If you WFH what time should you start work?

[EatPrayYoga]

If official hours are 9-5, is it a problem if you are not logged on by 9 every day?

I'm a team manager and one person on the team consistently logs on after 9 am. I know because our system shows a green or other colour next to everyone's names in an email so if I email the team I can see who is online and who isn't.

I usually send an email in a morning to confirm any things to be aware of for that day including who is not working that day and who is covering their work.

He usually logs on at about 9.05 but I'm not sure whether to mention this as he is only slightly late. He is in a junior role but wants to progress. There are other people in the same role who start work earlier than 9 to get things done so he stands out as doing less though I can't say who does more or less work in a day as their work is delegated by different members of the team.

I also realise we are in difficult times. He lives with parents and has no children or pets but I believe there are other adult siblings do not sure how easy or difficult the WFH circumstances are.

IABU to be unimpressed?

No, @VinylDetective, I did not say that “most” contracts include a clause that “negates contracted hours”.

I said that for many highly paid professional type roles (which sound like what the OP and her team are in) the contract states core office hours when the person has to be at work, but makes it clear that the employee must work whatever hours are necessary to get the required work done. The salary reflects this. There are usually non-contractual targets/client service standards set for each employee/team. Bonuses are often available. You may never have signed such a contract but I have had one in pretty much every job I have ever had. Not sure why you think I’d be making this up?

I’m so glad I’ve always worked in places where you’re judged on your output and not on the number of hours your bum is in your office chair! When I read OPs posts I imagine an office from the 1950s or something.

OP - as you’re so concerned about this employee who starts work 5 mins after 9am can I assume that you’re equally concerned about those employees who are still logged in at 5.05pm? As that would be applying the same principle?

I’d also be concerned from an equality standpoint about you allowing the early 8am starters to take on extra tasks that may help them gain promotions. Parents (and let’s face it mainly mums) who do the morning school run and so can only kid on at 9.15am or whenever will clearly be disadvantaged. It also seems a very ad hoc approach to workload management.

Be worried about the ones who start earlier . Don’t be a mongoose

OP you need to get a life.

Mongoose

@CheetasOnFajitas

I feel like I am shouting into a void here. It’s not unpaid time!

I feel like I am shouting into a void here. It’s not unpaid time!

If the OP's staff's contracts state that their work day starts at 9, then yes it is. How could it not be?

I’d argue that keen early starting woman is reaping the benefits of 9.05 man’s laziness because she can always pick up the work first and get the credit for doing so. Well done her.
I find it completely unsurprising that the keen, conscientious one is female and that the lazy one who thinks they deserve to be promoted is male. Typical male/female workplace behaviour. I bet the woman is also lacking in confidence and would not put herself forward for promotion.

Wow, you just managed to squeeze a healthy dose of both misogynistic and misandrist stereotyping in the space of one paragraph there. Impressive.

YABVU for the drip feeds and even more so for the pathetic grandiose points about what you perceive the role to be.

who starts work 5 mins after 9am can I assume that you’re equally concerned about those employees who are still logged in at 5.05pm? As that would be applying the same principle?

Sorry, what?

What do you mean by "ad hoc"?

It makes perfect sense to me to ask who is available to do something ASAP.

I am not sure why the responses are so strong when I simply asked a question and have taken on board the answers

I work for an international firm so even if I am old fashioned and my boss who raised his eyebrows at late starters are old fashioned it doesn't mean everyone in the business is and it doesn't mean we are hard to work for.

There is a lot of flexibility where I work.

Remember you only know a small part of the situation and more importantly please remember to be kind. There is no need to be rude at all.

@EatPrayYoga

who starts work 5 mins after 9am can I assume that you’re equally concerned about those employees who are still logged in at 5.05pm? As that would be applying the same principle?

Sorry, what?

What do you mean by "ad hoc"?

It makes perfect sense to me to ask who is available to do something ASAP.

I am not sure why the responses are so strong when I simply asked a question and have taken on board the answers

I work for an international firm so even if I am old fashioned and my boss who raised his eyebrows at late starters are old fashioned it doesn't mean everyone in the business is and it doesn't mean we are hard to work for.

There is a lot of flexibility where I work.

Remember you only know a small part of the situation and more importantly please remember to be kind. There is no need to be rude at all.

"be kind" AKA I'm talking shit.

OP I understand the type of employer you have. A professional, non-unionised place of work, very different to say the local council.

Your employer sounds like the sort where they expect trainees to prove their worth and loyalty. They want to see people put in the extra effort and employ the most hard-working and loyal. In return, once qualified And established they get a good salary and more of a personalised approach to circumstances around things like time off for family things like bereavement and illness, flexibility in start times, transfers to other offices etc that suit the employee. You work hard for the company, they value you and they realise it’s in their interest to keep you on. The downside is that once you’re not valuable these perks are not rewarded and everything is by the book.

On the flip side you have public sector, everything is by the book. Strictly defined rules on promotion, work hours and clearly defined job roles. Overtime is paid if asked to work longer hours. Harder to lose your job, easier to remain in your job if you work the contractual minimum. Pay never as good mind.

Personally I can’t get on with the second type of employer. I know Different people suit different types of employer.

I wouldn’t feel bad about this young man, he clearly has no strong desire to put the effort in. If he gets overlooked for someone more willing to show the effort then let them succeed. If he gets the promotion despite being lazy then I’d question why that was allowed to happen. A good employer would pick the trainee who would give them the best value for money in the long term, and that doesn’t sound like this man.

