WFH, suddenly taken away, are we really just going back to the old way?

[80caloriesofbiscuitplease]

Today my (public sector) employer announced we were all expected to be back in the office, full time from a months time, with home working only to be used in emergencies.
I know that response to WFH has been mixed from other professionals and some employees have frankly been less productive from home. I would have been happy with one day per week from home as a compromise.
My argument is that there should be a consultation period where we could put forward our rationale for being able to maintain an aspect of home working. Also are we really going to go back to the old way, packed buses, packed trains, traffic, pollution, all for presentism?
I feel that we've seen another way, with happier employees, healthier employees and an improvement in the environment. I work in a grey concrete wasteland where I regularly sit at my desk all day without a break. At home I can open my doors, hear the birds, stroke my cat. My mental health has improved so much and that makes me a better employee. Today two of us were in the office and four were working from home. They really want to go back to six of us coming to work all day, every day to answer emails and input data which we could do from home?
I know I could look for another role but I like my job and I'm quite good at it. I don't want a role which is completely home based, but I feel saddened by the whole world going back to the way we lived before.
And yes I know some have worked out the house the whole way through. It's not a 'my life is harder' competition.

*sorru not that I gave the idea I thought if it, googled it and realised that it was being done already which is good

@Rhinothunder

Exactly *@PattyPan*

Capitalism is about businesses doing what is best for them

For a lot of businesses this now means ending WFH now the government restrictions are ending as it has been shown to be less productive and less competitive (see the objective audit results for this- don't base your arguments on the claims of single individuals WFH and wanting to continue)

WFH was always temporary and isn't anyone's 'right' by default

And now is a brilliant opportunity to assess whether capitalism and this way of working is really in everyone’s best interests. For a lot of people, it isn’t, and businesses have now realised they’ve got to adapt. It already is a legal right to request flexible working!

I don’t owe Pret A Manger a living

Indeed. After working from home and now doing hybrid working I thought I'd enjoy buying my lunch out. But I've been eating so healthily and well at home that I've realised that buying takeaway food for lunch is mostly a lot of beige, overly carby, overpriced meh food with hardly a vegetable to rub together. So I'm bringing my own lunch in all the time anyway.

And now is a brilliant opportunity to assess whether capitalism and this way of working is really in everyone’s best interests. For a lot of people, it isn’t, and businesses have now realised they’ve got to adapt. It already is a legal right to request flexible working!

And even the most hardened capitalist can see it isn't just a "naice thing to do for employees". Investment is going into shops and businesses where people actually live now rather than commuterville being a ghost town in the daytime.

Are people who are working from home on this thread normally working in the big cities, London, Birmingham, Manchester, etc? Or is it local work too? I'm just curious.

@mag2305 small city here

I live in a Town, just a small high road, tescos, lots charity shops and barbers. If more wfh livens up local areas, then fab.

I'm in London but according to this thread I'm one of the people who should hate wfh as I'm single and live alone in a small flat without private outdoor space (but I do have a communal garden that no one else uses).

@Passthecake30

I live in a Town, just a small high road, tescos, lots charity shops and barbers. If more wfh livens up local areas, then fab.

Agree with this too – if more people live and wfh in towns and villages outside major cities and spend more time there rather than commuting, it's an opportunity to regenerate local high streets and independent businesses.

@tedmullins

But Capitalism is not about what works best for everyone. It's about profit and economic competitiveness.

I'm not disputing the right to ask to WFH, I'm saying it's no one's right to expect the employer has to grant permission

Businesses will do what is best for their profit margins and for a lot of them that will now mean telling employees to come back to the office for a large part of their working week

I’d be interested to see some analysis of how small businesses have done in residential areas pre/during pandemic

badly because they were closed for months. Even when they were open, people were scared of non-essential shopping and told be scared of each other and to treat themselves as unknowingly plague-ridden. There has been no revenge shopping locally.

Economic status of small commuter towns near me is not improved, the towns in decline are still declining. The towns with naice shops still feel like ghost towns, too.

Not convinced on the offshoring model... I overheard DH & Colleague patiently explain some work task to an overseas colleague yesterday. Slavic accent? They all work in data processing. Slav was asking for some English phrases to be better explained.

@Rhinothunder and that's why capitalism is a horrible way to run a society. If this moves us towards more socialist workplace policies and a democracy between employees and employers as to what works best for everyone, brilliant. We should look to New Zealand as an example – they rank wellbeing over profit in terms of their country's performance.

@Rhinothunder actually my organisation has always had wfh for at least one day a week as they cut costs by not having desks for everyone, so that should be considered as part of the bottom line too. They are going to reduce office space further and we won’t be expected to go in more than twice a week but we have the option to go in more.
I think what people are saying (not just on this thread, there have been a lot of articles in the FT) is that many employees want to wfh now and employers might struggle to attract the people they want if they refuse to allow flexibility. I certainly wouldn’t apply for a job where I had to be in the office 5 days a week because that is worse than my current offer. I’d happily give up many of my other perks but not that.

