Why are (some) people so against WFH?

[thistimenextyearwellbemillionaires]

I see so many threads on here about why people shouldn't be able to WFH and I don't really understand why people would be against it

For most people it seems make sense with their home life & financially as saving on commuting costs. When my children were young I was 5 days in the office and had to rush back from town to collect them and it was so stressful, it must be great for people not to have to do that now.

I know some people might take the piss a bit, but this happened when people were in the office full time too, there would always be someone always in late, leaving early etc.

I am lucky that my company is hybrid and no plans to change that. I've been offered another role recently which was a big pay rise but 5 days in the office and have decided to stay where I am. Where I work, whether you're in the office or at home you're expected to produce the same work and results and if you don't you'd be out so they're no slouch in terms of expectations of their employees.

Interested to know people's honest opinions.

I think it depends on what your job is. If it’s customer facing (albeit zoom / phones) then you need access to decent broadband, the files to do your job and no distractions. I have children with SEN and have had all kinds of problems getting hold of people (social services / council) who are working from home and then when I do speak to someone they don’t have files or their broadband is down so they can’t access them. So I’m not inherently against working from home I just think many employers aren’t really set up for it.

I don't WFH. But I don't think I want to. I like going out and coming back. I also know I would be faffing about at home. I'd just put the washing on. I've got two minutes to spray the sinks. Now I must just put this away... I'd get far less done without realising

My DH is like this so he goes into the office although he finds the travel expensive and time-consuming, but says overall he gets more done.

While I get loads done at home and my employer gets way more out of me because I am not wasting 3 hours a day travelling.

My job has always been remote. We have a small office in London the regional staff work from home and always have done. I would absolutely hate working in an office now. Very lucky that I work for four days and as long as I get all my work done it doesn't matter if I do two days one week and six the next. As my manager regularly says it's task based.
It works very well for me as I have a chronic illness so when I have a flare up I just take it easy for a couple of days then hammer it when I'm feeling better. I never had to miss a school play or parents evening.
The ones that it works really well for tend to be the older members of staff I do feel sorry for the younger members. They don't have the same social life that I used to have working and office in my twenties. I don't need to find friends through work anymore as I have loads already but for the young 20 year olds I think it can be quite lonely.
Also some of the younger ones take the piss as I absolutely would have at that age whereas now I am boring and reliable!

There’s usually several posts from women who do not work stating that WFH is outrageous because their husbands, who are very big important bosses, say it’s bad for business ergo we should all hot foot it back to the office now!

Or they are fed up with their DH acting like Big Billy Boss when at home and don't want him underfoot !

Some people are just deeply offended by the fact that other people have options not available to them.

@sharpclawedkitten - my DH is back in 3 days, the thing he enjoys most about it is his cycle to work, he really missed it. Because we split the week he normally is in on a Friday and he said he's quite often the only person in but actually I think he quite likes the quiet.

You're hybrid though. You still get to see colleagues and can presumably participate in any social events.

The reason I wfh is that when DHs job moved, my company wanted to keep me. Most of my colleagues are in California anyway, I used to visit the US office a fair bit but there's been no real justification for travelling for in person meetings for ages. I've never actually met my current manager despite us being on the same team for about 20 years, he was on holiday last time I was over there in about 2015.

Mine is probably an extreme case, but when I retire next year my guess is I'll basically just drop off everyone's radar.

I work from a company in Scotland and live in London, I met them once about 18 months ago. It's a new industry for me and a new job role too. I was trained and learned via zoom video meetings and loom videos of how to do things. I made the rest of the role up to suit myself really. There is one other remote worker, in a different country the rest of the team are in Scotland. The boss tries really hard to be fair but sometimes I do feel, as a member of the SLT that decisions have already been made before I am invited to the conversation which may or may not be true.

I work from home - I am self-employed and have been working from home exclusively for at least 15 years. The difference is that if I am not productive or slack off, I don't get paid.

Everyone claims they are more productive working from home, but on the other hand, we all have examples of shitty service because people were working from home, or hearing screaming kids and barking dogs on important calls. For every person who is doing loads of work, there is another doing as little as they can get away with.

It's not ideal for new starts into a company, not ideal for people who don't have a dedicated office space. WFH as the default was what we all had to do in the pandemic, if companies had seen that WFH had no impact on productivity and saved them money, everyone would still be doing it.

I do think this can be true - I sometimes wonder whether some of the posters saying what they do or don't get up to while WFH are posting in good faith.

