To think WFH permanently is a game changer?

[MiaMarshmallows]

For working parents as it saves on childcare costs as well as commuting etc?
DP been told he can wfh indefinitely and it's going to improve his lifestyle so much more. For everyone saying he will be outsourced, not a chance. He is very specialised in what he does and earns a very good wage for it.
One good thing to come out of all this at least.

[minchinfin]

childcare costs would have been greatly reduced for me though as I would only have had to pay for childcare 9-5, not 8-6 - where they generally charge more for breakfast clubs, extended days etc. At school age this would have been drastically reduced as I would have juts paid for 1 after-school club until 5 instead of breakfast club, 1 after-school club until 5, afterchool/wrap around care 5-6 and a meal.

[Eleganz]

@merrymouse

So childcare costs should not come down. Only commuting.

You also have to factor in the cost of e.g heating a house during the day.

I think that if WFH became the norm it would become easier for employees to get tax relief, but working at home is not cost free.

It's true, although my commuting costs are so much higher than my electricity and heating bill increases that it is a bit of a no brainer. I suspect that many others are the same too.

If I'm going to be able to continue to work from home more regularly after this I am going to have to invest in some improvements to my office space though. I know that many colleagues simply don't have the luxury of a dedicated space that I am fortunate to have.

[Eleganz]

Should add that wrap around childcare is often needed due to commuting rather than someone actually needed to be at work during the time required. So it may reduce for some.

[BustopherPonsonbyJones]

@merrymouse

So childcare costs should not come down. Only commuting.

You also have to factor in the cost of e.g heating a house during the day.

I think that if WFH became the norm it would become easier for employees to get tax relief, but working at home is not cost free.

I like your optimism but I think you are being naive if you think the government will continue to offer tax relief if you WFH. They will be doing everything in their power to get people back into work because we are broke. If anything, they will find ways to tax home workers or their employers for offering it.

[merrymouse]

I like your optimism but I think you are being naive if you think the government will continue to offer tax relief if you WFH.

I'm imagining a future situation where WFH is supported by some big businesses (perhaps because of savings on rent, heating etc?) and tax breaks for employed home workers would be a vote winner.

I think WFH works for some, but not for others. I'm just thinking through the financial implications.

[Cloudbeeb]

Government will never endorse WFH in the form of tax breaks or financial help for many reasons, the main one being financial- there is a lot of money and therefore tax to be collected from people travelling in and using city centre facilities. Of course some offices are in the arse end of nowhere and many people take packed lunches in so don't spend money; but for those that do, it's more than if everyone is sat at home. Politically I don't think it'd be popular at all, as many people, including a load of government paid professions don't have it as an option. If anything they will find a way to tax businesses who don't have an office presence.

[lolulop]

agree @Cloudbeeb

[MargosKaftan]

Oh yes, one of dds friends mums was saying she works 3 long days, mainly because commuting costs and childcare, this works well. She was planning to move to 4 shorter days, do one day in the office as a long day then the other 2 days hours over the other 4 days, with no childcare costs on those days.

It's making employers see flexibility works. They can retain good employees, that this will equate to a pay rise for her, saving the £60 a day train journey and the childcare for 3 primary aged kids.

Dhs employers are discussing 1 day in the office a week or fortnight. (Sadly I'm in every day)

[user5464]

WFH may be financially great for some. It could be a social nightmare though. Kids at home all day, wives at home mostly the ones looking after them - abuse rates will soar (as we have seen already)

We are much better when we mix with others. At work all those incidental relationships are nourishing - someone who is not of your rank or involved in the latest drama.

[rushmess]

In a perfect world people could have the option of going to work 2/3 times a week and wfh on other days.
This means you only have to worry about after school childcare for those days when you go to work.
It also means time for health, hobbies and recreation as you save time on travelling.
Save money on travelling.
Less traffic, less crowded on public transport and less pollution for the environment.
You would be able to have friends at work as well as school, gyms, book clubs.
You would be able to cook fresh meals at home some evenings.
Go out to meet friends for coffee or lunch during lunch breaks.
Play board games with your kids in the evenings.
Have breakfast and a cup of tea in peace.
Go for a walk or run during lunch break.
Do yoga or meditation before you start work.

Aaahhh.........

And then.......she wakes up 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[notacooldad]

rushmess
Thats pretty much my life now .
All of the team have to cover a few shifts in the building we work in over the month. The building is open ( not to the public) from 7.30am until 10.00pm Two people have to be on shift but the rest of the time we WFH and work what hours suit us and the families we work with.
It has been a great success and I doubt we will go back for many reasons.

