No more WFH or flexible working

[Lizzie523]

Been WFH for a year now - about 6 months ago the company MD said we had done brilliantly, was thrilled by how we had risen to the challenge etc. We were then told the future would likely be hybrid working & we all had to complete detailed consultations about our preferences RE this. Personally ive been more productive overall & I feel a mix would work well.

Imagine our shock to now be told we are all to go back to full time at the office 5 days a week. They said they would no longer consider the results of the consultations and wished they hadn't done it - many of us tried to appeal this but were just told 'no'.

I moved during the pandemic which means I am just far enough away that 5 days a week in the office is going to be a hassle (not to mention awful for the environment).

We work with a few people with young kids and it obviously isn't inclusive for disabled people either. Our main competitors have already confirmed their commitment to remote working.

Is everyone else headed back to the office or am I right in thinking most places are being more flexible now?

that is nothing to do with WFH and everything to do with poor management and work culture. The banks want to close their branches so they're making it as difficult as possible for people to use them, and then they can point to lower usage and close them. Same as libraries, reduce opening hours, then say footfall has reduced, and close them. As for the solicitors, most of the ones I know have a skeleton staff in the office so they should be able to accept letters.

I'll grant you the bank, although at this moment in time it is precisely because their mortgage advisers are working from home unless they have appointments, so it is wfh as the front for it but yes, culture etc is the root cause you're right. I don't think you can tell me I'm wrong about my solicitors though, when I know that to be the case because of the interactions I've had with them. It seems it's different for the solicitors you know/are using, but my solicitor was working from home and therefore something which was time critical was delayed because we couldn't hand deliver documents. It doesn't really matter if they have a receptionist in to receive a letter or not, my solicitor is the one who needed the document in her hand, not the receptionist.

The banks want to close their branches so they're making it as difficult as possible for people to use them, and then they can point to lower usage and close them I'd accept that argument if they were providing phone or chatline support but neither of these services has been adequate either. They need to up their game, we are jumping ship - we have been waiting till things opened up. I'm sure we're not the only ones who have wasted hours on the phone waiting to speak to a person who says sorry I can't help I don't have access to the system I'm wfm. Even HP a bloody computer manufacturer couldn't get its shit together!

@cushioncovers

Wfh will be a distant memory soon in my opinion. Businesses want staff back where they can see them. Wfh productivity has been mixed according to my ds who works for a big international insurance company ( only one opinion I know) as people have taken the piss with not being supervised at all times. As a customer I am fed up of Covid being a reason I can't get through to anyone on the phone lines. Some Banks aren't open full time yet either which is a pita. But then I work in the Nhs and have been working full time throughout so my view is probably influenced by that.

Firms are cutting staff and blaming covid. I have had a part-time job remote working for years plus a job in the office. My remote working job is more efficient. Meetings tend to be shorter and based on what is actually needed. People who take the piss do so wherever they are based. And I do think it is down to poor management. I mean it is even possible to put keyboard trackers on a laptop for people home working.

Your forgetting that a lot of people don't have adequate spaces in the home to allow for wfh on a permanent basis. When it was an emergency situation it was fine to be ignorant of things like this - we are all in this together after all. However, if your workplace were to continue with this set up they would need to ensure going forward that all their employees home workspace is adequate as there will be health and safety implications as well as data protection issues, equipment etc etc. It isn't as straightforward as just stay at home to work or attend in person at the office.

Also, is it fair that someone should be allowed to wfh simply because they can afford to live somewhere that allows for an adequate setup compared to a colleague doing the exact same role who really wants to work from home but cant because they only have the kitchen table to perch on. We all know that it is the person stuck in the office who is going to get additional work pushed onto them and its just going to breed resentment within the workforce. It needs to be fair to all.

In my field all new jobs seem to be being advertised as working from home or hybrid. It is a specialist field and it means firms get access to more candidates.
I do think if you can't manage staff working from home, you are a poor manager. But then many are poor managers. But they blame staff for their own poor skills.

I normally work in finance as an analyst but am currently out of career thanks to recent redundancy.

At my current government job, I started off wfh full time and will go back to the office full time for a couple of months and then will permanently be working on a blended basis.

But at my old organisation, wfh and flexible working already existed pre-pandemic! It’s very likely they will stay wfh forever as this is nothing new for them and their infrastructure can already account it.

