Government should advise 'work from home if you can' - plain common sense

[swabthenose]

I'm not talking about furlough, or people who are unable to do their jobs from home. I'm talking about office jobs where people have successfully worked from home for months and months with no decrease (and some increase due to no commute) in productivity. Surely it's plain fucking common sense for the government to say 'work from home if you can' and stop encouraging people back to offices?!

All this talk of a lockdown except offices and schools - why offices?! Why is the government so determined to keep all the worker bees in the group working environment when it's not necessary? Yes I know, save the sandwich shops, but tbh if people are working from home then local businesses are going to get a boost instead AND the public transport will be less crowded. Home working at least part of the time is the future, and trying to swim against the tide during a global pandemic seems pretty dim even for our shitshow of a government.

They need to protect pret.

Yes and no. Personally, I quite like working from home. I am fairly experienced in a professional job, am well-paid and have my own home office. I also have a chronic illness which causes fatigue and pain flares so it's nice to be able to rest for 20 mins in the middle of the day if I need to. However, I also like being able to see my colleagues face to face and get the "buzz" of working with and near others, otherwise for me my (large City) firm effectively narrows to about 10 people and it feels quite isolating.

Also, I worry for younger/more junior colleagues who house-share and therefore don't have ideal WFH conditions (from Zoom calls it appears several are spending 12 hours a day working at laptops on their kitchen table) and/or are missing out on interaction and professional development with senior colleagues.

@eurochick I think I saw on another thread that you are a law firm partner - don't you think it is damaging for trainees to WFH permanently? I think it must be very difficult for them for the reasons I mentioned above. Our firm is keen for us to work in the office two days a week which I think is a good balance. There is no pressure, so you don't have to come in if you are not comfortable with it.

Again, speaking from a position of privilege in that I work in my own room in a spacious City office, but the whole place is very Covid-secure and I would be surprised if offices were a major source of Covid spread. We are socially distanced at all times and I feel very safe going into the office.

Also, whoever said "One of the London train drivers was saying How packed the carriages were this week." - I also used the tube this week, and in zone 1 at about 9.15 there were around 5 people in my carriage. Not busy at all, and it would have been totally rammed at that time pre-lockdown.

With cases on the rise people should wfh if they can. My employer has no plans for anyone to return to the office full time.

In France, it’s the opposite: I think I read that something like 84% of people have returned to the office. Not necessarily everyday, or all at the same time, but by and large people have gone back. And we had 13000 new cases in 24 hours yesterday.

Why? it’s partly the work culture being quite old fashioned and hierarchical, and french people being wary of change. And there is a strong sense of «solidarité» which translates to «all in this together». Plus the lunchtime thing... it is a hugely important part of the day, to down tools for an hour or so and go off to the cantine or a local restaurant With your colleagues - so the economic impact of continuing to wfh On these industries would be huge. I am currently stuck at home in isolation, thanks to lunch with a work colleague who didn’t know he was infected and Who ate with 6 other people including myself, we are all isolating now.

So YANBU op, it seems like a no brainer - but is up against powerful economic and cultural interests.

I hate wfh, find it isolating and miss my home being a sanctuary rather than a workplace. But I agree with you - if wfh means schools can stay open then that’s where we are right now.

Why do people keep wittering on about common sense when there is obviously more than one way to see all this stuff?

I agree, it’s not worth doing this to save Pret. There will be a rebalancing, we need to deal with it.

@cochineal7

It is not just the local sandwich shop. It is the big City landlords (Canary Wharf etc) whose property portfolio devaluation would have a massive financial impact. On very few very rich people (who also happen to be large Tory donors).

This.

But @LyndaLaHughes companies have always been able to employ people in India. Covid hasn’t changed that. What they are more likely to do is employ people from different parts of the UK and Theo’s will be great for employers and employees. Say I lived in London and wanted to employ a shit hot software engineer but she is based in Edinburgh and doesn’t want to move to London. That’s easier to do now, and I don’t have to employ her on a London salary, and I don’t need to pay for office space for her. I like the idea of the country being less London centric, and for the flow of high quality jobs to extend across the UK.

