To think it’s daft to make big life decisions based on WFH without checking it’s permanent?

[GoldenOmber]

My work used to be office-based. We’ve all been WFH since March 2020 because of government rules (not in England).

This week the government lifted that rule, and later that day our employers told us what the plans were to start bringing us back. This is pretty flexible - not starting for a month or two yet, will still allow a lot of WFH for people who want it (like 9 days a fortnight with one in the office). Most people are ok with this. Some people really aren’t.

Now we are having drama over email with a small but vocal group saying how angry/upset they are, because they have made big changes based around getting to WFH and it will now be difficult for them to go back at all. Even 1 day a fortnight starting in April. Changes like moving house far away from office; getting a dog and not wanting to leave the dog alone; selling car and not wanting to get public transport b/c germs (not just covid, all germs).

Work have ALWAYS said WFH was temporary though! I have some sympathy for how long it’s going to take you to commute from your new house in the middle of nowhere, but SURELY you’d factor that in when you bought it?

YABU - no, after 2 years of WFH working fairly well it was reasonable to expect it to continue without checking.

YANBU - yes, they should obviously have checked.

It’s ridiculous of them!
I see this too at my workplace. Though the boss has said to go back in months ago, plenty are refusing and dragging their heels, going in only a day a week or whatever. No action seems to be taken - it’s an absolute disgrace.
(I stopped wfh after the initial few weeks as I couldn’t stand it)
Public sector and these lazy people are just letting the public down. It makes me very angry but I’m not in charge of them and can do nothing.

@EngTech

WFH will be good for people but not so good when they loose their London Weighting as they will not actually be working in London

Then watch / listen to the moans 😳

Not to mention car allowances, why would anyone need a car allowance if they are going to WFH full time? Some people should be careful what they wish for.

@ABitBesottedWithMyDog

YABU (and it doesn't affect me, I'm freelance and work from home when I want).

If the work can be done from home, why for the love of God insist that people spend hours commuting just to share office space with germ-riddled anti-vaxx rednecks/ perpetual eaters whose crisps packet antics cause interference on your headset/ pinstripe-suited loudmouthed knobheads boring on about themselves and their awful lives?

I work better alone with my potplants, and I know I'm not alone!

No of course not there are plenty of creep around.

well yes it is a control thing as your employer pays your wage in order that you do your job and can see you doing your job

My employer pays me my wage for the results I produce for the company, not for producing them in a specific location. It is up to me to choose to work in the place where I produce the best results. A workplace can't decide that for me.

If this group are actively moaning about it then they are daft. But there will have been plenty of others who deliberately took a chance, and now will vote with their feet and go to a new employer who is fully WFH.

What I find interesting is how work will again change once people are more back in the office. Presumably we will shift back away from the assumption that people are always contactable, always working, 8am/7pm zoom calls etc.

I think a lot of people think staff wanting to work from home are doing it to be lazy and work shy. I’m wfh following the pandemic and I work harder than ever before. I know that if I don’t put in the hours I won’t get stuff done on time and it will get noticed. There is that pressure to prove you are working. The number of staff where I work has been cut year on year and the hours we put in are insane. I regularly work in the evening or miss seeing my children in the evening (husband spends time with them) because I’ve got so much to do. If I were to go back to the office on a regular basis now then physically I would not be up to it. I would also somehow have to find an extra 2 hours a day to make up for time lost travelling, arsing around looking for a parking space etc. I wouldn’t mind going in for a meeting or training but if I had to commit to a set number of days given the demands as they stand then that would be a deal breaker for me.

I just get jealous on these sorts of threads of all the lucky people who were able to stay in the safety of their own homes for as long as they have.

[quote Foolsrule]@SirChenjins - absolutely. I have no idea but when does the custom and practice of the last two years become a legal precedent? Can it?[/quote]
I think there’s a middle ground. If the work has been delivered to a high standard, productivity has increased, staff are happier, turnover is lower etc etc etc then perhaps it’s time to draw on the principles of custom and practice and allow that to continue (where roles allow, obv - some roles will never lend themselves to wfh). There seems to be an element of posturing from some companies who see it almost as a power struggle that they will win because they’re in charge and no-one must forget it. It’s very childish.

