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!

It's unfortunate that staff are being laid off in places like Pret, of course it is. But some high streets have been saturated by chain food outlets, and it isn't up to people feeling obliged into buying coffee or overpriced food who are to blame for their demise. On my walk to work I used to pass 3 Prets in quick succession, none of them were particularly busy, but it's evident that they just didn't want a rival to muscle in, so ran 3 units. If they just had the one, chances are that another food outlet would have opened in its place, and people would have been able to work there, or even better, more Indies would have survived. Again, it is sad for those who have lost their jobs, but maybe the bigger solution is to find an emerging sector that can benefit the economy and also provide opportunities to workers. Pret were also having issues at the end of 2019, and as has been said, people might be more likely to buy from local coffee shops which don't just line the pockets of millionaires. I don't think that in itself is a reason for people to be forced back into offices, and I'm not even overly enthusiastic about WFH.

Milly Yes I do I live here in SE London. You don’t have to bold me .

It’s still no reason to prop up Prets in the city. Even moving from central to zone 3 would help. And if they already live in zone 3 then all good.

@MillyMollyFarmer

Perhaps low paid workers will relish more jobs outside the expensive city.

Yes, some do. Some will not. You all know that plenty of working class low income people grew up in and love london right? London isn’t just full of rich elites. Low income workers exist in London and they don’t have huge reserves to move with these mysterious, as yet non-existing fabulous new jobs outside the ‘expensive city’.

because the only place of employment in the country is central London and the square mile now is it. Oh dear.

The arguments for keeping an office are to me, making sure your clients know you are stable and ease of meetings. Teams and motivation. I’m thinking of my sector (creative) when I write this. Most agencies will keep their space if they can afford to.

Being told supporting Pret as a moral good doesn’t wash.

So maybe @MillyMollyFarmer a better use of some of those empty office buildings would be to convert them to housing. Then more people could live in the city centre close to work and support their local businesses and the whole thing would be more sustainable.

If they cannot work as efficiently from home they need to return to work.

However, they should take note of the jibe about India. It's got sting to it. At the end of the day its true of all jobs done remotely, unless you have a really specific skill set that cant be met by people elsewhere.

It's not about Pret in itself. It's about the low paid workers who will be made redundant when they go under.

Redistribution is fine - I'm really not wedded to the city centre - but these workers are not all going to go and open up sweet little independent cafes and sandwich shops.

I feel sorry for them; it's a scary time.

And, I should add, that I'm surprised so many posters are so cold about the situation they are in.

The thing is Pret owners will suffer more than staff. What they have is a transferable skill and other food based shops are hiring.

The thing is Pret owners will suffer more than staff. What they have is a transferable skill and other food based shops are hiring.

I disagree, the owners will have a certain amount of wealth to fall back on. I dont think Dominic Chappel or Philip Green felt the effect of BHS closing as much as much as shop staff on NMW.

And, I should add, that I'm surprised so many posters are so cold about the situation they are in.

I don't think they're being cold, they just rightly don't see it as their responsibility to be guilted into buying coffee and lunch they don't want. I lived in flat shares with many people over the years before leaving London who worked in food places, they don't get paid a wage reflective of any level of living costs, many were on shitty contracts, living in shitty conditions with shitty prospects for advancement- I don't see why we are so keen for that to be a major part of the economy going forward when there's a real chance for change.

True but they’ll be fighting it and I don’t really worry about them.

I’m pleased other areas of the sector who are doing well will look at those staff and take them on.

That was to Bull

Shops and cafes in suburban centres and villages have been under threat and closing for years now OP as all life was sucked to the centre. Now the situation is being reversed a little. That's not a bad thing. Our local butcher - under threat of closure in January - is now booming. The green grocer has started doing deliveries and is now taking on extra staff. Local cafes now do more business in take away lunches and are hanging on in there. Those jobs are important too, and frankly more important to me as they serve my community.

Our local high st is booming. Queues for lunch

I'd rather not buy the coffee and sandwiches, and give some of the money I save to support those who lose their jobs as a result. Through taxation and welfare, perhaps!

@MarshaBradyo

Our local high st is booming. Queues for lunch

But it won’t be when unemployment hits. It’s just a temporary boost.

Daisy we’ll see some sectors are better than others. And some people have reduced expenses. The temporary part is probably more to do with the eat out scheme. People will spend just not as much on commute or city Pret.

But unemployment is not going to be caused by the majority of office workers WFH!

The lockdown and restrictions are the problems. No one is saying they were a positive - a necessity possibly, but no more. Bringing a complete change in the way people work is still one of the few positive consequences.

It's a great shame we had to have a lockdown to change things whilst it could have been done years ago, the technology and good will were there for a long time.

I read an article in the Times about this today. Some businesses will definitely outsource

I'm not blasé about food workers being laid off, but I'm not convinced that the way the service industry has been operating has really been sustainable anyway. I feel the same way about tourism, I live in an area where tourism is a big employer, and it is suffering, but I think it was always bound to suffer sooner or later - the cheap travel industry is not something to depend upon long term.

At the same time, we see that many countries haven't enough agricultural workers and aren't food secure generally, maybe don't have very secure supply lines for other basic goods, medicine, and so on. So my sense is there needs to be a general realignment of the economy in many areas.

I do think that employers are reasonable to want workers to come into the office if productivity is down. I also think there can be other good reasons around work culture to want some face to face interaction. OTOH I think they need to be planning with the fact that people will need to work from home more often in mind in the coming months and they are going to have to keep employees needs in mind with childcare, colds, etc. Less density at work might also be a good idea.

It irks me that employers will see recent political messages as a green light to bully employees back into the office. Not all office work is city centre based, supporting a plethora of coffee shops and dry cleaners. Much is based on commercial or industrial estates with few services.

If there is a problem with productivity or service then good managers will deal with this directly with the individuals concerned.

@cyclingmad

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.

you ever watched Wall-E?

That's how we're going to end up.

you ever watched Wall-E?

That's how we're going to end up.

some might, but for many, the extra hours are the only way to squeeze in some exercise and people will get a lot fitter. It's a bit like the lockdown: some people have ballooned, others have used the time to become extra fit.

you ever watched Wall-E?

That's how we're going to end up.

I was trying to think of the film earlier, that's the one!