Forced return to office - anyone else?

[Flexipecs]

My work has announced we’re all being forced back into the office two days a week. I’m a sole parent of primary school aged children (no help from ex). If I’m forced to go into the office I’ll have to reduce my working hours and I’ll be financially worse off.

I’m going to contact my union but has anyone else had this problem and did you successfully challenge it?

There’s zero benefit to me being in the office. My stats and performance are high. I actually think I’m more productive at home because I’m not being distracted so often. I’ve worked for the company for a very long time and I’m really disappointed at this decision (to put it mildly).

That makes sense to me, although it could be a political hot potato (if ever the public get to hear about it). There’s an irony in Britain’s National Health Service relying on ex-Commonwealth nationals to cover so many patient- and non-patient-facing jobs.

It's an idea that's been looked at on several occasions, going back many years, always concluded as likely to be an absolute disaster.

Why is it ironic? Since it's beginning in 1948, migrants have worked in the NHS. Absolutely nothing new.

What cake and what eating?

The OP and others can work perfectly well at home. Her productivity is high; if it wasn't her boss should've addressed separately. Expecting us to sacrifice our work/life balance and wellbeing on the altar of presenteeism is wholly unreasonable post COVID.

When I return from mat leave I'll do one day pw in the office. Two on occasion. Any more is counter productive; I lose 3 hours per day to the commute and no way am I going to get up earlier / stay at work later; I'll commit 8-6 as I do now, which means I'll get in at 9.30 and leave at 4.30

This thread is perplexing. There seems to be genuine venom at the idea of people working from home! My husband (NHS) has always had the option of working from home, many years prior to covid. He works very hard, does lots of unpaid hours.
Perhaps it's just a case of people judging by their own standards, and presuming that everyone who is WFH is a skiver!

@LaffTaff I'm sure your husband does work very hard, however there is a 'comfort' and certainly a safety aspect to being in your own home. It's not comparable to going into a patient facing role, especially at the start of COVID when there was so much donning and doffing and fear of patients transferring between wards and whether the vaccines should be mandatory and people staying in hotels so that their families wouldn't get sick.

They can't get any worse, the incompetence of payroll especially isn't to be underestimated.

It’s not suggesting all wfh is skiving but rather that wfh to avoid paying for and organising childcare isn’t going to work for companies as looking after children impacts the work you can do.

So why do you think they would be outsourced abroad when they haven't been already?

If you work from home while you have your kids at home, yes it affects the work you can do. MNers seem to be obsessed with that scenario though and apparently "every" contract forbids it (I've never had a contract that mentions it).

But in the OP's case it's about the commuting time - 2 hours a day. You can get a lot of work done in two hours, and you don't need (as much) wraparound care if you work from home or locally.

@ForestGoblin that's really interesting to hear. Even if it's in your contract that your work location is the office? Good to know.

All the people I know who WFH do significantly more than their contracted hours. However, on the days when they are in the office they tend to stick much more to their contracted hours.

Employers who think they are going to continue to get that free extra time and have people come into the office are deluding themselves.

Over three years of WFH is no longer temporary. If there is a problem with productivity then that needs to be addressed with the individuals.

I can provide a couple of reason why people don’t like the idea…

1. they’ve experienced greater work/life balance - it’s a nice short commute from the home office back to your living room.
2. they got additional time back in their day outside of work because of the above
3. they’ve saved money in travel costs
4. they’ve (substantially) saved money in childcare costs
5. re travel and childcare costs - were still in a cost of living crisis; high rents OR high mortgage payments, extortionate energy bills, high price of food costs and wages that have not risen inline with everything else that’s gone up.

There’s a few reasons for you.

Now I appreciate not everyone can work from home - for example, my partner is a nurse and HAS to go in and had no time off over covid. But I can, and I’d be annoyed for all the reasons above (though my working arrangement is hybrid, so 2 days in the office), but I’d be furious if it was back full time 100% as it wouldn’t be worth me working.

The observation about longer hours when wfh is certainly what I find with colleagues, and indeed with me on some days.

But why do you think trudging to the office makes you less replaceable? It doesn't change the nature of your work.

It's pointless posting about this on MN. It always goes the same way, mainly people who don't WFH claiming how everyone that does is taking the piss. I work for a large corporate and we will not be going back to mandated days in the office. In fact, we're having a great time bringing in people from our competitors who haven't caught up yet as people are placing flexibility above all else. The few companies I've seen try to do the 'return to the office' are ones with lease commitments who are worried about losing money. Nothing to do with their employees at all.

I read an article today saying that one of the larger law firms is going to make attendance in the office one of the criteria on which bonuses are decided.

Not sure how that fits in with diversity etc, as women are more likely to have caring responsibilities, older employees are more likely to have caring responsibilities or health conditions, anyone could be disabled.

And clients don't care where your bottom is placed when you do their work, they just want it done.

This!! My stance/thoughts too when we have staff saying they can't come in the office for various reasons ranging from health, social and childcare reasons.....what would you be doing regarding attendance had Covid not happened?

Quit.

Apologies, didn’t quote correctly.

Quit.

I think that’s a really interesting thing to say so a couple of things to note, and I say this as a single parent who had no support, and a manager who runs a service.

Your childcare issues aren’t their problem. They have a business to run and they pay you to do it. You agreed to the terms and if you want different terms, there is a process to ask them to change. They have to consider flexible working but ultimately, if they need you to work in the office a couple of days, it is probably because, despite what you’re saying, there is an issue. I imagine it is one that relates to teams being connected, interpersonal support and possibly any number of other business related issues.

I get that it’s really hard for you (I genuinely do, I’ve done it). Cost of living increases are affecting everyone- that includes your company! There is definitely scope for you to ask for a change, and you should, but if they say no, chances are it’s for a reason. We had to do a similar thing a few years ago and it was tricky- with a real divide from staff about wanting to come in. We now have a hybrid policy and contracts were changed to reflect this, but we do have an expectation that people come into the office a minimum number of days a week (pro rata).

Ultimately, business need and what suits your family life are very separate. They aren’t trying to be mean, if their business doesn’t work, you might not have a job at all!

Just a thought but would those who enjoy the benefits of WFH be willing to accept a pay cut? They are saving not only time but also money in not paying for a commute or potentially childcare that they had to pay for pre covid.
Those who cannot WFH due to their job are not receiving bigger pay rises or additional annual leave to put them on a par.

Your lucky having WFH all this time. Some people havnt got jobs where you can WFH and never have and have to pay childcare and expensive travel. It is the real world and I think everybody should get back to work and stop bloody moaning I bet before covid you never worked from home. Did you take the job because you were going to work from home I bet not.

Working from home might be better for you in many ways but your employer is more interested in what's best for the business (or department).

I met a young person last week who started a graduate trainee job during lockdown. He thought it was going really well and he was getting good feedback. After a few months they went back to the office and he realised that what the job actually required IRL was subtly different in many ways to what we was learning from textbooks, Zoom meeting and training videos.

He said he learned more in 3 days in the office watching and listening as more experienced (and often much less highly qualified) staff got on with their day and interacted with colleagues, clients and service providers than he learned in 6 months diligent hard work at home.

Should people who work in the office get different pay based on their commute? By your logic, someone who can walk five minutes to work should be paid less than someone who has to spend £5 a day and an hour each way on buses and trains.

Should people working from home get a portion of their gas, electric, and water bills paid by their employer? Those in the office don't need to pay to power their laptops or make a cup of tea.