Accommodate it*

We all know that it is the person stuck in the office who is going to get additional work pushed onto them and its just going to breed resentment within the workforce. It needs to be fair to all.

Precisely and it will be the middle managers (who let's face it barely have a job at all) who will be sat in their luxurious WFH office attending zoom "meetings" whilst everyone else does the actual work. On the plus side, it might speed up the re-structuring of workplaces to force out these pen pushers.

[quote IrmaFayLear]**@castemary* - so if someone elects* to wfh, and, say, fall off their kitchen stool whilst working, the employer is liable? [/quote]
Of course not. In the same way, an employer is not to blame if an employee falls off a kitchen stool in a works kitchen.
But you do a home assessment. As someone who has worked remotely in one of my jobs for years, I had to complete a form and email photos of my work set up at home. And yes I was provided with an ergonomic chair.
It isn't that difficult. But employers do have to do it.
You also have to ensure your insurance covers employees working from home.

@MoonshineTuttiFrutti

We all know that it is the person stuck in the office who is going to get additional work pushed onto them and its just going to breed resentment within the workforce. It needs to be fair to all.

Precisely and it will be the middle managers (who let's face it barely have a job at all) who will be sat in their luxurious WFH office attending zoom "meetings" whilst everyone else does the actual work. On the plus side, it might speed up the re-structuring of workplaces to force out these pen pushers.

Surely you have clear roles and responsibilities for different staff with clear work plans? I know what my targets are for the year. I suspect there are just a lot of badly managed offices.

We are a professional services firm moving to hybrid. So its totally up to us as to whether we want to wfh or the office. However we are still recruiting fairly locally because the understanding is there will be times when you will be required to go into the office, be that once a week or once a month. This is because letters need to witnessed/signed, stuff will need on the day photocopying, occasionally meetings need to happen in person etc. So we cant recruit from miles away

@MrsMaizel

WFH doesn't mean you have to be chained to your desk. Yup, I put washing on, do a bit of hoovering etc when I'm working from home. So what? People in the office will be going for coffee, chatting with collegues etc so it makes no odds

and then some women wonder why they fail to progress ...

Goodness me. I've read some utter tosh on this site from the anti-WFHers over the last year but this has got to take the biscuit.

There may well be negative career impacts from WFH that disproportionately affect women. The evidence isn't clear yet but it is of course possible to make some assumptions based on what we already know about women, the workplace and where the burden of home admin lands in most families.

However they will not be related to taking 10 mins out of the working day to bung some pants in the machine.

Honestly some of you really need to reflect on why you are so desperate to keep people locked in the same old unhealthy cycles and so resistant to anything that looks like change.

We all know that it is the person stuck in the office who is going to get additional work pushed onto them and its just going to breed resentment within the workforce. It needs to be fair to all.

I've read plenty of posts on this and other WFH threads suggesting the complete opposite - that those in the office will get first dibs on all the exciting and interesting new projects and that the losers who insist on WFH will miss out because they'll be too busy sorting their whites from their colours I guess

Honestly some of you really need to reflect on why you are so desperate to keep people locked in the same old unhealthy cycles and so resistant to anything that looks like change.
This. I wonder if it’s to do with pensions being locked into corporate property investments; WFH en masse devalues all those shiny glass and steel capitalist totems in Canary Wharf.

OP, I think you’ll need to look for somewhere else to work. Ignore the bootlicking doommongers on this thread, there are plenty of WFH and flexible-working companies who are somehow managing to combine different policies for different employees – gasp! Imagine! – and treating their workforce as adults rather than wanting them to be grateful for breadcrumbs.

(Yes, I WFH full-time – well, four days a week actually, a condition I asked for on accepting the job last month, amidst “an employers’ market” apparently. Progressing just fine over here with a wash on, no my job isn’t going to go to Mumbai or Manila; it could go to anyone in the UK, sure, but then again I can go anywhere in the UK, and removing the London-centricity from the job market can only be a good thing.)

I find wfh it is much easier to talk to those I need to talk to because there are far fewer useless meetings. I have lots of meetings of 10 minutes long.
I know some say it is easier to ask things in the office. I find those who ask things all the bloody time instead of actually looking, probably do miss asking things in the office. This colleague is relieved. I have spent many days trying to focus on figures or writing something complex, only to be constantly interrupted by a colleague with questions that can easily be answered just by looking.
I find colleagues who rarely do this just ask questions on chat now. We have various team channels in teams to ask questions and share info.
I think there are a lot of very poor managers whose poor management is more obvious when staff are working from home. It is easier to hide poor management in the office.