@SarahBellam I agree. We employ software developers from India and some move over here for their contract. They are (and sorry for generalisation) absolutely brilliant workers and very clever, but there are a lot of differences in communication and working style, and often in spoken English.
I don't see it being a huge short term worry about jobs moving abroad unless this situation turns out to be more than the 18month max blip I hope it is.

@AFireInJuly where did I suggest wfh should be permanent? From where we are now, with cases rising quickly and politicians talking about another full lockdown it seems sensible to me that if we can try a measure that has minimum disruption to the economy and in large part worked well during the first lockdown, it's a good place to start. And it can be lifted when numbers are lower again. It's surely better for mental health in many cases to work from home but to able to see friends and family for support (within the rule of six) than end up in a full lockdown again, which was so difficult for many.

FWIW our trainees seem to be doing brilliantly for the most part and are well-supported. A few of our people have really struggled and we have made special accommodations for them. My office is just starting to open up and encourage people back. Given where we are now that seems like a terrible idea (in our London office pretty much everyone would have to travel in on train or tube) which just seems like unnecessary mixing when numbers are rising (and as my firm has been pretty cautious throughout I'd expect them to stop encouraging people back pretty soon).

It is not just the local sandwich shop. It is the big City landlords (Canary Wharf etc) whose property portfolio devaluation would have a massive financial impact. On very few very rich people (who also happen to be large Tory donors).

Not really. Most big offices are owned by pension funds. The same pension funds most are relying on to fund their retirement.

I’m firmly on the side of learning to live with the virus which does mean prioritising a return to work.

My experience of WFH has been a return to silo thinking. We are starting to see errors because of this. I work across multiple teams & so incentivised to speak with lots of people; notwithstanding it’s actually quite hard to do well remotely.

When companies say that remote is just as productive as being in the office, all they are saying that they can keep their businesses ticking over in a pandemic. All anyone is doing right now is keeping the lights on.

Companies are starting to see things coming gently apart at the seams. Barclays said everyone would potentially WFH forever in April & they’ve since recalled people to the office.

I supervised an intern over summer & found it very, very hard to give him the full “intern experience”. I felt so sorry for him as it just wasn’t an ideal learning environment. We have delayed our grads as we are concerned about their learning.

I’ve also heard of a few law firms extending training contracts as they’re not convinced the trainees were ready at the traditional exit point this year.

Boris Johnson came across as a right fool when he said go back to the office.

Absolutely. I can mostly do my job at home. When I'm in work I'm mostly seeing people via Teams anyway - so have to book a room to do so, as do many of my colleagues so logistically not good. A colleague has tested positive already.

The thing people are missing is that it's a balancing act. To keep parts of society open (e.g schools) we need to minimise or close others.

I'm really sad that people are struggling with WFH and I'd support a system where those who are suffering could go into the office on a rota basis. I'd rather this type of approach than closing schools though and all the chaos that brings, not just for our kids' sakes but also the impact on productivity of parents, childcare knock on effects etc.

When companies say that remote is just as productive as being in the office, all they are saying that they can keep their businesses ticking over in a pandemic. All anyone is doing right now is keeping the lights on.

Speak for yourself! I'm perfectly able to WFH and progress my files; I don't need to be in an office to do that (though my employer is of the 'get everybody back even though the office is too small for adequate SD' mindset).

As I'm in my notice period, I've negotiated WFH rather than going back into the office as part of that. My direct dial still rings me, my emails still work; I'm as contactable at home as I was in the office. If team members have technical / other queries, we ring each other and talk them through, or email if it's a simple question.

My new role is permanent WFH. My employer is 170 miles away. They realised they could employ people with the experience they need, but is in short supply where they're based, from anywhere in the country, purely due to the first lockdown. We both win in this situation.

I've actually seen some benefits from wfh for the full team. We have people who work in India, and before they had to sit and listen to meetings from a room and probably couldn't hear a word. Now we're all dialling in their voices are equal in a way they weren't before and have started contributing more ideas which is fantastic.

