If you can do your job from home then it can be done from India...

[Bewareoftheblob]

This is what my brother has been told by his employers. He works in a small office in a city centre and can work remotely. He admits that their efficiency, especially in terms of the quality of customer service, has been compromised by the team working from home.

They've all been told to go back to the office from mid September, which he is reluctant to do, mainly because he dislikes the commute and has enjoyed being at home with his wife and toddler.

When he (and, I think, some other team members) requested an extension to working from home, they were told in no uncertain terms to get back in to the office, and that they should be wary because 'if you can do your job from home, it can probably be done from India', which my brother has taken as a threat of redundancy.

They were also asked if they didn't feel guilty about the impact they were having on the economy and other people's livelihood - I assume they meant transport/Costa/Pret etc. They were asked to have more of a community spirit. It's a pretty informal place, not very 'corporate' which is why I assume it's been worded in this way!

What do you think? I'm torn to be honest, I totally understand why my brother wants to work from home, but whilst I don't think his company expressed themselves very well, I can see their point too.

So I suppose it's more are they being unreasonable rather than am I being unreasonable!

I don’t think they are being unreasonable. If productivity is down then I would want people back in.

If working from home doesn’t suit the business, and they are at risk of redundancy then surely they are right to try office working and see if things pick up.

It's a tricky one. I don't think people should be guilty into spending their money on pretty, costa etc. Can the job actually be done from India though, really? Surely there are other things at play?

I think the way forward is going in once a week or so in order to have those face to face meetings that are deemed so necessary, but still have plenty of time wfh. Unless of course they really are failing when they wfh.

Surely they don't want their teams constantly off sick with cover?

*guilted into
Pret
Costa

I do think the main thing is the fact that they are not doing their jobs as well from home. Brother thinks they are unreasonable and not sympathetic regarding Covid concerns, as well as threatening them with unemployment...

I think it boils down to productivity. If you cannot do your job 100% WFH, then this is not a long term option and I get why the employer would want them to be back.

*off sick with covid

Companies would have offshored already if they wanted to. Many companies have brought call centres and IT jobs back to the U.K! Then there are time zone differences, language barriers, UK employment law, paying tax in different countries, industry regulators, multiple currency payroll, training, difficulties doing criminal record checks and background checks on employees abroad etc. It's not that easy to offshore jobs.

I’m more worried about automation.

@Bewareoftheblob

I do think the main thing is the fact that they are not doing their jobs as well from home. Brother thinks they are unreasonable and not sympathetic regarding Covid concerns, as well as threatening them with unemployment...

Yeah they don't sound great tbh. I've realised how unprofessional so many places are!

I think you can push the not wanting to get sick, as long as you're not also going out to restaurants, on holiday on planes etc

I think they're entitled to put their productivity, which after all pays their wages, ahead of your brother not liking the commute and spending more time at home with wife and child.

@Newjeansrippedjeans I think it's more that customer service is not up to standard. They're getting complaints about responses to customers not being as timely/efficient as they used to be.

Compromise would be a good solution here. But at the end of the day if the company want to spend their money on business premises that's up to them. They can't, however, force your brother to buy things from Pret etc!

@Bewareoftheblob

I do think the main thing is the fact that they are not doing their jobs as well from home. Brother thinks they are unreasonable and not sympathetic regarding Covid concerns, as well as threatening them with unemployment...

Bit of things don’t pick up he won’t have a job at all, so many people are being made redundant at the moment.

I run a small business and I was hopeful I could keep all my staff, but I don’t think it will be possible now.

Most people dislike commuting that's nothing new. I would say he's lucky to have a job. Unemployment is going to get a lot worse. If the performance of the company is affected he should be back at work.

Disliking your commute and liking being at home with your wife and child aren’t reasons to continue a WFH situation that isn’t even working. People have got even more entitled dying this pandemic 🙄

If they're unable to work efficiently from home and there is an impact on quality/service, its entirely reasonable to expect to return to the office.

