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.

Because we live in a capitalist society and the rules of supply and demand apply. You don't get 2019 back just because you want it.

The buildings themselves don't do the work, you need people physically in them. People in lower paid customer service roles often have more options than they did 5 years ago. A council can refuse to allow remote working, but they can't stop staff from leaving to customer service roles that do. There have been customer service and call centre recruiting staff on MN before who've explained that this is the way to get roles filled.

There's also the practical issues. The structural support for travelling into workplaces like childcare, elder care and public transport that some people relied on in 2019 isn't necessarily there in 2024 either.

But I don't want my taxes spent on expensive office premises, or my civil servants wasting time chatting to colleagues. If anything it's more important that public servants work in the most effective way.

I don't see how default office working is automatically considered the best.

I think it's mainly older people who hate change and people who have never WFH and don't have jobs where they can WFH who are a bit jealous and are against it, and also rubbish managers who think their employees need to be constantly supervised.
I have worked hybrid since covid, the flexibility is great and I don't take the piss. It's had no effect on productivity at my company and employees are generally happier because they have more flexibility and are travelling less. People who hate WFH can do every day on site if they want to, 2 people on my team wanted this and were given permanent desk space, no issue.
I think it's the future, much better for the environment.
I know some city centre businesses have suffered but the flip side of that is local cafes & shops will be better off because of people getting lunch there instead of near their offices.

This is an important point and it's one I can see being made more as Labour attempt to make further cuts.

Public sector premises for staff who already have the equipment to work remotely is one obvious option. The narrative over the past few years has been entitled civil servants too lazy to get back into the office. Could easily enough switch to entitled civil servants expecting the taxpayer to pay for their desks and heating their offices.

I work in a small department of just my manager and I so it works excellently. All I do is handle forms and emails and excel sheets, which can easily be done from my living room. I go in twice a week to collect any post and scan/print things, but I’m alone in the office those days too as my manager works elsewhere usually.

I started in 2023 and worked in office with my manager for 6 months. I completely agree with PP that WFH is torturous when trying to onboard new/junior people. They constantly have to ping or call for questions, rather than being next to you. It’s also torture to be the new starter as you don’t know who to turn to, feel like you’re constantly disturbing people, and it can be very isolating. I’m glad I was able to learn in the office and then get more flexibility as I got more comfortable.

I did 6 months WFH during Covid and hated it.

I just can’t motivate myself when working from home. I faff about all day and end up working until midnight.

That said, I don’t care what other people do. It doesn’t work for me, but does work for others.

The only thing that annoys me, is when people working from home expect the world to revolve around them - I have a neighbour who works from home and expects the rest of us to live in silence so we don’t interrupt his teams meetings - another neighbour was having some building work done and he kicked off, he’s always moaning about kids playing out, I cut our grass one day in the summer when I had a day off work and he came round hammering on my door. Another neighbour working from home shuts her constantly barking dogs out in her garden and expects the rest of us to put up with their barking because they ‘disturb’ her.

I think it's jealousy, and a warped understanding of what people who WFH 'actually do'.

Definitely. I go into the office twice per week, and spend the rest of the week at home. Hybrid is perfect for me. Also, I think many people confuse hybrid with completely WFH. You get regular articles in the press about people being forced back into the office, and when you read the detail, they're only being asked to go in twice per week (hardly a big deal unless, of course, you were employed on a fully remote contract).

I think it's a combination of misery loves company "well, I struggled/suffered so now it's your turn" and needy people who can't bare to be on their own all day so we must supply them with company even if it comes at the expense of our own sanity and productivity.

Finally, I think they are trying to justify the quiet layoffs by blaming the people who are suddenly put in an awful position which is not sustainable, forcing them to quit.

Ha, define older - I'm in my 50s and love it!

I could wfh. I choose not to. So I’m not jealous. I’m glad I don’t have to because I hated it when I did it.

I say each to their own. It’s not for me.

It works brilliantly for me and has done for several years. My team are largely abroad anyway and it allows me to do the school pickups and drop offs easily. I work from 9am till 8pm as i tend to overcompensate for being 'allowed' to wfh. Id say none of our teams take the piss whereas when i read mumsnet, it sounds like many do. The downside is the social aspect and i wouldnt have taken a role like this when i was child free/younger. But as a single parent, its ideal. If i had to go into the office, id need to drop the kids at club about half 7, then leave on the dot at 5, taking 2hrs to get back into the house.

That's fair enough to be pissed off. Some people use their remote working as a means to be a dickhead.

Why should the taxpayer pay to heat and maintain office premises when public sector staff could be WFH?

This.

I was reading through the thread and thinking the opposite.
Most people are putting a balanced discussion on pros and cons.

Except the people whose conclusion that anyone who is against is simply jealous.
It's a rather silly assumption, and shows they haven't been reading/listening to the discussion.

