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!

The company a friend works for has already made the decision that COVID has proven WFH broke habits and forced good managers to create better ways of working.

They have turned it up on it's head - from 2021 50% of the cost of offices will essentially be added into departmental budgets - and then managers and employees can choose to use the budget for buildings or additional staff by having people work from home.

Employees are very much affected, as they need to make up the other 50% if they choose to be in an office - being given allowances , but having to pay per day they choose to be in the office (the allowance will nowhere near cover people being in every day) - just the same as if someone chooses to pay to commute or pay for a car park.

They expect to have very much smaller offices next year.

Re Pret, Costa etc. We need an economic shift away from services, and 30 years ago most would have made a coffee and brought in sandwiches - something else will take their place; real growth only occurs when a significant shift of practice happens like this - we'll look back in 50 years and see this as a good thing.

Sounds a poorly managed workplace for the OP's brother - if customer service agents need to shout across the office, there is an issue; they should know the answers if trained properly. They are not being unreasonable, but it's likely that people will leave them if they don't afford good flexibility - so depends on whether there are really lots of good capable candidates available. The WFH demand was happening already ime pre-covid - and despite what people are saying, we are still recruiting strongly and it remains difficult to find sufficient candidates, so increasing the overall level of skilled roles wouldn't be a bad thing.

@Bewareoftheblob

That makes sense - pooling knowledge can be more effective in person. Sounds as if he acknowledges that he can't do his job as well out of the office at the moment, so it is either go into the office or suggest improvements that would make the service he can provide at home at least equal to that at work. Or take a pay cut to reflect that the current service he is providing is of a lesser quality. His employer went about things the wrong way by talking about India like a threat IME, but I don't think they are unreasonable to expect a better showing than they are getting!

It's almost as though he's actually a fan of a system that is built to enhance the wealth of the very few and keep others living in poverty
^ this, DC was looking into a clever 'blue sky' way to further entrench the above, he wasnt reckoning on a pandemic that would totally change the game and make it harder for him to get the outcomes he wanted

If adapting means moving outside of larger cities, I wonder how people think low paid workers can afford the shift? It’s expensive. It’s just not as simple as is made out by some, unless you have money to adapt sometimes you can’t and you fall through the cracks.

I work for a financial institution. I live in Scotland. The rest of my team are in West Yorkshire. To get into the office by car is one hour, by PT much longer. When I get to the office I don't have a desk just a locker and I don't know anyone or speak to anyone I know in person all day. Just my colleagues by phone or by VC which I can do from home. Some of our work is already outsourced to India. It is highly technical and the faces keep changing and wages are getting hiked every few months so we will actually be getting rid of them soon. We need some continuity. The work we do requires a lot of self motivation and initiative to seek out and develop technology solutions. We have really struggled to locate offshore staff that can assume command, develop projects and innovate independently of Management. Not saying this talent doesn't exist, just that it is probably just as expensive in contracting costs as a temporary worker who may disappear in a few months when they are taken off the account.

They do know why [productivity is lower]. It's because employees are WFH. The brother himself admitted that they were working less efficiently in a WFH environment

No they don't - they have made that assumption. There is a myriad of factors affecting business productivity at the moment, they have assumed the cause is the one which is easiest for them to address with no effort. Hence they are "doing something" rather than addressing the root cause as they should be if they want to stay in business.

One person's subjective view that he is less productive at home does not make that the root cause of reduced company productivity. Its an anecdotal point which can just as easily be used to say that the company has a problem with its managers.

Even if homeworking was demonstrated to be the causal factor, having people in the office won't necessarily fix it at the moment. For instance what is the quality of the kit provided - that is consistently shown to be relevant in home working.

Most common problem I see in WFH productivity is with ithe management layer lacking the skills to manage workers who are not in their line of sight. They won't fix that problem by using workers on another continent.

@MillyMollyFarmer

If adapting means moving outside of larger cities, I wonder how people think low paid workers can afford the shift? It’s expensive. It’s just not as simple as is made out by some, unless you have money to adapt sometimes you can’t and you fall through the cracks.

low-paid workers cannot afford to live anywhere but outside of larger cities for a start...that is one of the main problem in London for a start! Do you actually believe people commute for the sheer fun of it?

We have really struggled to locate offshore staff that can assume command, develop projects and innovate independently of Management. Not saying this talent doesn't exist, just that it is probably just as expensive in contracting costs as a temporary worker who may disappear in a few months when they are taken off the account.

Yes this is one reason why a lot of offshore work has been re-onshored. There are some tasks, expecially around innovation, design, origination which are just as expensive to do offshore as onshore. Other tasks can be offshored very successfully as "enclosed" pieces of work.

When managers start wittering about sending jobs to India and protecting "McJobs" it suggests they are not particularly effective managers and don't really know where their business problems lie.

I am Indian and absolutely hate it when employers use offshoring to India and other countries as a threat. The fact is offshoring comes with major service and quality impacts - you can absorb this as a large / well known brand but not if you are a SME.