If the OP's staff's contracts state that their work day starts at 9, then yes it is. How could it not be?

See above.

@Fucket

OP I understand the type of employer you have. A professional, non-unionised place of work, very different to say the local council.

Your employer sounds like the sort where they expect trainees to prove their worth and loyalty. They want to see people put in the extra effort and employ the most hard-working and loyal. In return, once qualified And established they get a good salary and more of a personalised approach to circumstances around things like time off for family things like bereavement and illness, flexibility in start times, transfers to other offices etc that suit the employee. You work hard for the company, they value you and they realise it’s in their interest to keep you on. The downside is that once you’re not valuable these perks are not rewarded and everything is by the book.

On the flip side you have public sector, everything is by the book. Strictly defined rules on promotion, work hours and clearly defined job roles. Overtime is paid if asked to work longer hours. Harder to lose your job, easier to remain in your job if you work the contractual minimum. Pay never as good mind.

Personally I can’t get on with the second type of employer. I know Different people suit different types of employer.

I wouldn’t feel bad about this young man, he clearly has no strong desire to put the effort in. If he gets overlooked for someone more willing to show the effort then let them succeed. If he gets the promotion despite being lazy then I’d question why that was allowed to happen. A good employer would pick the trainee who would give them the best value for money in the long term, and that doesn’t sound like this man.

Presenteeism and talent are different things. It seems a lot of employers value the former more than the latter.

I've worked from home for 12 years. All my Director cares about is whether I am delivering results / doing my job, not when I do it. My contract says 9-5 ... Presenteeism is a grossly over-rated Managerial preference, proven by multiple studies to be not a reliable indication of productivity (outside of sectors like manufacturing).

YABVU unless you have evidence that logging on 5 mins late has materially impacted his work quality / output. You don't say what his job is to do, so hard to judge how you are measuring performance. If it's a subjective impression based on the fact you're watching when people go 'green' then I'd speak to HR before you broach the issue with him.

What I meant in my comment was that if you’re so concerned about employees rigidly sticking to a 9-5 workday then someone who goes against this by working until 5.05pm is not sticking to your rules either. But I imagine you’re not going to worry about employees who work 5 mins more than their hours, only those who work 5 mins less.

In other words - you want employees to stick to the rules exactly when it’s to your benefit, but you don’t mind them bending the rules when that is also to the company’s benefit.

OP as a fellow lawyer I think you're getting a hard time on this thread. The expectation to work more than contacted hours is totally natural to me and has applied in all my legal jobs, private practice and in-house.

It's tough when you're junior, it is all give and no take, but as you get more senior you can be more flexible. Work your 10 hour days at the time of your choosing!

Your employer sounds like the sort where they expect trainees to prove their worth and loyalty. They want to see people put in the extra effort and employ the most hard-working and loyal.

Loosely translated as 'they want muppets and mugs to work hours they're not paid to work, for which effort they may or may not be rewarded.' We might as well all don shoulder pads because this attitude harks right back to the presenteeism and 'lunch is for wimps' culture of the 80s.

I'm possibly a bit older than a lot of MNers and I can remember the days when it was perfectly possible to prove one's worth in a job within one's contracted core hours. Perfectly possible to prove oneself to be keen, engaged, hard-working and competent, and to gain advancement and promotion, without jumping through stupid hoops of arriving early and leaving late. And when I read posts like some of those on here, I despair, because it seems as though so many people here are brainwashed into thinking the only way of getting ahead is to gift their employers hours of unpaid time. They're trading valuable hours of their lives (five minutes at the start of each day adds up to roughly 20 hours in a year - just saying) to provide free labour which is unlikely to even be appreciated or rewarded at the end of the day.

Attempting to turn this into a 'private sector vs public sector' debate is overly simplistic in my opinion and experience, btw.

Are you sure he wants promotion op? It sounds like he's trundling along ok in his job - not doing well but not doing absolutely terribly either - so maybe he's happy there. If he does want promotion then it's your job as manager to let him know where he needs to up his game, which might include working overtime.

If the OP's staff's contracts state that their work day starts at 9, then yes it is. How could it not be?
See above.

I did. I disagree with the points that were made.

At my work we have a lot of flexibility. Core hours are 10-12 and 2-4 but you can then flex the rest of your time around that (37.5 hours per week contracted hours). Even then, as long as you get your work done and record enough hours across the course of the month it doesn’t really matter unless you have something important on or a meeting.

I wouldn’t like to think someone was looking at their screen to see if I was logged on at 9 am, especially as I have the school run. But you’ll find me logged on quite late on a Weds when dc are with their dad.

Thanks Cheshire I think those who work in this realm understand the expectations - that we have to work late to get the job done and that it's so competitive that people do need to work hard to prove themselves.

I like this person I'm talking about and I'm going to do all I can to help him get where he needs to be but I can't do that for him and I think he needs to do a little more too.

But you can’t disagree- it is fact, not opinion!

I’ve not read the whole thread but, maybe his computer takes five minutes to spark up. Why should he have to start work at 8.55 so as to appear online at 9.00 ?

Outcomes not presenteeism. If laptop takes ages to fire up, not his fault. Give him equipment that fires up in the blink of an eye.

It takes my laptop about 5 minutes to get connected to work and my on light switch green.

I’ve also never worked anywhere that cared what time I started work. We have hours of operation for things like the iT help desk or reception, but everyone else makes their own schedule. The has also stated officially that we can work odd schedules to accommodate Covid life.

But you can’t disagree- it is fact, not opinion!

'It' being what, specifically?