I guess the problem as well is that many bosses don't like having parents wfh with kids in the house. Even if it is just after school from 3pm till 6pm. I can understand that. If childcare is in place then for the short term, wfh is sensible at this time.

The "if you can" is the problem. Lots of people are making out they "can" work from home, but can they really do everything or is it just them doing what they can and leaving other things not done?

At work i'm usually in contact with numerous organisations on a daily basis. I'm experiencing real problems in contacting people, delays in dealing with things, etc., that impacts on my work. In my personal life, it has become almost impossible to contact banks, utility firms, telecoms, sky, virgin, BT, etc - they've taken down live chat, and I can be waiting in phone queues for hours, only to end up speaking to someone who can't help and can't pass me to a colleague (because they're at home!).

Firms who usually take on trainees (such as accountancy/audit practices) haven't taken them on this Autumn, because they can't train them, as training is usually "on the job" in their own, or client's offices.

I'm sure a lot of people can work just as well from home, but my experience is a lot of what should happen, isn't happening. Whether that is the fault of the employer, or employee, I don't know. But sooner or later, such difficulties need to be addressed and rectified. For a few months, lower efficiency, delays, etc is tolerable, but not in the longer term.

@DrunkOnEther

YANBU. DP wfh very successfully from March, but last month his company demanded they all go back to the office. Just as local lockdowns were starting in the area where he works. The office is on an industrial estate and part of a manufacturing site - it’s adding absolutely nothing to the economy having people there, save the petrol/diesel of people commuting. And now we’re just worried our kids are going to end up sent home from school to self-isolate, because if they are, who’s going to look after them? Our only option will be my retired parents.

All this talk about sandwich shops and rail fares - even if you think that’s reasonable, surely that only applies to people who work in city centres? A significant amount of people don’t; they work nowhere near bloody sandwich shops or even adequate public transport. I can’t help but feel that this is just another example of the government forgetting that there is more to the country than London.

Good point about London Centricity again. Yes, fully agree lots of people don't have access to public transport and don't have a "Pret" within walking distance of their workplace!

London could be a real loser of WFH. That's probably a good thing for the country as a whole. It's been a stupid couple of decades when all the young graduates have had to leave their home/Uni towns to trudge down to get jobs in London.

We need to rebalance the country and Covid could well be the way to make it happen.

I’m not going in and risking catching something just so our sandwich van can stay in business. I’m sorry and that sounds so harsh but my health is just as important as their finances and I choose to put myself first, not them.

I’m not worried about the ‘jobs in India’ thing. I think making the U.K. less London centric is fantastic and companies will have their pick of skilled professionals not just those who can commute. Qualifications and experience can rarely be matched overseas and employment law would be very complicated. As someone else said, if companies wanted to hire everyone remotely from overseas they could have done that already (some have, most haven’t).

And yes some companies absolutely are following ‘the government guidelines’ which at the moment are actively encouraging people back to the office. Following the guidelines takes the responsibility off themselves.

I am still WFH and it is going great productivity wise.

Already, we have had 2 people on our team who have had to pull their dc's from school as they are waiting COVID tests. Schools won't have them in obviously. If these 2 team members were currently based in the office, well they would now be at home isolating for weeks.

Thankfully, as we are all set up at home there is no further disruption to the business. I work for a Bank, and think we will be at home till 2021 at least.

That’s fine if you have the luxury of space to wfh long term. But a large proportion of people are still working from their bed/sofa/kitchen stool which is not feasible long term. There are reasons why people go through assessments in work to make sure their desk is set up correctly to avoid long term injuries.

I have heard people in here say oh just buy a desk, make an office, build an extension, buy a new house like it’s the easiest thing to do. Honestly people live in a different world.

And then there are the hundreds of thousands who live alone and now their whole life (work and personal) is in 4 walls. Now with the rule of 6 and even more restrictions coming in those 4 walls are coming closer in every single day.

There is more to health than bloody Covid and more things that can kill you than sitting in an office or travelling on public transport