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?

[Egghead81]

Talk about productivity levels is irrelevant

The pandemic period was utterly artificial for overwhelmingly number of businesses

No decision maker in their right mind with look at productivity levels during the last 18 months and put any great store against them.

I’d be saying.... we are going to give WFH a go for 6 months starting from now and measure production during this period and then make a decision.
And this decision will not be set on stone. Liable to change in accordance with productivity levels

[NothingIsWrong]

@DownyEmerald

I haven't RTFT but would imagine that companies that don't offer flexible working will be less attractive. And people will leave. My employer has been very clear that flexible/agile working is the way forward (already had work life balance policies - I've WFH for one of my 3 days a wk since mat leave 14 years ago).

Played a huge part in my staying with employer.

My very recently ex employer was inflexible the other way. No office ever, permanent WFH despite the fact that for what I did for them was not as productive.

Hence why they are an ex employer.

[Oblomov21]

Egghead, I disagree, why are the results from the last 12 months insignificant.

Facts are facts. This is how much you've produced in the last year. What type reasons are, whether it's covid related or not, are surely secondary.

Or alternatively, if you are relating it to covid, then surely what you will produce in the next 6 months, seeing as we are still in a pandemic is equally affected.

Why would you ignore the last 12 months data, but only review and make decisions, once you've got the next 6 months data?

[Egghead81]

You would precisely ignore data of it was based on a situation that is not the case going forward

My ex husband is very senior. He is a decision maker at a huge (10000) international (but he’s senior in the UK contravention which has 1500) I asked him what their policy was WFH.
He said basically what I regurgitated here.
He also said that the investment banks and similar were also doing the same.
Going to give it 6 months / a year and then make a decision but make clear that it is not a decision set in stone

Makes total sense

Depends what industry you’re in perhaps. This is finance / insurance / banking

[Egghead81]

Facts are facts. This is how much you've produced in the last year. What type reasons are, whether it's covid related or not, are surely secondary.

The environment in which you were operating can’t be described as “secondary” surely?! Very very “material”

[Dontforgetyourbrolly]

Look for another job

[Irishterrier]

People say they are more productive wfh but that's mostly just not true. Every single company/public sector I have dealt with since March 2020 has been worse than before.

I suggest you go and get another job.

We are back in the office and it's GREAT. Productivity shooting up, with collaboration and communication so much easier. No more endless setting up zooms - you just walk over and ask a couple of people a question quickly.

[Porridgeislife]

Why would you ignore the last 12 months data, but only review and make decisions, once you've got the next 6 months data?

Because we will (hopefully) never repeat a period in our lifetimes where we were forced to stay at home & children weren’t at school. Most businesses were operating to “keep the lights on”, certainly between March and September.

People don’t perform their jobs in a vacuum & employers will need to understand how part WFH/part office routines work practically in a normal world from a productivity perspective.

[Egghead81]

@Porridgeislife

Why would you ignore the last 12 months data, but only review and make decisions, once you've got the next 6 months data?

Because we will (hopefully) never repeat a period in our lifetimes where we were forced to stay at home & children weren’t at school. Most businesses were operating to “keep the lights on”, certainly between March and September.

People don’t perform their jobs in a vacuum & employers will need to understand how part WFH/part office routines work practically in a normal world from a productivity perspective.

This

[year5teacher]

@Lizzie523

This was also published in The Guardian yesterday:

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/18/the-guardian-view-on-working-from-home-a-new-social-divide

The comments reflect a lot of what has been said here

This article is fair enough, and I feel that flexible working should be the way forward where possible. However, the complaints about commuting and having to wear work clothes are going to understandably fall on deaf ears of those of us who actually have been going to work throughout the pandemic.

[Bourbonandcoke]

WFH is great, can get a load of house/personal stuff done.

[IrmaFayLear]

I hope your employer is on to you soon....

[UserAtRandom]

WFH was also artificial for some businesses in that it created changed patterns of behaviour that were artificial (for example, supermarkets seeing higher sales than they would normally do due to more people eating at home).
My organisation is reporting the last year entirely separately from other years, as the trends from last year are totally out of step from the normal demands of the business. It's estimating going forward on the basis that things may return more to "normal". But it does mean judging productivity over the last year only gives a false picture.

[IrmaFayLear]

Productivity is difficult to measure. Of course some jobs can be done from home no sweat. Especially if you have been doing that job for ages. But even so I know people who say that although they can wfh and are now required to, they find it difficult to keep motivated hour after hour, particularly when they live alone. If your job is a bit mundane then keeping engaged will be hard with no distractions except for endless surfing of the net on another screen.

[astery]

@IrmaFayLear is about the design of jobs. Boring mundane jobs are boring in an office as well.
And I really do not understand why productivity is so difficult to measure. Every job I have had I have targets. This is routine now. Unless you are a pa type person who is responsive directly to an individual, someone should be involved in setting your work targets.
Sure this does not directly relate to productivity. But if person A can achieve their targets wfh that they were achieving in the office, then surely that si what matters?