I was already WFH 2 days a week pre pandemic. The company, like most I thought, is now adopting a hybrid model & I guess i'll be in 1-2 days/week.

I also think employers who insist on people working in the office with no flexible working will not attract the best employees. Flexible working has been around for decades as has some wfh.
If as an employer you are stuck in the past, then don't be surprised if employees react to that. Of course employers stuck in the past will be able to recruit staff new to particular posts, who are unemployed or not particularly ambitious. But decent employers want to attract the best candidates they can. You do not do that by being stuck in the past.

I also think employers who insist on people working in the office with no flexible working will not attract the best employees

TBH that sort of employer will have a different view of the "best" employees.

Not the sort of employer I'd ever work for!

is it fair that someone should be allowed to wfh simply because they can afford to live somewhere that allows for an adequate setup compared to a colleague doing the exact same role who really wants to work from home but cant because they only have the kitchen table to perch on

In normal times WFH doesn't mean working from home, it just means remote working. Which can mean working on a beach, in a coffee shop, the library, a business centre or a co-working centre. Of course it all depends whether you need two screens or you make lots of calls etc.

If you rent a desk in a co-working centre it can be pricey, but may still be cheaper than commuting or having an office built in your garden. For example, there is a business centre about 10 minutes drive from my house which charges £25 a week for a desk. My local council offices have desks too but I am not sure how much they charge. Village Hotels have business centres but I think they are more expensive.

@Needanewhat yes good point! Not an employer I would ever want to work for or fit in with.
One of the things I love about mainly working from home is the lack of bullshit meetings. For some reason, even managers do not prioritise bullshit meetings where people only show off about what they know but serve no real purpose in terms of achieving work. When I used to work full-time in the office, I sat through so many useless meetings that achieved nothing.

A lot of companies are genuinely committed to wfh and most people seem to be in favour of it.
Vote with your feet.

@looptheloopinahulahoop

is it fair that someone should be allowed to wfh simply because they can afford to live somewhere that allows for an adequate setup compared to a colleague doing the exact same role who really wants to work from home but cant because they only have the kitchen table to perch on

In normal times WFH doesn't mean working from home, it just means remote working. Which can mean working on a beach, in a coffee shop, the library, a business centre or a co-working centre. Of course it all depends whether you need two screens or you make lots of calls etc.

If you rent a desk in a co-working centre it can be pricey, but may still be cheaper than commuting or having an office built in your garden. For example, there is a business centre about 10 minutes drive from my house which charges £25 a week for a desk. My local council offices have desks too but I am not sure how much they charge. Village Hotels have business centres but I think they are more expensive.

An employee should not have to pay to rent a desk. It might be cheaper for an employer to pay for that than provide an office. I think hybrid working is going to be the main way of working. I know my job where I used to work in the office is now looking at hybrid working and full office working for those who want it.

@looptheloopinahulahoop

is it fair that someone should be allowed to wfh simply because they can afford to live somewhere that allows for an adequate setup compared to a colleague doing the exact same role who really wants to work from home but cant because they only have the kitchen table to perch on

In normal times WFH doesn't mean working from home, it just means remote working. Which can mean working on a beach, in a coffee shop, the library, a business centre or a co-working centre. Of course it all depends whether you need two screens or you make lots of calls etc.

If you rent a desk in a co-working centre it can be pricey, but may still be cheaper than commuting or having an office built in your garden. For example, there is a business centre about 10 minutes drive from my house which charges £25 a week for a desk. My local council offices have desks too but I am not sure how much they charge. Village Hotels have business centres but I think they are more expensive.

It depends what work you do, its not always appropriate to be making calls or doing work in a public place that may be confidential. Also who on earth, unless self employed when there isn't necessarily an office to use for free would pay to rent a desk?

Interesting points raised around pollution of WFH vs commuting. Just done the sums and working on my house producing 3x the national average CO2 from heating it would produce an extra 15kg per month to heat it for an extra 8hrs per day. The commute 5 days a week produces 600kg per month of CO2 so environmentally at least for me it’s a no brainier.

OP I'd go back and at the same time look for a more progressive company to work for