[quote AlDanvers]@chaosrabbitland I don't think you understand. It extremely easy to track productivity, regardless of where someone works.

Your job in retail doesn't really compare.[/quote]
but if companies are now wanting people back in the office for days in the week they must have a reason for it though .
everyone working wfh crys they are just as if not more productive than in the office , now many companies are wanting these people back in so obviously they are noticing something different . which is that having everyone sat at home isnt working as well as theyd like in the long term

Haven't voted because im not sure i believe the "wont get public transport because of germs not covid...." that doesn't sound believable!!! If so then YANBU ...how ridiculous..surely everyone knows you should be expected back to work in the office at some point

@gwenneh

well yes it is a control thing as your employer pays your wage in order that you do your job and can see you doing your job

My employer pays me my wage for the results I produce for the company, not for producing them in a specific location. It is up to me to choose to work in the place where I produce the best results. A workplace can't decide that for me.

well they kinda can because they employ you , if they say they now want you in 3 days a week then unless your contract now states wfh on a permenat basis than you wouldnt have a choice , other than to resign or look for something else

Big fan of wfh and I get the annoyance (and to an extent ‘horror’) at even three days a week if lockdown has proved it unnecessary. But basing major life decisions on a work location different to the one in your contract without a change to that contract or a very clear, very flexible policy is foolish to say the least.

Also, I think one day a fortnight is extremely reasonable. I’d be thrilled with that and am surprised at the pushback. My place started off saying three days a fortnight, which everyone seemed happy with, but ended up on three a week when formally announcing the policy. I do find that too much personally given that I’m in a remote team.

@dorkfink

I can't imagine how someone would find 1 day a fortnight back in the office so difficult. Have they moved abroad?

I have a Canadian colleague who went to Canada as soon as she could after the first big llock down, and is not intending on coming back anytime soon.

In some ways people are trying to vote with their feet.

The Great Resignation must be part of this.

Life in some cities was unsustainable for a lot of people probably.

I edged my bets that they would want to keep me and decided to move 2 hours away from the office (and I don't drive!). I did warn them though and my manager said they fight to change my contract.

Thankfully my contract has been changed to full time home worker and that means if they want me in the office then they pay my expenses.

But half our team were full time home workers before covid.

@chaosrabbitland you have talked yourself round in a circle. Because sometimes it's just down to control. Which was the original point.

As someone said above its often 'just because' it's a power play. I work all over the country and at home so never been based in one office. My teams are all based at head office.

Last October our MD said he wanted my teams back. Purley because the Co owner of the business said so, who (incidentally) lives 200 miles away and rarely comes in. I laughed and told him that wasnt good enough reasoning as I had data that proved they worked better at home. In the end, the MD backed me.

It was a power play. Some people will need to go back because it doesn't work and they have limped through. But some employers want people back just 'because'. We are seeing a large influx of experienced staff applying, because we offer wfh (one day a month in the office). They are leaving our competitors. Its good for us.

Also some employers and managers simply don't believe people are working unless they see them doing it. Also some managers are just terrible and we're ineffective before the pandemic. Wfh just exposed it, so they want people back.

There's a couple of people in my team who have up sticks. We are based in Brighton. Someone has moved to Yorkshire, someone else appears to be in the North West but being very vague.

I've received a mileage request and an attempt to order train tickets using our online system. Erm.... No. You have chosen to move away knowing you'd be expected back in the office. Get to fuck with your £200 train ticket.

YABU. What a depressing thread. And instead of judging people who stopped living in big cities or commuting to big cities for work, maybe employers should be a bit more flexible. Maybe the government should be requiring them to be, in the interests of family friendliness and the environment.

Covid home working for those lucky enough to be able to do it has allowed some people and families priced out of decent accommodation to find something more affordable for their needs elsewhere. The alternative is that we have to pay in inflated housing costs so that big city office spaces can continue to be rented to our employers for us all to work in … a crap deal for anyone except the highest paid.

