Just had a rather interesting argument at work...

[YouSaffBridge]

We work for a pretty large firm, as part of a team of 10 people. Working from home is allowed within the firm - some more senior people do it when they want to, other people have negotiated it as part of their contract. IT etc is all set up to allow complete WFH.

WHF is not part of any of all of our team's contract but our manager is happy to allow it occasionally. One of us WHF one set day a week. Others do it occasionally. Reasons generally include standard things like waiting for large deliveries and workmen and attending doctors appointments. This has also included less urgent things like attending a child's school play, a vet appointment, and half day WHF when juggling caring for an ill child (i.e. both parents doing half days from home).

Our manager is fine with this. Our work couldn't be done all the time from home, but it can be done a lot. I imagine she sees it as part of treating her team like adults and acknowledging we all have lives as well.

At a team meeting this morning (without manager, which is probably relevant) one member of staff kicked off about it. They feel it is unfair that some people can just WHF with little notice. Their main issues as that they cannot, or do not need to, WHF. They don't have a laptop or PC at home they can work on, don't have any dependents that might need care (childcare, vets etc) and live in a rented property so don't need to stay in for tradesman. Individual concerned is very irate and even threw the word "discriminatory" into the conversation.

I can slightly see their point as some reasons for WHF are far less important or urgent than others (want to see your kids play? take a half day). However, when any of us ask to WHF, our manager could always say no if it is a problem - and does not. Most of the rest of the team operate on a "don't ask, don't get" mentality. There is no reason why this individual could not ask to WHF, or as IT if they can borrow a work laptop.

WIBU - is our team discriminatory, or are they U for complaining?

&LordBrightside*

"It's like people who get vexed by people having extra breaks or fag breaks or whatever. I don't smoke but I just don't care if some colleagues have a fag. I'll often sit and have a coffee in the office and just chat."

I've found from that those that get vexed are those that pick up the slack caused by the extra breaks.

"I've found from that those that get vexed are those that pick up the slack caused by the extra breaks."

They need to get a grip.

How do you know unless someone is telling you something that you shouldn't know

I guess because we're a small team. I can't answer for how it works in other firms but we all tend to chat to each other before requesting things like holiday, WFH etc to ensure that no one else has anything planned.

The only people who were allowed to wfh or have flexible hours (for school drop off and pick ups) are parents (normally mums) in my last job. I was denied wfh or a later start (my reason was distance to the office, 5 hour round trip). Seemed very unfair to me.

That's really unfair, Janey

That is outrageous and discriminatory, Janey. I'd have kicked off about that.

Colleague sounds like a bit of an idiot, why doesn't he or she just ask to WFH in odd time, either take a laptop home or buy one?
Sounds like a non issue.
Where I work anyone can WFH, you don't need a reason (although often people will give one - not feeling 100%, want to finish early and avoid commute, child care issues, school holidays, meeting a delivery/ tradesperson etc etc, sometimes just "couldn't be arsed coming in and need a quiet day on the sofa working on a document or doing research")..

LordBrightside

What they need to do, is let those that CBA to do the job fail.

Working from home and flexible working are really good ways to keep a workforce motivated, and for people to balance their lives. But there should be a clear and fair policy, it should be open to all and have some sensible limits. However, as each job is different, some jobs are more amenable to working from home than others, so the last say should be from the persons manager. If the person feels that this is unreasonable, they could appeal to HR.

For example - there could be various flexible options - 9 day fortnights (squashing 10 days into 9) or term time only. These would have to be able to be done without compromising the persons job specification.

Working from home - example - each person entitled to up to 10% of working time from home. However, would need to be contactable at all times by phone and email - secure log ins to the work servers could be set up. There could be a shared laptop for home use only. Hours would need to be agreed in advance with at least X amount of notice.

So people who are trying to juggle the normal things in life - childcare, house repairs, vets etc - while working f/t and commuting "CBA to do the job"?

YouSaffBridge

was posted in response to Brightside.

Agree with everyone else about the colleague - he needs to get off his backside and ask to WFH, not moan about it.

Lurking There's no reason a user would know the acronym VPN if they WFH - they just get shown how to connect remotely. If the IT department have the nous to introduce a three-stage authentication process (which it sounds like the company have) then it's probably fair to say they're likely to have a VPN covered.

They don't have a laptop or PC at home they can work on

and it's an IT job he does??

We have a similar set up in my team once you reach a certain level of seniority. My boss is happy for folk to WFH to go to nativity plays, doctor's appointments etc. I like that we can be open about it.

It is a given that you make up the time. the type of work we do there's no one to pick up the slack anyway so would be obvious if you were skiving.

Yousaff - so, is it a male or female colleague then?

No, it's not an IT job we do.

Thumb - actually, female. But I found it fascinating everyone assumed they were male!

