WFH - am I entitled to a lunch break today?

[millerjane]

I've been lucky enough to work from home during this pandemic. All morning I've been unable to sign in due to a network wide issue (according to the IT help desk). It appears I'm the only person in my team having this issue. Whilst I've been unable to work I have had to message/speak to the IT people and follow their instructions. So obviously I haven;t been working as normal.

But am I entitled to have an hour lunch despite this? Manager just rang me and seemed annoyed when I asked her to ring back in 20 minutes as I was in the middle of lunch (consists of going for a walk and eating my sarnie).

AIBU?

I did do some work offline in Excel not a lot but I wasn't sat in front of the tv or anything

I would always prioritise my boss/work over a walk and a sandwich. YABU.

I would always prioritise my boss/work over a walk and a sandwich

So you wouldn't take a lunch break ever?

OP, your boss might be annoyed but 20 minutes isn't a long time to wait. In the future, it's best to just not answer the phone at times when you aren't available to talk.

20 minutes isn't an unreasonable time to be uncontactable. It's how long many of my colleagues spend in the toilet at a time.

I personally would have taken the call. Particularly as you say you're in a grad scheme and u sure how it works which signals yiure relatively new? Tbh when I first started I was eager to please. Still am really. You could have had the chat and then had your lunch afterwards. Ringing and speaking to it - not your fault it was down so I'd put the hours on timesbeet but it wasn't actual work. How come you didnt eat in between? Also lunch breaks arent sacred. I.may be biased as I run groups all day and if I'm hungry but have notes to complete and a meeting right afterwards then I'm eating my lunch either afterwards or taking bites in between typing. Keeping boundaries is important but that's more around work phone off at 5, not checking emails on weekend etc, not refusing to talk to manager over lunch.

If you have been in contact with work all morning - i.e. on calls/on hold with IT etc, then you have, in fact, been working. That you haven't been completing your normal tasks is not your fault.

If, however, you called in at 10, were told there was nothing doing till 12 and have since been twiddling your thumbs for two hours, but now expect to take your break even though you have had two hours and could now start clearing the backlog, you're a bit out of order and inflexible.

Only you know which of the two scenarios is closer, but even in the first, it would be more diplomatic to shorten the break to the time needed to eat and then crack on, as you can always go walkies later on.

Wouldn't bother me if someone I managed did this but it does depend how you said it.

If you said "I've just popped out for a walk over lunchtime so not at my computer - could I ring you back in 20 mins or so when I'm back at my desk?" then fine.

If you said "I'm on my lunch break. Please phone back in 20 minutes." then I'd think you were a bit inflexible.

It seems very inflexible. Why did your lunch have to be at that moment?

I would’ve taken the call and delayed my lunch, but that’s more because my boss only ever has a few free windows a day whereas my diary isn’t as flexible.

*is more flexible

Of course you are entitled to a lunch break but on this occasion I would have taken the call and taken a break later.
If your boss had asked to speak to you as you were about to take a break while in the office would you have told them to go away?

I’m with your boss on this one I’m afraid

You're entitled to a lunch break but to have to take it at a fixed time seems a bit inflexible. Unless of course there's a reason you have to - for example meetings scheduled that mean its the only 20 mins you would have in the day.
I'm a big believer in making sure you step away and have a break but most jobs I have had do require some degree of flexibility in when you take breaks.

If you were in the office all morning unable to do anything due to an IT failure you wouldn't have to work through lunch to make it up - that's how being an employee works. The IT screw up is your boss's problem not yours.

If you were a contractor on the other hand, then yes you would have had to compensate because you'd only get paid for hours worked.

Just because some posters have unhealthy boundaries doesn't make it normal.

Ha. Our company takes the stance that you have flexibility at home so your lunch is on your time. So if I have an 8hr day and take a 30 min lunch I'm actually unavailable from 7-330 instead of 7-3

Yes you're entitled to a break. But I'd have just taken the call regardless and moved my lunch break back to later in the afternoon if it was me.

I personally don't like to work on my lunch break for the sake of my mental well being (on medication for depression and anxiety/eating disorder).

Once wouldn't have killed you.

I just want to maintain my boundaries.

You don't get boundaries on a Grad Scheme. This is the point in your career where you prove yourself a team player and be flexible with your time.

I would have taken the call, and had lunch afterwards. You should have thought about what’s more important, having the sandwich and walk right that minute or making a good impression on your boss?

Also you can walk and speak? So it wouldnt have really disturbed you I guess

You’re on a grad scheme?
You’re daft.
You take the call. You eat your lunch after. I’m with your boss.

I might not have answered my phone and let it go to voicemail but I would not answer it then ask someone to call back whether they were my boss or not. Answering indicated you were available

Have you just come off several weeks of furlough? If I had had several essentially paid weeks off, I wouldn’t begrudge working extra or through my lunch break at first to show my work ethic and support. I would have taken the call and then taken my downtime after. If you were the only one with a system problem, IT and your manager were probably trying to get it sorted for you so probably needed to speak to you re an update if you can access yet, test things or other work matters.

Working from home is a bit different. You need to take a lunch break for yourself but you also need to be a little realistic and weigh up wanting to look hardworking and professional in this uncertain job climate where you need to keep your job and take over some of the workload at perhaps a higher extent initially just like your colleagues may have been doing before you got set up to WFH. I think a lot of managers especially in companies that are testing WFH for the first time, might think that their workers at home are not working, messing around, not doing all their paid hours so on my first day WFH the last thing I’d want to do is come across that way, especially as it was a computer situation only affecting me and work were trying to get it resolved for me.

As you say, you need to take your designated breaks for your mental health but in new WFH circumstances and in the middle of a pandemic, I wouldn’t expect to take my one hour lunch break so literally and rigidly in the middle of the day. At least not at first. There are always teething/access/equipment problems working from home the first time and usually I’d assume everybody to work a little extra initially until things got into a flow and everything was working. You could have had a short lunch break today to sort out your work problems and taken a longer one tomorrow or the next day or next week or logged off an hour earlier or literally anything.

So you haven't (no fault of your own) done any work at all this morning, and you refuse to work when your boss calls you?
Totally taking the piss!

Were you really on the phone or other with IT for a full 4 hours this morning?

How can you have been the only person in your team affected by a network-wide issue?

I would have taken the call.

I would have taken the call and then had lunch, gone out. Yes you are entitled to lunch wfh, but there is often a need to be flexible, as in this cade