To resign because my job suddenly requires me in 3 days a week?

[Earlyflash]

We got told on Friday that we would be required to do a minimum of three days a week in the office from monday.

I’m new at the company (4 months) and this was never mentioned in the recruitment phase. That said I didn’t push them for a written answer.

Given we’ve spent the last two years working 100% at home, this seems like a massive overreach, and I’m intending to tell them to do one.

It’s going to have such an impact on me, my partner, and my children (from previous relationship).

I already have interviews for fully remote roles.

So, AIBU for reacting to such a request?

[quote monfuseds]@MarshaBradyo & yet you are still responding although of course ignoring the ones highlighting your embarrassing errors.

I guess it explains why your experiences are so at odds with everyone else on this thread though. You probably experience that a lot 😆[/quote]
I’m now laughing that you can’t stop…

I could tell you were one of those strange posters who go apeshit like this

I would try speaking to them first, my DH's company went back 3 days a week and he said he didn't want to and is WFH full time. If they say you have to, then take the other job.

@MarshaBradyo this is what is bizarre, you can't stop hence why you keep responding to me but can't see your own behaviour.

Well at least we have something in common as i've been laughing at you throughout the whole thread!

yes yes I’m very upset

Let it go….

I could tell you were one of those strange posters who go apeshit like this

Why are you so upset that you made a mistake, we all do. I've no idea why it's triggered you so much 🤷🏻‍♀️

Hybrid systems like 3 days at the office, 2 at home does seem to give the best of both worlds for most, employees can have a couple of days they can get their head down without distractions to clear through work, or a couple of days with cheaper childcare, being at home for pets or deliveries etc, but then 3 days in the office for those team meetings, training, helping out colleagues etc.

OP were you definitely told only possibly 1 day a week in the office or "at least 1 day a week" or "there will be some requirement to be in the office in the future, probably 1 day a week." You might be able to negotiate 2 in the office, 3 at home.

If you work in London there are two issues with this.

One: the rail companies are running a massively reduced timetable.

Secondly: a full time season ticket costs the same as travelling in 3 days a week.

So it would be better to do a 3 day home/2 day office split. Once we have a pre-covid timetable back.

Of course, if you drive/cycle/walk into work, it's a different story.

I would also speak to your employer first before jumping ship.

Let it go….

why can't you?

@DGRossetti I guess it depends how much power you have as a candidate at interview.

Everything is connected. If offering WFH starts to pull the better candidates away, it gives others more clout.

The bottom line is a canny employer offering WFH realises that for some employees it's effectively a x% pay rise. My first WFH role increased my monthly pay by £250, simply on fuel alone. The extra 10 hours a week were a bonus.

It's early days yet. Ultimately the government and HRMC still hold a lot of cards, and the easiest way to kill WFH is just to tax it as a benefit in kind (see upthread). However, a direction of travel with increased WFH also helps towards those COP26 promises. Not that the UK or any other nation has the slightest intention of actually delivering them. But it's a great, free sleight of hand to say "Look ! The equates to a 0.00001% of fuck all towards our commitments."

Of course those employees who aren't WFH or being called back in are carefully keeping an eye on colleagues remuneration ? Because a lot of people will have been tested in the past few months over "how much does WFH mean to me in hard cash ?".

Obviously not all roles can be done WFH. And I hope that society as a whole starts to recognise that. For example by making sure that public transport doesn't collapse. In which case I don't think it's unreasonable that all that extra lolly WFH is put back into "the system".

My situation is my situation. DW has MS and would be at home anyway. So we have no extra heating costs whether I WFH or not. By WFH we also reduce the need for district nurse visits (thus freeing them up for other patients). In addition with a carefully planned schedule I can take her to appointments myself. Again freeing up hospital transport for others.

I doubt that many employers are factoring in the needs of their landlord or keeping Pret in business.

This. My employer reduced office space from 5 floors to 1 and has reconfigured the 1 to be designed solely for use for collaborative work - rooms for groups coming together on projects etc, open spaces. The view is if you are sat at a desk on a computer you can do that from home. There were two cafes under the building, one has closed, that's not our problem.

And I hope that society as a whole starts to recognise that. For example by making sure that public transport doesn't collapse. In which case I don't think it's unreasonable that all that extra lolly WFH is put back into "the system".

Yes that is a good point re public transport. I know TFL has a huge black hole & will permanently cut some services. In London this may not have a huge impact but other parts of the countries may not have various options.

@OLP2019

I mean really ffs until covid everyone was expected to work in an office so what is the problem

Presumably you’ve never had to concern yourself with arranging childcare with no notice.

Informing the OP on Friday or requirement to work in the office from Monday = INADEQUATE NOTICE.