I genuinely don't get the issue of why it can't just be a hybrid model and those who want to work from home can and those who don't want to can go into the office providing everyone is meeting business needs. We have had several hybrid meetings now and they work fine.

I have actually been achieving more whilst working from home (as confirmed by my manager and I am ahead of timescale on a project) so I don't see why I should have to go back to the office? I enjoy working from home, I am meeting my targets and I am happy. Why should I have to therefore come back to the office five days a week? What is the issue?

Can it not just be done on a case by case basis. Clearly some will be less productive working from home in which case a plan should be put in place (for example bringing the individual back to the office) to work.

A lot who wfh are quite selfish to other family members when they are at the kitchen table doing their oh so important job and have no thought to what misery this causes, loads of threads on here about this.

@Rosegoldglow most posters on here are advocating for a hybrid model anyway.
IMO the original point of the thread has been lost. OP’s employer is NOT going back to the old way , quite the opposite. They used to have one day WFH and have taken that away.
Among the business and people I have worked with this is rare. Very, very few have wanted people back in the office full time in fact a lot of the moaning comes from people asked to work a split week (2-3 days in the office).
Everything else is just going In circles

Also to add - the discussion is also whether WFH is a right/entitlement.
This has also been answered by pp - the right to request flexible working has been around for a long time. Anyone can ask. Whether they’re denied or not is another question.
The end summary is - if productivity really is higher business will be happy to have WFh.
If they don’t despite such higher productivity do you want to work for such idiots?
If the business managers are now dumb then the corollary is that no, productivity is not indeed higher.

TedMullins In terms of the economy, NZ is very much a capitalist country. It has more socialist policies than the UK which provides better checks and balances than the UK but it’s nevertheless capitalist. It’s not a horrible way to run a society per say.

@Rhinothunder

Ps for those who maintain that the commute is the issue, you need to move closer to your workplace!!

Where you live is literally not your employers responsibility/ problem

I did originally move to be close to my employer. After two years, my employer moved their base so I now live an hour away. I can't afford to move house every time they lease a new office.

@LightasaBreeze I can guarantee those people will be selfish in other aspects at home as well though, it’s not caused by wfh.

I think if you've had a positive experience WFH since the start of the pandemic then you're obviously going to feel differently and may want to continue that way long term. That's fair enough.
Opinions on WFH will be divided though because while some people will have loved it, for others it may have been difficult and miserable.

My WFH experience is a bit different as I was teaching from home whilst the schools were closed and also doing a lot of private tutoring work too. I do work in a small office with others ordinarily for tutoring. My oh also works in schools and was also teaching from home. We have a 2 year old who doesn't go to nursery yet and grandparents weren't always able to provide childcare. Also, our house is tiny! So WFH was a bit of a logistical struggle.

I also found it quite lonely and isolating at times. Plus, found it quite difficult getting into the right head space, going from changing my ds's nappy one minute to teaching fractions the next. Crazy!

Maybe it's also a personal thing but I like separating out home and work but maybe I'd feel differently if I was older, had older children, a more spacious home, etc. Everyone's circumstances are different.

I also wonder how many people would actually have the time to posting on this thread if we were all back in the office already! I definitely wouldn't be ;-)

I think it's worth considering how much of the reported downsides - loss of productivity / profit - of WFH will be, at least in part, because this was a sudden, forced directive that many businesses had very little time to plan for. For many this was not a carefully organised transition to a new way of working planned over months with the chance to consult staff; it was practically overnight and companies had to adapt on the hoof, while dealing with stressed and scared employees who suddenly had other huge challenges outside work to cope with too, especially in the early months of the pandemic. Of course efficiency and productivity will take a hit in those circumstances, but it doesn't mean that under normal circumstances where processes can be reviewed and adapted with some measure of control, WFH or hybrid working is fundamentally wrong or unproductive.

I'm also public sector. WFH has always been an informal thing pre pandemic that individual line managers could agree. Post pandemic the whole organisation was WFH. Recently we were able to opt into one of three work styles. a) work from home b) office based c) hybrid. Approx 85% opted for a). This will be reviewed annually. The benefits are massive all round. I think as long as your role doesn't require you to be office based there is a case to challenge the instruction via union.

It already is a legal right to request flexible working!
Funny how so many seem to interpret 'request' as 'entitled'.

As already said, everyone gets to request, it's been so for many years. It's then up to the company to decide if the business can be carried without negative effect doing so.

In many cases, it will have a detrimental effect and that enough to say no.

Let's face it. Why would companies buy or rent space if staff can work just as productively at home? They do because as a whole, businesses tend to be more productive when their staff are all in one place. It's not just about the productivity of one person but the team.

In the end, it will come down to supply and demand. The staff that are hard to replace have more of a say than staff that can easy be replaced.