[notacooldad]

I forgot to add in my last post, those that don't like wfh can request to do more shifts in the building. Theres a few staff that are finding it hard work being g at home so the rota can be tilted in their favour. It all started out equally where we has the same number of days as each other at home and in the building. Over the months it's been tweeked to suit everyone's needs.

[drspouse]

We use a childminder so pay hourly for two children
We also use a CM but pay per session. So no savings there.

[therealteamdebbie]

There has always been a lot more requests for WFH than roles available, so it would be a plus if all those workers who have been trying for years were now given the chance to get one.

A bit like part-time roles, even if there are more requests for the IDEA of part-time, and not the reality, but that's another debate entirely.

[MiaMarshmallows]

Rushmess My DP is that person and I know a few more who are in the same position. Definitely not a pipe dream.

[OverTheRubicon]

@user5464

WFH may be financially great for some. It could be a social nightmare though. Kids at home all day, wives at home mostly the ones looking after them - abuse rates will soar (as we have seen already)

We are much better when we mix with others. At work all those incidental relationships are nourishing - someone who is not of your rank or involved in the latest drama.

Why do you assume kids would be home all day and 'wives' (what? You're aware that many mothers aren't married, right?) looking after them?

Kids can be back at school, younger kids in nursery, wraparound care, a holiday club or with another family member who is not working at that time of day (e.g. grandparent, shift working parent) or paid carer, while the person works from home.

It is beneficial for the environment, for people's mental health and for a majority of families to have people working at home at least some of the week, provided they are properly supported with the right kit etc. It's up to us as a society to do more to protect those more at risk from this, but not to put it on hold just because a few arses will take advantage. Would you also get rid of parks because flashings and muggings happen in them?

[Baker0104]

My job hasn't changed but my OH has been WFH for a year now due to covid and won't be going back into the office full time once this is over. His work have realised that the staff all work just as hard at home and they can save so much money on London office space. They've given up 2 London office leases which has saved them a lot. There will only be 1 office in London for the company now so they will each go in once a week on a rota system. If you want to be in the office more however then they can accommodate this.

It's so much nicer for us, saves us £5000 a year on travel expenses. We're having our first baby in July so it'll help lots there! I'm a nanny so long hours, it'll mean I can get up and go to work leaving the baby home with dad, I'll do the school run for the oldest child and pick baby up on the way back through so he can start at 9am, have baby with me during the day, then when OH finishes at 5pm he can come collect the baby while I finish my work day at 6.15 😊

[OliviaBensonsEyebrow]

I've really been happy with saving the cost (both money and time) of commuting and would love to go back to 2 days office / 3 days home.

Not sure it's a game changer in that I still think our cities will be where a lot of the work is but it might mean that commuter land expands a bit further away from cities, as people will do a longer commute if they only have to go in 2/3 days, rather than 5.

[Passthecake30]

I’ll be going to the office 1 day a week in future, compared to wfh 1 day a week pre -Covid. I’ve saved money as dd is in yr 6 so can look after herself/zone out with an iPad after I’ve collected her. From sept, I’ll have 2 in secondary school and it’ll be great for our work/life balance just being here when they return home. My eldest struggled a bit with motivation to do his hw while I worked in the office, now I’ll be home to nag/support them.

[Coffeepot72]

We'll be going back 1-2 days per week in September/October. The rest of the time will be WFH. The entire workforce seems to be delighted. Me included.

[theleafandnotthetree]

@changi

Being with your spouse 7 days a week isn’t normal

For a lot of people, it is now.

Normal. But shit.

[ParadiseIsland]

I personally think that having two people working from home is a but if nightmare tbh.
You dint get a break from each other.
You dint get so see other people so your other half is basically your only social contact for most of the time.
It makes people reliant in each other much more than before. It also heightens all the downsides of the relationship imo. Because you basically never have a break from each other.

[theleafandnotthetree]

@ParadiseIsland

I personally think that having two people working from home is a but if nightmare tbh.
You dint get a break from each other.
You dint get so see other people so your other half is basically your only social contact for most of the time.
It makes people reliant in each other much more than before. It also heightens all the downsides of the relationship imo. Because you basically never have a break from each other.

I separated from my husband a number of years and can only imagine how draining it would have been to have spent the last year as each others main adult company, squabbling over whose turn it was to do what, home schooling etc. It would have done for us I reckon, if we hadn't already been done for.