This is the thing, I am the first to admit I'll put a load of washing on or give the house a quick vacuum in, what would be, my lunch hour but I am at my desk at 8 and am normally here until 6.30 whereas when I am at work I start at 9 and need to leave at 5.30 to get home.

I find hybrid working is best for me. Our team has 5 members. 3 work hybrid, 2 like being in the office all the time. The 2 who like the office could not be more different - one is calm, bit shy, single, very helpful and friendly. He almost never has days off but regularly takes Friday afternoons. The other is always uncalm, married, highly argumentative and books his blocks of leave off at the beginning of the leave year. He disapproves of everything- including the calm colleague’s approach to leave taking and wfh as a concept.

I’d actually say the disruptive colleague is both the reason I come into the office and the reason I don’t. He has to be managed and I do feel the calm colleague welcomes our supportful presence even though he can deal with trouble very effectively. I personally feel I get more done when wfh and would struggle to be effective if distracted every day by the annoying guy

I do think that some people who hate wfh, can't conceive how it might be better for others. They know they can't work that way so they think no one can, not understanding that we're all different.

The big argument is always people slacking off. But I've done that in the office enough times. Make coffee, chat to colleagues, go out for a cigarette, browse MN! On the odd occasion I've wasted a whole day doing nothing. Being physically present doesn't mean you're mentally present.

There's definitely an element of jealousy from some people. I admit I'd be jealous if I couldn't wfh.

I think it's the entitlement.

I've worked from home since 2014, at times full-time from home, now I am hybrid (to suit myself though) and I like that but there is such an entitlement to people these days thinking they should be able to work from home just because they want to.

It's hardly a short part of your life, 9 or 10 years with just one child. And most working parents have children 3+ years apart due to nursery fees.

I'd say even in secondary it's beneficial to be at home when your kids get home from school - not essential obviously, but nice if you can.

A huge number of companies have hybrid working or a flexible work from home culture though and people are entitled to work for an employer that suits them, why get annoyed about that?

For bosses like Elon Musk, it's just about control. He wants to enjoy the power of his minions having to give up something that works well for their life in order to appease him.

For some millionaires and billionaires (including those who own newspapers) it's because they have a lot of investment in commercial real estate, largely offices, and they are worried about that dropping in value.

For people like William Rees Mogg or some who have been retired for many years, they simply do not understand modern knowledge work and how it can be done from home quite easily. Also some of them just don't trust people.

@SnapdragonToadflax - totally agree. My children are at 6th form now and logistically they're very capable to looking after themselves when they come in from school but it's still nice being able to chat with them when they come in.

I can’t work from from home, but my partner does.

He is a director and absolutely hates it, thinks people should be in an office together, he also suspects that some people have their kids at home while working to save money on childcare and that just means they aren’t working 100%

Well if they want to and make decisions based on that surely it's fine? I want to WFH - so I got myself a WFH job. If they ever wanted me 'back' in the office regularly (they won't!) I would leave.

A few reasons I think.

Often it's just plain old jealousy. "I can't/didn't WFH so I don't want anyone else to benefit from that".

Sometimes there are genuine reasons why people don't like it in their workplace specifically, because it impacts their job or work/life balance (e.g. makes collaboration harder in specific circumstances, makes training difficult etc). But people don't object to WFH universally for this reason.

Then there's the bootlickers who think the international business-owning billionaires need them to be workplace prefects, sniffing out slackers and being cross because Debbie put a load of washing on at 11am on the company dime. These are the same people who are always up in arms at suggestions of billionaires being made to fork out more tax. Weird mindset that I can't understand at all and is generally underscored by a lack of intellect.

If you're in the public sector being paid from everyone else's taxes then you should be in the office

Why?? I'm public sector. I'm given a list of reports to write each week and I do them. I don't have any need to interact with anyone else. Why do I need to go and sit in an office to do that? I'm the top performing member of my team and have voluntarily taken on additional tasks. So I'm not slacking at home.

I don't like DH working from home more than one, at a push, 2 days a week. This is hypocritical though as we have to work in the same room (the only downstairs reception room, no studies or spare bedrooms) and it feels a little claustrophobic. We run a business together from home (so I work full time in that around the children (secondary age) where he works a full time job plus a few hours in home business) so I can't go elsewhere. I can concentrate better without him there as I can put on trashy TV or music and focus, where as he is on meeting a lot.

I think WFH is brilliant for people with space for a home office.

As a director, does he not have systems in place to measure productivity? Surely he knows if people are getting their job done or not.