THAT’S OBVIOUSLY THE PROBLEM!

I'd be careful about how you discuss this with another prospective employer, because frankly I'd think you were a bit dim for not being clear on their intentions in a recent job change.

I started a new role in December, and I wanted remote working by default. A surprising number of employers advertised as remote, but put "until guidance changes" in the description.

I preferred to apply for jobs where they had a clearly defined hybrid or remote model rather than one who didn't know what they wanted. It's on you to appropriately vet future employers.

Secondly: a full time season ticket costs the same as travelling in 3 days a week.

So it would be better to do a 3 day home/2 day office split. Once we have a pre-covid timetable back.

I think the rail companies will just increase the cost of 2 days though.

Surely, hybrid maybe beneficial for everyone but people's needs vary and it is not as simple as suggesting everything should be about the poor young 18 year olds stuck inside. At 18 surely you can find ways to socialise other than through colleagues in an office and you can do this with hybrid situations anyway!

When I talk about the social side of working, I'm not necessarily talking about socialising, but working alongside all sorts of people and developing social skills to manage those relationships, although finding new friends at work is also a real positive as well.

I doubt that many employers are factoring in the needs of their landlord or keeping Pret in business.

A lot of commercial lets are on multi year basis, so quitting early can incur a penalty. However there's usually a break clause so many years in (or every so many years). In the past it's been an excuse to up the rent. However when I first started WFH, it was use to quit the office. Which was then (and still is) occupied by a firm of solicitors. Now that is one business that is going to always need a office (or "official" premises).

I think there will be sectors where it will be led by employee demand. Sectors where you want to attract top young graduates will try and maintain at least some in person office time if that's what young people want. Firms who employ mainly older, more experienced staff may find they have to offer a hybrid model to attract staff.

Be curious to know what peoples experiences with companies that run an offshore capability are ? They clearly haven't got an over-ready excuse that they "can't support" remote working. They have to explain why they can't support your remote working.

I also wonder if this entire subject is starting to be divided along the same lines as "asking for a pay rise" ? Where it emerges that some employees have been slightly conditioned into feeling they can't be as assertive as others ? I've read a few posts here where it's clear not all demographics have the same attitudes. And I write that very conscious of where I sit in that stew .....

OP were you definitely told only possibly 1 day a week in the office or "at least 1 day a week" or "there will be some requirement to be in the office in the future, probably 1 day a week."

I wondered about that myself; we can all sometimes hear what we want to hear, and it doesn't always match the reality

@JuergenSchwarzwald

If you work in London there are two issues with this.

One: the rail companies are running a massively reduced timetable.

Secondly: a full time season ticket costs the same as travelling in 3 days a week.

So it would be better to do a 3 day home/2 day office split. Once we have a pre-covid timetable back.

Of course, if you drive/cycle/walk into work, it's a different story.

I would also speak to your employer first before jumping ship.

Yes this all makes sense. Our trains are woeful at the moment.

The problem is, train companies are trying to protect their profits and do so by cutting services to save money (ironically many train companies are foreign state owned so overseas governments profit from our misery)

We need a train service that serves the commuter. But we are held hostage! I don’t have any direct trains at the moment, and it’s awful.

Of course they're not being unreasonable to expect a return to the office. It's a little naive to think that this policy would not change at some point, most people understand and want a more 'normal' life back. Find yourself another job that now suits as this one clearly doesn't.

Just get another job

People wishing COVID to be gone won't make it true. There will be another surge and more variants. This directive is likely to reversed on a sixpence. Flexibility should not be one way.

It is entirely unreasonable to change from WFH 100% to 3 days a week without notice.

Of course childcare is a work in place issue. Employers must not discriminate.

I have worked from home part time at least 17 years, some of them before I had DC. I work hard and am effective. This is true as an employee as when I was self employed.

WFH has benefits and drawbacks. We need to optimise the former and mitigate the latter. This isn't a race to the bottom for people unable to WFH. My partner is a teacher and has been working in schools throughout.

I have not noticed any decline on customer service over the past two years. It is less likely that we will every speak to a call centre as a first option. It's cheaper to be have IT interface.

I’m in a similar position. After a year of WFH, we were told that we wouldn’t be returning to the office, except for occasional meetings. I took this into consideration when moving house.

Nearly a year later, management have changed their minds. They want us back in the office and they want to give us some unpopular tasks that were previously carried out by another department. According to our contracts, they have the right to do this. I don’t want to go back to hot-desking in the office and I loathe the thought of my new duties. So I’m looking for another job.

Trains and buses cannot cope with increased travel. Before Christmas there were a lot of services cancelled without notice because of staffing issues. One of my team had awful problems with train services. They could get to work ok but travel home was awful and took 3 hours longer than expected.