As an ex employer (retired now) I'm actually very much in favour of WFH, which is an excellent concept where it works

It's where it doesn't that I become against it, and the reason for that is ... experience

OP, are you WFH today?

@loropianalover

I completely agree with PP that WFH is torturous when trying to onboard new/junior people. They constantly have to ping or call for questions, rather than being next to you. It’s also torture to be the new starter as you don’t know who to turn to, feel like you’re constantly disturbing people, and it can be very isolating. I’m glad I was able to learn in the office and then get more flexibility as I got more comfortable.

I think this is the biggest issue really. When I first started working, my desk was adjoining a senior guy who was tasked to train me. He was busy with his own work. I could see when he was busy or stressed and would avoid asking him stuff if I could, and then ask when he had a quiet time. It worked really well as I tried my utmost not to constant disturb him when he was clearly thinking or struggling with something. I'd have hated to have been constantly pinging him whenever I had a query and I presume he'd have hated the constant disturbances. As it was, we got into a rhythm of me making a list of queries and asking him just a few times per day when he was having a break or between calls, etc.

My son is in a graduate training scheme at the UK's biggest insurance/pension firm. He hates the WFH (they have to work 2 days per week at home) and far prefers the 3 days in the office, but even that is problematic as it's always a random rotation of other staff, bosses, etc., so there's no continuity and he's often told different things by different people when he asks for help/advice, etc. He's saying his training is glacially slow because of that and a lot of the time, whether at home or work, he's twiddling his thumbs whilst waiting for "Pings" back from his line management which is worse because he doesn't know whether to expect a reply imminently or whether they're busy with something and won't reply for a few hours. If he'd been sat within sight of them, he'd see what they were doing and could gauge response times, etc.

So, yes, I agree with others re the problems with training young and new staff. That's definitely something that will come back and bite organisations on the arse in years to come when the more experienced/older staff leave or retire and the younger ones just havn't got up to speed within the usual training/experience cycles.

I imagine work from home is great if you’ve got kids and a nice house. As a recent graduate where you live in a crowded noisy house share, in a completely new place, and want to go into the office to learn from superiors and meet colleagues it’s quite isolating. Additionally when I was looking for experience I tried to get work just shadowing people/ bringing coffee but couldn’t because everyone was working from home. Not against it totally but I want to be in an office!

I think the social isolation aspect is important. I’m a recovering agoraphobic, and I absolutely couldn’t work from home without slipping back into agoraphobia and severe depression.

That said - I’m not anti-WFH for others. I do have some reservations about the world going forward generally. We’re a social species, and more and more, youngsters are growing up with fewer social skills than previous generations. I don’t think a world where people spend the majority of their time in front of a screen from childhood for the rest of their lives is going to turn out well for anyone.

Friend works for a big bank after lockdowns her team were instructed to highlight productivity or lack of it in WFH employees . There were redundancies/dismissals. There was also financial reward for those that coped well.

This is the answer.

I work in Product for a large bank. WFH works from me, because regardless of where I am, I am largely in charge of my own workdays and agendas - I'm not customer facing so I can block out large swathes of time to complete XYZ for example. It works for me, and people in roles like mine.

However - as a bank, there are obviously lots of contact centre staff. WFH is ok when you're an experienced member of staff...but most aren't. The nature is that there is a high turnover. And being in a fast-paced environment, at home, without direct support (Teams is not an adequate replacement for a floorwalker) really doesn't work well. Training requirements for roles don't work well on Teams IMO; too easy to be distracted.

As an aside, during Covid when everyone was quickly transitioned to WFH, we did have more than one occasion with complaints of customers being connected to agents who were audibly asleep!

I also think that younger, less experienced members of staff should be encouraged to come into the office - partly because they need that interaction; many of them are not learning how to behave in more formal environment.

Also those that don't take the piss just can't imagine that some people would!

I am public sector, all my hours are billable so no sitting on my arse for me when I WFH (one day per week). My time sheet is recorded every 15 minuets. Also, I dont use instant coffee, milk etc or put my desk fan on if I am WFH, thereby saving the taxpayer money.

That depends of the flip side which is the "cost" of poorer efficiency, mistakes, lack of training opportunities, etc.

For example, I'm finding I'm having to make several calls to HMRC to get things done which previously would have been done in one or two calls. That means HMRC will need to employ more people, or spend money on better training/higher quality staff, otherwise they'll have a never ending increase in calls needing to be handled. That costs money. Probably more than any saving in office rent.

That's simply because the staff I finally get to talk to either can't or don't do what is necessary to solve the issue I'm phoning about.

I don't know the answer but it's rife on MN!

Surely it must be envy from those who can't WFH? Because if you can and you just don't like it then why such vitriol?

The automatic assumption that WFH equals free childcare grinds my gears. I literally don't know anyone in my circle who would even attempt it - it's impossible!