to think WFH is going to permanent for most who have switched?

[elmouno]

I was chatting with someone earlier and I said that most people currently working from home will be working from home now permanently. There will be no switch back to the offices in the city.

The other person disagreed and said people will have to go back. If they don't too much of the city economies will collapse which will affect the overall economy (i.e. no coffee, lunch, rail tickets, cleaners etc) that it would be catastrophic.

I'm guessing that businesses will be forced to change, but maybe not? Am I being unreasonable to assume that all the people now working from home will be doing so permanently?

@Nanny0gg

To be fair, the old system was not equal either. The have nots were people in the middle, whose incomes were too high to get any support from the government but also couldn't afford to live close to work. The haves were the ones who could afford central locations and the have nots were on trains they couldn't afford, with a substantial amount of their monthly income sucked away in season tickets. The haves had cheaper commutes and probably large inheritance which meant they could stay central.

Thanks for the info how to schedule a TEAMS mtg. Very useful. :)

@PastMyBestBeforeDate

check availability in Outlook then book in Teams.

That sounds a bit tedious. Have you any idea why they are not integrated in your installation ? Both Microsoft products, intended to work together. Why would they not be integrated. They are supposed to make your life easier rather than harder.

So much of my work is with teams of people, invariably spread across different counties, so that their location home v office is irrelevant.

Having the 'chat' persist across meetings is so helpful when someone isn't sure who to ask about something, a message there will be seen by all. If you can then encourage people to check the chat before asking a question, working together will immediately be making good use of the available resources.

@lljkk Hello. Good morning. Glad someone was able to help...

I'd really encourage you to ask why they are not integrated in your set up. It's most likely just an oversight by someone who never sets up meetings, so doesn't realise.

@FinallyHere there's a reason why it doesn't work on my laptop that could be resolved but for technical reasons I can't let them do it yet. . I was just suggesting a work around for lljkk if it isn't integrated.

Thank you @PastMyBestBeforeDate

Looks like @lljkk appreciated the work around too.

I doubt my WFH will be permanent, management seem to be just going week to week and have said we won’t be going back in the near future not committing to anything. In my team I think we are slower and less efficient wfh and as the work starts ramping up it will show and we will be back in the office in the. New year.
It’s swings and roundabouts to me , no commute or dead time lunch break + everything else -
I like the divide between home and work , getting home and chucking my bag down it’s not the same just closing a lap top

There still seems to be a sort of ‘absolutism’ around the debate-wfh or wfo, 2days here/3days there. Technology allows so much more flexibility-reactive to need rather than routine. Why does there have to be An Office Day -with restrictions on public transport, why aren’t larks getting in at 7, leaving at 2, Owls going on at 11, leaving at 6? Older staff working more from home as they’re likely to have the facilities and less ‘draw’ to the social aspect of work, leaving more office space for those who need it?

There’s a ‘rules’ culture that relies on the Authorities setting the parameters of our norms and if this situation has taught us anything, it’s that the Authorities have been screamingly incompetent and we all need to look at new ways.

I'm not following the 'integrated in your set up' discussion - but anyway, with TEAMS, there were some group tutorials offered that I skipped - I reckoned most of that would be tedious easy stuff -- like "This is how you share your screen", "This is a mute button" etc. I could have tried to youtube-search it rather than ask here, so I appreciate the patience of those who replied.

Our IT support isn't great. My contract feels very insecure so not clear anyone will invest in my IT support, colleagues are starting to clamour for some kind of budget for home equipment; the people with permanent contracts will (and should) get first dibs on any limited and rapidly depleted funds.

I'm home based (with customer site visits) so unlike many others' workplaces, my work practice has changed very little. But it's great to see how many big companies have been able to adjust so quickly to a WFH scenario. WFH has been on the cards (& possible) for so many and been awhile coming, but it took a global pandemic for many companies to implement it. I reckon WFH is going to be much more common now. It's part of the fourth industrial revolution and no wonder government is fighting it, like most revolutions, it's not within their control and they haven't figured out a way to monetise it yet.

This issue is concerning me more than the virus in all honesty - I'd love it if someone can reassure me and show me I'm wrong about my concerns.

Let's say a huge proportion of people do wfh permanently... it's not just Pret which suffers - you have office cleaners who lose work, transport staff, all manner of shops suffer which would have otherwise had people pop in in their lunch hour to browse. Arts and cultural institutions who would have had people drop in at lunch or stay on in the evening in the city to go out couldn't survive, nor could pubs where people once congregated after work. We attract scores of foreign students to places like London, too, because it's a vibrant city with lots of opportunities for internships and work and meeting other professionals. Why will they come over and spend their money here if the city is deserted and they'll be stuck in a tiny room working over Zoom?

I can't understand how this shift wouldn't be utterly life-changingly catastrophic for the whole of society. Salaries will drop because companies know staff don't have commuting costs. The hit to the whole economy means that there would be a drastic increase in redundancies, given we're all connected. It's like people back in May saying tourism was just 1/5th of Cornwall's economy and tourists should stay the fuck away, despite the fact if 1/5th of your economy is virtually wiped out, the other 4/5ths are then inevitable affected for a whole host of reasons.

And I'm concerned about the people crammed into crap house shares who don't have a nice home to work from, the graduates who can't network and learn in the same way as before (I'm looking back to my best job in London where I was learning just because I was overhearing conversations in the open plan office rather than being sat down and taught specific things by a manager), the people who escape abuse at home by going to work, etc, etc.

I have never envied people stuck with long commutes and obviously I care about the environment and hate the idea of people travelling into city centres unnecessarily but I just don't think people have grasped how catastrophic the consequences could be if many wfh long term.

I'd dearly love to be wrong but I think this will do so much more damage to wider society than Covid.

I'm lucky as our smallest bedroom was already an office - my husband uses it in the evenings, so I just set myself up in there. And now I'm not commuting I have approx 2 hours extra per day, so I exercise more, cook better meals, get more fresh air - it's been a real game changer and it's great not to be absolutely shattered all the time.

I suspect my employer will settle into some sort of blended approach where we go into the office a few times per week, but WFH for the rest.

I'd dearly love to be wrong but I think this will do so much more damage to wider society than Covid.

I agree with you but what can we do about it. The government have caused this through fear and the stay at home message. They can't turn it around by saying we must be safe and not get close to anyone but at the same time can you all go back and mingle in the office.

It's a shit storm and I think we are all in for a terrible time for many years in terms of the economy.

I think the truth is between your positions. People will do more working from home that but will still go into the office 2/3 days per week. Collaboration is better in the office, concentration is better at home.

@MrsWooster Because most people work together, in teams, not doing one man projects isolated from everyone. We need to be available at roughly the same time. Let's say I want to work 9-5 because I'm young and enjoy my evenings. But my boss has kids and wants to work after his kids go to bed. Suddenly I work 9-5 AND 9pm-midnight when her kids are in bed because I need her input. I have clients. What if my clients like to start at 7am. So I now also have to work at 7am. Your proposal doesn't work in any profession where you need people to collaborate.

There is usually room for some flexibility though @WhereamI88. You agree to all work a 9 - 5 day on a Wednesday, or set aside Friday mornings and Tuesday afternoons for your meetings or the company say you must be available between 10 am and 2pm , or whatever. I mean, we are all in different jobs and I see that everyone thinks about their own workplace and own role, but it seems unlikely that many jobs need people to be working together all day every day. People would say that customer facing roles need people to be at work at set times, but again, some flexibility in staff working hours can actually make it more accessible for clients / customers rather than less. Yes, there might be fewer staff in, but there are longer hours when you can get hold of someone.