We've been allowed to work at home with occasional visits to work as necessary, but quality/efficiency etc has not been impacted, and everyone has been available when necessary (ie not taking the piss).

It depends. The company I work for says productivity and customer service has stayed the same since homeworking began and has actually improved in many ways. Jobs cannot be offshored to India etc.

The India reference is blunt, but also I think true. Look at the example of call centres. Why would you pay UK workers, who are relatively expensive by global standards, to do a job at home in Hertfordshire, if you thought you could pay a sufficiently fluent English speaker much less to do the job at home in say eastern Europe or even the US (US included as much weaker workers rights)? Why won't the services sector follow the path taken by manufacturers if they think they can? I think too Covid gives employers a lot of power - it will be easier to push through redundancies & restructuring over the next six months 'Cos Covid' than it would be normally, so they'll do it.

Of course he should go back if the business is being impacted. Wanting to stay home with the family is not a reason to not return to workplace now.

I don't particularly love my commute either but the business comes first if I want to remain employed. Many at my place have already been made redundant. I haven't so I put up with the commute to remain employed.

Just to add, of course plenty of jobs can't be shipped overseas, but I bet employers will be up for finding out which ones could. Plenty of workers in say mining & manufacturing thought they were immune to globalisation and the forces of social & technological change and very much weren't . Sorry if thats depressing - I'm mostly a centre left Labour voter type so don't take any satisfaction in this at all. I just think its how things will go

We’re being allowed to/encouraged to WFH because productivity and service has remained the same and has even increased in some areas of the business.

All employers have to balance the effect of WFH on productivity and service with the risk of catching Covid. My employer has done that and has concluded that the balance falls firmly in favour of continued WFH. Clearly your brother’s employer has reached a different conclusion.

Hating your commute and wanting to spend more time with your family are not reasons for an employer allow continued WFH if productivity and service are affected.

He should be grateful to have a job. Four people I know have been made redundant in the last three days.

No I don’t think the employer is being unreasonable. So long as they implement appropriate new procedures then they are entitled to ask staff to return to the office if it is deemed moe productive.

My DH is working from home at the moment and it has been nice for me as I am at home anyway. But when he is called back to the office he will go. I think it will be nice for him to see his colleagues in person again and I think he will like the change of scene, although also hoping he can do some WFH in the future.

Regarding the thinly veiled redundancy threat, well I think employers may need to start getting tough on this. There seems some pretty widespread unwillingness to go back to the usual workplace.

I think there are issues with a long term move to working from home being sprung on large swaths of the workforce. It's been great personally but then my partner and I have an office and the ability to share it amicably, those having to work on the kitchen table, or in the bedroom because they have young kids at home with a SAHP or who are struggling being around each other 24/7 (not because they don't care for each other but because its a sudden change). I'd like to see companies offer more flexibility generally but the 'we don't trust you to work from home so your all coming in' attitude does stink. If individuals have performance issues that needs to be managed so it doesn't impact those that can work from home productively.

If the job isn’t being done as well, then absolutely the employers are right to want to have everyone back in the office. People have shot themselves in the foot it seems.

One compromise could be to see if they would allow people to work from home a day or two a week, but the onus is on the employees to prove that the job can be done just as well.

If there are genuine reasons for the fall in productivity such as illness, that is one thing - but it is unusual for everyone to have fallen sick, isn’t it?

Employers do have a duty to implement Covid protection measures - frequency of cleaning/distancing etc.

I enjoyed not commuting and spending more time with my family but I couldn't imagine giving that reason to my boss. We're fully back in the office now, despite no drop in productivity while working from home. If it suits the business and your boss wants it that way, then he needs to get on with it or find a different job.

It will be interesting if most jobs are offshored and automated, there would be very little tax paid and no more public services or benefits.

Companies will offshore or automate it they want to despite WFH.