To think my employer demanding I go back to the office is just cruel

[Runnyrose]

I work full time over 4 days. DD attends nursery and DH and I split drop offs and pick ups between us. We live 45 minutes from my work in one direction and an hour from DHs in the other but I've been working from home since returning from mat leave in February. My job used to involve a lot of travel around the county and before mat leave, I could easily not step foot in our main office for weeks at a time and generally would start from home and finish at home and go to meetings or appointments in between. Because of the efficiency of Teams, these meetings are almost exclusively virtual and there is no plan to go back to face to face meetings. There is literally not a single aspect of my job that requires me to be in the office.
Suddenly, it's been announced that we have to go back to the office and work there. This will be impossible to manage with DDs childcare setting so the only way will be for my DH to take over both drop offs and pick ups which will mean, to ensure he's there on time, losing 2 hours of work a day. He's self employed so this is a significant amount of money lost every day. I will also lose 2 hours of seeing DD for travel time every day. Not to mention the sudden increased cost in fuel.
I've spoken to my manager and she was completely inflexible and the only solution we could come up with was for me to drop my hours so that I can drop DD off as soon as nursery open, race to work, leave the second the clock strikes 5 to race to pick her up again which frees DH up at least but makes my day a race everyday and costs me a full day a week's pay which works out at nearly £5k a year in bring home pay, not to mention the impact on my pension etc . I can't work full time over 5 days because the nursery don't have availability for her current day off and also, I don't want her going in 5 days a week. Going part time won't even feel like a break for me because I'll literally just be replacing the 2 hours a day working with traveling.
I feel so unbelievably angry at my employer that I work so incredibly hard for them, they know this and my manager said she knows this, but there is no flexibility to allow me to keep working from home when it's going to cause complete devastation to our family set up and financial situation and not in any way shape or form change what they get out of me whilst I'm at work.
I'm trying to find another job but my work is quite niche and there just aren't that many jobs around that pay the same level I'm at now. And I do love my job and don't want to leave it.
I have no problem going back into the office, I just want the option to still be allowed to start and / or finish at home like the job was when I first started and what DH and I planned our situation around before we even had DD.

“It doesn't make them non-existent but if the employer is too clueless to say to the workforce "this is what happened, here were the costs and benefits to the business, this is how it was measured and this is why we need X, Y and Z" then I'd be astonished if they had conducted any kind of meaningful assessment.”

We simply don’t know if this is the case with the employer, because the OP hasn’t said and just that after a meeting they couldn’t come to an agreement.

All the OP has done is what’s beneficial for her and not what’s beneficial for her employer, sometimes I believe individuals believe the employer works for them and not the other way round.

They’ve given a flexible solution, just not the one the OP wants.

My own organisation has had a huge impact during the pandemic with people WFH. It’s not surprising that companies are changing their working environment to try and keep them afloat.

I wonder if the OP’s employer is actually trying to force out some of the staff? Who knows?

If everyone had just gone along with everything their employer wants then we would all still be working in Dickensian mills. We do now have some rights and a skilled and competent employee should be valued for what they contribute to company profits.

Some people here are saying suck it up because they did. I had to suck up a lot of unreasonable conditions for many years and my family suffered. If I had my time again I’d argue my case more instead of being a good, loyal employee.

@Franklin12

I worked for a company for 30 plus years most of which was spent working from home with client meetings as required. I was a middle manager and had a team of people and also interfaced with other parts of the business.

There are huge issues with wfh for some people. Sadly the more junior members and often women saw it as an opportunity to be unavailable during school run times, who declined calls after 1530 because they knew their children would make a noise having come back from school. Who took it as an opportunity to save on childcare and who were bloody difficult to manage because you couldnt see them but you knew they were slackers.

There was always some reason why they couldnt attend something which meant others had to pick up their work. That caused resentment with the rest of the team.

You would be very surprised how many people think if you work from home family can drop in, you can take a break to do school runs, attend school plays, take kids to the dentist, to play dates etc etc because actually no one can see what you are doing.

The call centres I worked with had people who put themselves on busy with 'customers' and it was found that they were chit chatting to each other!

Our young people need to be rubbing shoulders with people, getting on with their careers not at home being only a voice at the end of the phone.

So how does this 'rubbing shoulders' work when your team is geographically dispersed anyway? I find the seeing what you're doing argument very strange. As a manager you know that X amount of output is required ; X may not be numerically measurable but still performance is measured by what gets done. Why can you not performance manage people if they decline calls/slack off?