Well I'm happy to call her a petty dick too, y'know, for the sake of equality

I worked in an international team where working from somewhere other than one's regular desk was normal. People could be anywhere in Europe so if you wanted someone you just picked up your mobile and called them (and asked what the weather was like).

I moved to another team within the same company. This other team found WFAOTYD (Working From Anywhere Other Than Your Desk) to be totally alien. Out of sight meant out of mind. It was a very old fashioned team which was an attitude which came from the top.

Perhaps your colleague has come from the second sort of team and perceives that people WFH are not working at all so enjoying an undeserved perk.

It couldn't possibly be discriminatory unless she's been told she can't do it. Not finding the need to do it is irrelevant nonsense.

Is VPN when you use a 'dongle' (I love that word)

"Dongle" can mean 2 things ...

1. a 3/4G mobile data connection. You plug it into your PC (laptop) and it uses the mobile data network to provide you with internet access, for when you are out of the office with no WiFi.

2. (incorrectly, but colloquially) a two factor authentication device whereby you go to access a remote resource over the internet, and as well as prompting you for a username/password combination, you are asked a "key" (typically 6 numbers) which the dongle generates and displays on a little LCD display.

(Two-factor authentication requires something you know plus something you have - like the online banking sites that provide a card reader you need to log in with).

either meaning might suggest a VPN (Virtual Private Network) underpinning the connection. Depending on provider, and machine/network configuration. It could be made seamless, such that the end user was unaware, if needed.

Every employee able to WFH at my employers is given a briefing document and demonstration explaining what a VPN is - no matter what their role. (I suspect our CEO likes to be able to drop "and what does this mean for the VPN ?" into meetings when he's bored). Not my decision - our 100+ security team decision (they take security very seriously). For various reasons we are regulated every which way but loose, and any data breach would be viewed as catastrophic (since we are dealing with peoples money). If it was only personal details, we could relax things a lot, and take our lead from the public services of the UK (sarcasm alert). If nothing else

For me, WFH was like a massive pay rise. Not only did I not have to buy fuel every week. I lost the 1-2 hour/day commute, and get paid to go into the office(s) around the country. So I take it as a great privilege, and happily put a few hours extra in, so it's a 2-way street. Not sure if it's something my employer would have arrived at independently, but there's nothing like seeing how much a desk space in an office costs, to concentrate the mind. (Currently, we have about 200 designated homeworkers, with about 10 spare desks in Head Office). Also, traditionally, the industry I work in has been needlessly geographically centred on London. By some clever IT twists (blushes) we have managed to devolve that need, and can hire the best across Europe, if needed.

Never say never, and all that, but I would be very wary of a non-WFH role, even if the pay was double.

FWIW, I like "dongle" too. Incredibly, it sounds more techno than "doodah, whatchmecallit, and oojimaflip" . And "2FA key generator" sounds like I'm auditioning for Star Trek. Or the Clangers.

I know, Alas, I get so much more work done too (no quips about me being on MN at the moment, please ). The simple concentration without picking up other people's phones and the bloody duplex printing going 10 to the dozen next to us...

Interestingly, we're in the middle of a bit of "big thinking" (yes, I know) about the team and how we serve the firm and changing our working hours is part of the conversation. Which means a discussion of more flexible working and WFH - especially if you accept that WFH cuts out the commute and makes people available for longer. I can't entirely see how this colleague is going to respond well to this!

Interesting responses though, thank you. They do have a tendency to moan but this one struck me as, potentially, actually a bit legitimate.

It lots of ways it seems better if you can log in via your personal computer, because you don't have to know in advance that way. If you are feeling a bit unwell one day - well enough to be able to work, but not wanting to infect your colleages, or if you need a doctor appointment at fairly short notice, but it's not enough to stop you working, or you need to stay home with a sick child who spends most of the day sleeping, or you need to wait in for the plumber to fix a sudden emergency, etc., you won't know in advance to make sure you have the work laptop with you, or to book it out ahead of time, etc. And it's in those short-term crisis kind of days that I can imagine WFH really makes people's lives easier (along with the being able to change your pattern of work/hours/commute to factor in nativity plays/routine appts/etc that you do know about in advance). So it seems much handier to be able to use your own equipment, as you can do it without notice (or if you want to do overtime, for example, to meet a last minute deadline, and you are happy to do it on an evening - but don't want to stay at the office, instead coming back to it after children are in bed, on your own computer).

Exactly - most of our requests are short notice because something urgent has cropped up. Maybe that's colleague's issue?

Shame no one in the meeting asked the employee if they had ever been refused. If they said they hadn't asked that would piss on their bonfire straight away. I can't work from home but I am in a team that works to cover rotating shifts - our rule is everyone can have 2 preference requests per month, any above that is at your manager's discretion or for you to agree a swap with a colleague. People without kids/houses ask too - eg the young lad who requested not to work the day after a big party (sensible lol!)