Sounds a bit unreasonable - with regards to outsourcing abroad, my experience in workplaces where that has been tried haven't been great, and have had a couple of interim roles bringing things back in house.
Big fan of WFH - but I do seem some benefits of meeting up from time to time - an office day once a month seems about right for my role.

I don't think that the company my brother works for has any intention of outsourcing jobs to India to be fair. I think they were making the point that if the job can be done effectively from home, then it can be done effectively from anywhere and that the team should watch their backs and buck their ideas up.

The McJobs thing was a bit strange, a bit 'we are one body' but I take their point. Someone up thread mentioned that maybe it's a good thing to move away from service based roles. I suppose it's always difficult to consider what will come next, but I don't imagine that these roles will be replaced with lots of well-paid professional work for those made redundant from Pret.

I am sure that some people are more productive WFH full time. I wonder about the whole company though.

Those creative moments. Discussions about issues that just come up. Insights. The company culture and ethos that can't easily be replicated if many staff are at home.

Those companies that can replicate that ethos, work collaboratively easily will be much better at surviving than others.

There are also going to be important members of staff, new younger members and others who want to be in the office and would benefit from having others there.

There is a bigger picture in place.

And yes - we are an interconnected economy. If your high paying job in London can be done by someone in the North of England - who will do the job for less, then that's going to be an issue.

India is not the problem. There are plenty of places in the UK where people will do the same job for less.

Ha, 'Save Pret' is trending on Twitter.

I’ve been working from home and in our role we’ve been more productive but have also been told we need to come back in for “community spirit” which I think is bonkers

In your brothers case though if quality and service are down I can see his employers point

India is not the problem. There are plenty of places in the UK where people will do the same job for less.

Exactly

WFH positively impacts many peoples lives for the better. We should support this
People WFH should demonstrate their commitment in return by drving up standards

I agree, and like the balance you included in this, but while it shouldn't impact on everyone else the problems come when you get an employee like OP's DB, who she's quite openly described as "lazy" and "trying to see what he can get away with"

FWIW I also agree this is where effective management's needed, but it would be an unusual employee who put their hands up rather than resorting to "not faaaiiirrr", and the admin difficulties around disciplinaries need no advertisement ... all of which can explain why some employers, rightly or wrongly, go for the easier option of just having most on the premises

@Bewareoftheblob

I don't think that the company my brother works for has any intention of outsourcing jobs to India to be fair. I think they were making the point that if the job can be done effectively from home, then it can be done effectively from anywhere and that the team should watch their backs and buck their ideas up.

The McJobs thing was a bit strange, a bit 'we are one body' but I take their point. Someone up thread mentioned that maybe it's a good thing to move away from service based roles. I suppose it's always difficult to consider what will come next, but I don't imagine that these roles will be replaced with lots of well-paid professional work for those made redundant from Pret.

A lot of Indian staff get threatened by automatation, which to be fair is going to be the next big threat to all routine / non-thinking global jobs (pretty much most of India’s service jobs).

I prefed wfh but the noticeable difference is how much less exercise I get throughout the day, meetings are b2b so you dont move away for hours at a time whereas before at least those meetings were in different rooms and id walk in between up and down stairs. My walk to the kitchen in the office is much longer than in my house again all those little bits of extra steps and exercise add up.

@Bewareoftheblob

India is not the problem. There are plenty of places in the UK where people will do the same job for less.

Exactly

I don’t see this as only a problem. It also means people can move out of high centres and keep their jobs. The issue is getting a new one should they need to but if companies are doing the above it will be easier.

High cost cities

India is not the problem. There are plenty of places in the UK where people will do the same job for less

The same issues typically arise. Outsourcing brings a bunch of overheads with it and you need a good management layer to operate it.

I don’t see this as only a problem. It also means people can move out of high centres and keep their jobs. The issue is getting a new one should they need to but if companies are doing the above it will be easier

House prices
Negative equity
Effect of lower income on an area plus potential loss of part time work jobs that people depend on to pay the mortgage

But - it would play a role in levelling up a bit more

@chomalungma

I don’t see this as only a problem. It also means people can move out of high centres and keep their jobs. The issue is getting a new one should they need to but if companies are doing the above it will be easier

House prices
Negative equity
Effect of lower income on an area plus potential loss of part time work jobs that people depend on to pay the mortgage

But - it would play a role in levelling up a bit more

Well London house prices are incredibly high. And keeping people working there or commuting is a pressure so removing that isn’t all negative.

If your employer requires you to be in the office because they feel it's not been done effectively from home, it's their right to insist you come in. My dh has been working from home for almost ten years and even he is saying lack of face to face meetings is affecting his ability to do his job.

But - it would play a role in levelling up a bit more

Possibly. In reality for office workers some kind of balance point makes sense. We, along with all our London based clients are minimising on site presence but prioritising desks for the juniors who find WFH more difficult for reasons ranging from cramped, shared accommodation to being at a career stage where building the personal network is important.

However managing a large remote workforce is BAU for us - we have people all over the place. Its a skill we actively teach and grow, along with providing the equipment to make it work. Where I've seen problems with our clients is where they lack skills and experience at managing complex or distributed teams. So its a skills gap rather than a WFH issue.