I just don’t blame anyone for wanting more flexibility. Lots of employers have not been clear or they have overpromised or changed their minds. People can’t keep putting their lives and plans on hold for years not knowing when this would be over. And try asking your struggling boss back in the thick of the pandemic while everyone was desperately trying to keep their business going for ‘everything they’ve promised you in writing’…

Yanbu but at the same time, I don't understand why people have to go into the office when they've worked from home for 2 years. Apart from the old fashion argument of 'because your employer says so' but really what is the reasoning and whys of it all? It seems really unnecessary to me, different if there are performance issues and they want to check up on you, l but if there's none and people have worked well from home, I just don't know why they want people back.

They can do the exact same work from home so why do they have to come in? Baffles me but I'm clearly in the minority going by the replies.

And the economy argument, I go into the city nearly every weekend now because I don't have to go through the week, when i worked there all week, I was sick of it and wouldn't go near at the weekend. I have more money because I'm not commuting, so I spend more. I imagine a lot of people are the same.

The people who physically can't work from home that I've spoken to enjoy the roads being quieter for them anyway.

Maybe I'm missing something, or I just don't accept 'because we say so' with no reasoning behind it.

However, yes you should have checked with your manager etc before you moved away from the office or just move and quietly apply for a new remote role that suits.

But without the annoying, moaning people at work, nothing would ever change. Although they annoy me a bit, they're often forward thinking and necessary - and the reason worker's rights have improved so much. It's like saying, if you don't like the way the UK is, then just leave - but if everyone did that, nothing would improve and change for the better I guess.

well they kinda can because they employ you , if they say they now want you in 3 days a week then unless your contract now states wfh on a permenat basis than you wouldnt have a choice , other than to resign or look for something else

No, they really can't decide where I work the best. They can't dictate what environment a person finds most productive. How exactly would they do that?

They could tell people to be in the office regardless of whether or not the employee is most productive in that environment, and that would have the predicted impact -- we'd lose people to other companies who are offering the circumstances they want.

Thankfully my company hired adults who are capable of doing their work, not toddlers who need minding, and acts accordingly.

A friend who lived in central London in a 1 bed flat moved to nice 3 bed house just outside Bristol. Plan to commute in to London 1 day per week, WFH 4 days.
Already she is complaining work are asking her to come for 2-3 days per week, sometimes consecutive.
I did suggest this could happen but I think the theory (lovely energising cycle to city edge station, fast train on which can work, short tube journey) vs reality (cold, dark, wet mornings and late evening cycles,, train takes 2hrs, usual tube chaos all at great expense) are two separate things.

I know what you mean, but ultimately I think YABU a bit, purely on the grounds that it’s been two years.

Under employment law, in cases where people are trying to prove that an informal arrangement should be considered contractual, the tribunal will consider “custom and practice”, which has to have been in place for two years. Now I’m not saying that WFH for pandemic reasons is the same thing, but two years is a damn long time, people worked from home on zero notice in March 2020 when the company asked them to, often in cases where the company had previously refused home working requests, and there are proven benefits to a bit of flexibility. It is not on to demand people come back to the office immediately because “it was only temporary”. It’s a power play. If managers can’t manage poor performance from home then they can’t in the office either.

@Nc123 actually, I retract my 'I understand if there's performance issues' because you're right, they can address them remotely too.

On the other side of the coin..... when the pandemic hit I wasn't working, I was looking for a job.
Suddenly my husbands working from home. Great. He can be around to DD more now he isn't wasting time commuting.
DD starts school, mid pandemic.
I get offered a very good job, very good, what would normally be London money but I can WFH.... it's only a 6 month contract. Great!
DH and I can share the school run.
They then offer me a perm contract.

There's still no word on when DH is due back in the office, if he ever will. So I take the perm job.

Now if DH has to go back into the office more then once a week it will mean it will affect my work as I will have to do both school runs.

We have been wfh limbo for nearly 2 years. So yes lives have changed in that time. We're people meant to put life's on hold?

YANBU it really annoys me when people say they don’t want to go back due to the commute (which they did without complaining before) or childcare (when they had professional childcare in place before). I do hope that the changes employers have had to make due to covid mean they will
be more flexible for their staff with wfh and not force them into work if they are feeling poorly as I think that as a society we tended to feel under pressure to carry on even when we weren’t well/medical apts etc but people complaining when their employers are asking them to perform their job safely, in a similar way to they did before are really annoying me.