Holidays, isolating and WFH

[LastOrdersMaura]

I work somewhere that has some roles who can WFH and some which can't.
We've all had to work throughout the pandemic, however this difference in our job roles has started to cause some friction.
Right now the debate is that if someone chooses to go abroad to somewhere on the Amber list then can they WFH for the isolation period when they get back. Obviously this isn't fair to those in the other roles who have to either take more holiday to cover that or take it unpaid. I will note that the non WFH role is not usually better paid than the WFH role, it's about the same or worse.
However it's also really hard to say that you can't WFH if that is what you've been doing anyway. Also it's a bit harsh to punish everyone. WFH has been useful to the company in the past as it means work productivity doesn't go down when the schools shut or when people have to isolate.
What are your companies saying?

We are all WFH but I think amber countries are still seen as a bit risky. The main problem (same as last year) is if you test positive while out there and have to stay there until you're clear. How many people are able to turn a one week holiday into potentially a three week one without any work consequences?

I live for foreign travel but we've ruled it out again this year for that reason.

Unfortunately there is always going to exist some roles that can't work from home and they aren't always going to be inherently better paid. If fact, in some cases they'd be worse paid - face to face customer services can't be done from home.

I'm not sure what our new policies will be, but before when the traffic light system was introduced

You can't go to an Amber list country for a holiday

You can go for work in which case work would cover your self isolation period I assume.

You can go in emergency situations in which case you would be applying for whichever leave matched- bereavement for example or taking unpaid leave.

I think it would be a bit petty for someone to complain that if they can’t go to country X then nobody else should be allowed either.

In a similar vein, I have for the majority of my career been limited on when I can take annual leave due to the nature of my specific job. It has never occurred to me that everyone in the organisation should be subject to these limitations even if their job doesn’t require it but just because mine does.

*sorry posted early

When the last traffic light system was introduced, if you were wfh, fine carry on working. If you travelled knowingly to a country on the isolated list and didn't work from home, then holiday had to be taken, but if it changed while there then I think it was sick pay (I had no intention of travelling so didn't really care)

Ultimately, it will always be the case with wfh - isolation or not, wfh people will have the (dubious) luxury of being able to work from their bed if they feel inclined where as an office staff would have to take the day off.

Same way wfh staff will be able to wait in for deliveries/repairers whereas non-wfh would have to take half days etc.

Unless the disparities are within one team - its not wholly unfair that one job role has a different set of perks than the other - including being able to work when isolating.

All sorts of things like this are going to happen. DH has a non-WFH job and his work have already issued a policy to say that if anybody cannot work due to isolating after a holiday then they won't be paid and it will count towards their absence score.

I do already feel very guilty about WFH. When someone rings me and I'm sat at my kitchen table eating toast and they've just cleaned up sick or been punched in the face by someone they were trying to care for. Massive guilt.
However I really want to go see my family. My dad nearly died in December. I'm sure so many people are in the same boat. Feels unfair that if we are allowed to go again in the summer, my role will be less effected than theirs, when they are definitely more valuable!

It has never occurred to me that everyone in the organisation should be subject to these limitations even if their job doesn’t require it but just because mine does.
Yes, this. I can WFH but I can’t flex my hours, I have to be available at set times. I have colleagues who can WFH and flex, colleagues who can’t WFH but can flex, colleagues who can’t WFH and can’t flex. Differing holiday allowances according to how long you’ve worked for the company, different salary levels, some roles can be done job share and part time, some can’t.

I don’t see that this is any different, really. The world of work isn’t necessarily fair. Yes, it’s a bit shitty if a colleague can go on holiday and not need to worry about isolation, but someone else can’t, but I still think that scenario will cause less resentment than refusing opportunities to everyone.

The Local authority I worked for brought in a blanket rule that even those who typically did or could WFH couldn't do that if they were SI after holiday as it was unfair and discriminated against those that couldn't, so all staff were expected to take a/l or unpaid leave. Whilst frustrating I don't see how you can fairly take any other approach. The exception was if the need to SI was introduced whilst you were already on holiday.

@Notmydaughteryoubitch I agree that's fairest. Love your name, btw, Mrs Weasley was the best!

@Notmydaughteryoubitch

The Local authority I worked for brought in a blanket rule that even those who typically did or could WFH couldn't do that if they were SI after holiday as it was unfair and discriminated against those that couldn't, so all staff were expected to take a/l or unpaid leave. Whilst frustrating I don't see how you can fairly take any other approach. The exception was if the need to SI was introduced whilst you were already on holiday.

I think that’s a very fair approach and one more employers should consider. There’s already a big divide many feel in between those who can work from home safely and those that have to accept the risks of a workplace without adding to it.