To be agog at this incentive to Work from office?

[GretaGip]

DS1's chum is 18 months through a Grad Role and has just secured another job with a different company

They are incentivised to work in the office 4 days a week by 15% of their salary, with a minimum of £10,000. It's not included in income for pensionable purposes.

AIBU to think this is not normal??

I'm feeling quite old and out of touch

Highly paid quick entry specialist roles in ICT are cyclical.

The one-time paper based ICT trade rags would have an informal barometer of how much of the issue would be given to recruitment agencies & job adverts. In good full-fat times, the ads would begin before the middle pages/staples. In stricter leaner times the issue would have overall fewer pages as the job related ad revenue had dropped,, & the ads would start well past the staples.

Of course, this is not so obvious as we all live & breathe online…

@MissConductUS Accounting degrees are also a thing in the UK.
Big4 is a good choice, guaranteed career promotion until you earn 80K in London at least. Provided you pass the exams and don't mess up badly.

As I said in my first post- I didn't hire these people, they don't work for me. The person complaining to me didn't hire them either, and would be more than happy if they walked tbh. Some people have a very rose-tinted view of the value they're adding to the business!

Due to the nature of my work across ICT sector, I had extended periods of WFH. It is not for everyone.

In the short term, the argument of unit based productivity gains works well. But in time, overall organisational productivity rate slows or stalls..

WFH is great for getting through your own task list, also for your team. Collaborative teleworking online has come along way in the past few years & Covid drove this update into many organisations. Right now, many people & organisations are harvesting the benefits of this new efficiency. But it won’t last unless there is a deeper shift in organisational design & this will lead to revision of the business model & restructuring.

As an example, if people are to deliver 100% on a 37 hours over a 4 day week, then working day will be extended to allow for meetings & project delivery deadlines. Covid WFH is not the same as usual operational WFH - it will be different.

In my experience, part-time workers often work longer than their contracted hours to keep up, & those WFH found it a challenge to keep & work & home life truly separate.

It can be very helpful to be there to pop out to pick up the kids & give them tea, or get some exercise, but the work is there waiting there for when they are free. Often people WFH from home caught up in the evening or at weekends.

WFH is not a bed of roses, thorns lurk.

‘ Some people have a very rose-tinted view of the value they're adding to the business!’

Yes indeed.
Which is why being in the office enough is important, it smooths off employees rough edges/estimation of their ‘add value’ to the business & helps networking.

Come any levelling, bonus distribution, restructuring reviews, if your ‘reputation/presence/face’ does not easily come to mind, then you are at a disadvantage. The other side of that is that you don’t so easily come to mind when the proverbial hits the fan 😉.

Why would you pay people the same amount to do 80% of their usual work

Productivity doesn't work like that in roles that are about output rather than time spent, like nearly all office roles. Four-day weeks are proven not to reduce output anything like 20% from a five-day week.

@Mundra

As I said in my first post- I didn't hire these people, they don't work for me. The person complaining to me didn't hire them either, and would be more than happy if they walked tbh. Some people have a very rose-tinted view of the value they're adding to the business!

And some businesses have a rose-tinted view of the value they bring to the employee! I see no harm in people asking for what they want. You can always say no. I also see no issue with people flitting. It proves their ability, that so many are willing to hire them. Companies have no loyalty, they will happily hire today, fire tomorrow. Anything to save money. It's good to see employees responding in kind. Yes, it makes the job of individual managers harder. But managers are also employees, and in fact might one day get their next position from one of their former ship jumping employees!

@CatJumperTwat

Why would you pay people the same amount to do 80% of their usual work

Productivity doesn't work like that in roles that are about output rather than time spent, like nearly all office roles. Four-day weeks are proven not to reduce output anything like 20% from a five-day week.

Also this. A lot of time is in fact wasted in faffing about. People could work 4 day weeks with no drop in productivity. A pp mentioned that 50-60 years ago we had a 5.5 day work week.. the very idea would be sacrilegious now! Times change

Businesses aren't there to bring value to employees though- they pay people a salary for their work.

I also see no issue with people flitting. It proves their ability, that so many are willing to hire them
Not really. This industry is desperate for people, that they take almost everyone that applies.
Anyway, my friend said that her team are about to be reassigned from what they're working on to automate the work of the other team...so who loses out here?