They are being dicks. But I guess they figure if they are flexible for you they will have to flexible for everyone that asks. When I had littles I had an hours commute and I put them in a nursery near my work which solved the problem although meant they were in the car with me two hours a day. They mostly slept to be fair during that time. However I knew that it would be worse when they started school so I started looking for a more flexible job early with that in mind. Could that be a solution for you?

Do they want you to come in every day? I get you need to be in 1 or 2 days but every day seems excessive.

@upsielazy

But they didn't go to the office, they worked from home meaning if they went out to visit sites they went from their home. Not go to the office THEN go to site.

Everyone telling op to find a new job- it will be so much easier for OP to get time cut, take time off juggle etc as needs be in a current job she has worked up some leeway with than to start a new job in a niche area where she wants to work from home and wants them to be extremely flexible. Sorry OP

@stayathomer

Everyone telling op to find a new job- it will be so much easier for OP to get time cut, take time off juggle etc as needs be in a current job she has worked up some leeway with than to start a new job in a niche area where she wants to work from home and wants them to be extremely flexible. Sorry OP

Bit of a defeatist attitude.

I have what I consider a niche skillset, and you know what, it is. But I've still quit my job, and I've applied exclusively for remote roles. Very highly paid - same or more than my previous role - and competitive. Had interviews for several of them, making the final two etc.

The one thing you should never, ever fall into the trap of is thinking that you need your employer more than they need you.

The one thing you should never, ever fall into the trap of is thinking that you need your employer more than they need you.

This. Exceptions apply, obviously - in some workforces, there are always new people to fill your role BUT you always have the advantage of being trained, having experience, knowing the business etc.

It's also true that some people couldn't financially cope with a new job unless new paydays etc lined up perfectly, and that's understandable too.

But largely - your employer has to impress you as much as you impress them. I've spent the last few months reminding my business partners of this as our employees ask for varying degrees of flexibility and changes to their roles - yes, we could refuse to accommodate and let them look elsewhere. But if we can accommodate, why would we not keep good workers with experience of our business and industry, who we like and know we can trust? It's a bigger gamble to hire someone new than it is to see if a different working model can work efficiently with our existing team.

Before maternity if one of your site visits was cancelled would you have gone home or to the office to work?

Cruel is a very emotive word to use for an employer. 9 times out of 10 an employer won't ever be cruel. They may make decisions you don't like, but it's usually as a result of a commercial or cultural reason and not just to be 'cruel'.

I'm afraid as you are contracted to work out of an office, the danger was always there. Unfortunately you've made decisions based on the assumption it won't change, and it has.

I'm confused. You used to travel all around the country. Previously. So you don't have a case, surely?

@Oblomov21

I'm confused. You used to travel all around the country. Previously. So you don't have a case, surely?

No, she used to travel in the region in which she lives. Her day would start and end from home.

What was the business need?

Could you work earlier say get in for 7am and leave at 4?

thecatsthecats
The difference is you don't want an exact set of conditions. No matter how much a company needs you, they also need things to run a certain way, and if your conditions don't match theirs then you are very much responsible to them. I've worked in companies that were so accommodating that the rest of us were nearly on the floor trying to pick up slack for other employees. Why would an employer choose that when taking on a new employee? Whereas of course if they know the employee delivers they'll try their best

All the OP has done is what’s beneficial for her and not what’s beneficial for her employer, sometimes I believe individuals believe the employer works for them and not the other way round

No the OP's previous working arrangements were set to be beneficial to the employer by traveling daily to clients. The employer has changed the work pattern, not the OP.

A number of employers have changed work patterns in ways which just happen to disproportionately hit women, particularly women with children. I'm sure its a total coincidence that its mostly women affected.

But would op have even been able to fulfil her previous working pattern without same issues?

The employer has changed the work pattern, not the OP.

No. The pandemic changed the work pattern.

The employers are now setting the terms for the OP operates when on-sight visits are replaced with something else. On the face of it, there's nothing unreasonable about them doing that. They are her employers.

The exception would be if wfh is stated as the OP's place of work in her contract. But the OP hasn't supplied that info.

As your contract states the office as your place of work, and the need for you to travel to sites no longer exists, your employer isn't doing anything wrong by having you come into the office.

I'm all for flexibility, I think its a great thing and is very beneficial when it's exercised both ways. You already have flexibility in your working arrangements with your compressed hours. Everything you've said has been about your domestic priorities, with not much said about productivity, efficiency etc. Your husband is able to completely manage his own workload so why is there no consideration given to him changing his working hours or arrangements?

Without knowing exactly why your employer has decided they want everybody in the office, it's impossible to say whether it's a reasonable request or not.