[astery]

@useratrandom Yes, that makes sense with measures such as volume of sales. Where I work we were not able to do about 80% of our business for some time.
But you can still measure the efficiency of what is happening. So it would take time to increase volume of deliveries. But you can still measure customer satisfaction, levels of substitutions, late deliveries, etc.

[poppycat10]

People say they are more productive wfh but that's mostly just not true. Every single company/public sector I have dealt with since March 2020 has been worse than before

I'd place a bet on that being down to furloughing staff and nothing to do with where the staff are working.

If staff are working from home and don't have adequate tech 15 months in, that's nothing to do with the staff and everything to do with the employer.

[astery]

Most places have cut staff or given them more work. I am sure people who contact the company my DP works for say this. They are virtually all working from home. But mass cuts throughout with one-third of my DPs team cut, and no reduction in workload. Yes the quality of customer service has dropped. As you would expect. And the company blame it on people wfh rather than saying we have cut the number of staff drastically.

[Egghead81]

@IrmaFayLear

Productivity is difficult to measure. Of course some jobs can be done from home no sweat. Especially if you have been doing that job for ages. But even so I know people who say that although they can wfh and are now required to, they find it difficult to keep motivated hour after hour, particularly when they live alone. If your job is a bit mundane then keeping engaged will be hard with no distractions except for endless surfing of the net on another screen.

The bottom line is in finance is... the bottom line.

That is how productivity is measured.

Boards don’t give a hoot about whether someone was trying really hard but after an extended period nothing to show for it.

So that is how huge swathes of the finance industry will measure productivity. Hence lockdown not being appropriate period for measurement.

[DeadlyMedally]

I don't see a hybrid model working. There will be a drift to either mostly wfh or mostly office +most likely office).
The "hybrid model" is an example of compromise that just makes both sides miserable.
Take the scenario of a person who believes office work is better for collaboration.
You have a model where certain teams are in on certain days or every team has some members in each day.
Unless you have a method of scheduling which ensures that the people who need to informally collaborate with eachother are always in on the same days, this will not be fit for purpose.
For people who like to wfh, the idea that they come in a couple of days a week "just because" will actually make the "presenteeism" even more onerous. They will likely feel that those few days exist simply because employers want to exercise their ability to dictate that they are at a certain physical location at a certain times regardles of necessity.
Personally, I'm on the wfh side. I think Teams meeting are fine and I like that someone can't just come up to my desknand interrupt my flow to force me to pay attention to whatever they deem to be important (in my office days, I'd usual tell them I'm busy and ask them to send a meeting invite anyway).

[TheKeatingFive]

I don't see a hybrid model working. There will be a drift to either mostly wfh or mostly office +most likely office).

I totally agree with you. The logistics of managing it to everyone’s satisfaction and getting the balance right in terms of team interaction will be really difficult and ultimately managers will decide they could do without the hassle.

I give it 18 months and we’ll be back to 2019 working patterns with maybe 1day flexibility wfh if we’re lucky.

[MiddleParking]

The "hybrid model" is an example of compromise that just makes both sides miserable.

Not the side paying for the office space, though, which is usually the deciding vote. Hybrid flexible working is a pain in the arse, but I think it’s a least worst option compared to the inflexibility/inadequacy of full time WFH or the expense of permanent on-site working.

[UserAtRandom]

Personally, I'm on the wfh side. I think Teams meeting are fine and I like that someone can't just come up to my desknand interrupt my flow to force me to pay attention to whatever they deem to be important (in my office days, I'd usual tell them I'm busy and ask them to send a meeting invite anyway).

You see the flip side of this is where you have my job which requires you to ask lots of questions of different people that might only require a 2 minute conversation. When in the office, I could see if people were in the middle of something and know not to disturb them or I could see that they were chatting about the football so I wasn't interrupting their train of thought. Or I could grab them for 2 minutes after a physical meeting.
Having to do this virtually is a nightmare. I have no idea if people are disturbable or not, and it's too easy for colleagues to ignore my emails, IMs and meeting invites. I would estimate that what used to be a 2 minute office conversation can now be up to an hour of me constantly chasing people to reply. Not to mention that I now have to juggle increasing amounts of stuff as I have to keep track of all the things I'm waiting for an answer on.

[TheKeatingFive]

Not the side paying for the office space, though, which is usually the deciding vote

I think that’s such a red herring. The expense of space is neither here nor there if the company loses competitiveness because of its lack. Companies always had the option of limiting office space or moving to cheaper locations. There’s a reason why they didn’t take it.

[DeadlyMedally]

@MiddleParking

The "hybrid model" is an example of compromise that just makes both sides miserable.

Not the side paying for the office space, though, which is usually the deciding vote. Hybrid flexible working is a pain in the arse, but I think it’s a least worst option compared to the inflexibility/inadequacy of full time WFH or the expense of permanent on-site working.

I think it will be some time before companies are comfortable enough to outright get rid of office space though. That would come after some confirmation of a significant shift towards home working.
It's another example of how the hybrid is unlikely to work as, for some significant period until the dust has cleared, companies will be paying for a partially occupied and partially utilised building.