSE.

I can't remember if office work is under HSE or the local council, but the website of one or both should have information in the 'covid at work' section, making it very clear that meetings like this should be avoided. It doesn't have to be specifically illegal to not do it, but needs to be subject to a suitable and sufficient risk assessment, which will conclude that it's too high risk to be allowed. Talk to your health and safety people, they should agree these meetings shouldn't happen.

That's not actually true. It's only RIDDOR reportable under specific cicumstances such as coming into contact with someone who is known to be covid positive (not someone who subsequently testes positive) or if on the balance of probabilities someone is more likely to have caught covid at work than outside

"There must be reasonable evidence linking the nature of the person's work with an increased risk of becoming exposed to coronavirus.

Factors to take into account when making this decision could include:

whether or not the nature of the person's work activities increased the risk of them becoming exposed to coronavirus?
whether or not there was any specific, identifiable incident that led to an increased risk of exposure?
whether or not the person's work directly brought them into contact with a known coronavirus hazard without effective control measures, as set out in the relevant PHE guidance, in place such as personal protective equipment (PPE) or social distancing"