@Mundra

Businesses aren't there to bring value to employees though- they pay people a salary for their work.

I also see no issue with people flitting. It proves their ability, that so many are willing to hire them
Not really. This industry is desperate for people, that they take almost everyone that applies.
Anyway, my friend said that her team are about to be reassigned from what they're working on to automate the work of the other team...so who loses out here?

'Value' is what each participant in a market transaction gains. For the employee it's salary and benefits (monetary or otherwise). For the business it's work done.

For some reason you think that people need to stay in one job. Why? What do they gain by staying on? Your statement about automation actually proves my point. The company is happy enough to get rid of their job. Why is it bad that they're happy to jump between companies

I don't think people should stay in one job, of course not, but changing every 12mo means that you never see a whole development cycle through from start to finish, so you're not seeing what goes wrong in a process, and learning how to mitigate for that. These employees are making themselves unemployable a few years down the line (even without automation).

It sounds like you hope they'll make themselves unemployable. In reality they'll be fine and maximum their income by moving frequently.

Its demand vs supply. Companies will have to do this if they want to attract workers who have the choice to wfh elsewhere and prefer to.

@Mundra

Someone told me this week that some of their employees were demanding a 4 day week for no downgrade of pay. I found that shocking.

Two of my colleagues do a 4-day week but they still do full-time hours.

@Mundra

I don't think people should stay in one job, of course not, but changing every 12mo means that you never see a whole development cycle through from start to finish, so you're not seeing what goes wrong in a process, and learning how to mitigate for that. These employees are making themselves unemployable a few years down the line (even without automation).

I'm really intrigued as to the nature of this job. So desperate for people that they'll take 'anyone that applies'. At the same time they'll be 'unemployable, despite said desperate shortage, if they've never finished a whole 'development cycle'. Never mind the fact that cycles are all likely similar, so they're likely to get enough experience jumping into different jobs, at different stages of said cycle. Also the fact that you have intimate knowledge of these people moving jobs like clockwork, every 12 months although neither you nor the person complaining actually hired them.

@CatJumperTwat is right. You're just hoping they get their comeuppance.

@LakieLady yes, I think compressed hours is a great thing to have if your role can be done that way. 4x10 hour days as opposed to 5x8. Why not?

Last time I backed incentivising working in the office I got a bit of a pasting but I stand by the idea that it is undoubtedly more expensive working in the office than from home. I'm not convinced that having the central heating on for a few more hours in the winter really compares to travel costs, maintaining a halfway decent work wardrobe, extra childcare to account for commuting. Not to mention the convenience of being at home and being able to do small but helpful things like stick a wash on, get out for a lunchtime walk, or accept a delivery here and there.

I'm all for home working. My DH does it alternate weeks and it's a massive help in terms of school runs and keeping on top of chores.

It's a niche industry, most people know one another. However, it's being heavily automated, and times might be good now while there's a skills shortage, in a few years it will be a completely different story. One big firm is buying up all the small players, and then all these positions will be gone. These roles are already extremely well paid, even for the sector, they have great perks too. To demand a 20% hours cut on top of that seems greedy to me personally.
The money isn't so good that they'll be cashing out and retiring in three years.

To be honest I work 2 days at home and 2 days in the office.
No massive pay rise and I'm spending more on electricity and heating because I'm at home!!!
I can however take in the online shop, put loads of washing in, have friends over for lunch, have my tv on, have my own laptop on and be online too, do a pile of ironing inbetween jobs, wrap presents (very ha day at Christmas!!) and also not have to be in the office with a mask on all day

If however they said here's £10k to go back to fully being in the office I'd be there 😂

I'm not surprised OP.

We are currently recruiting a few roles, upwards of £60k, and £400-500 a day contract roles in finance.

My employer wants everybody back in the office a minimum of 2-3 days now, rising to 3-4 in the next couple of months. The minute any potential candidate hears this, they run a mile, and we're struggling to even get people to attend physical interviews (they all want to do it by Microsoft Teams!).

I don't blame them as I want to leave this employer myself now! As a single parent, with my office an hour away (typical in London), WfH means I can easily drop DC to breakfast and after school clubs, and pick them up at a decent hour. Being in the office means roping in extended family to help, and only arriving everywhere by the skin of my teeth, feeling stressed. My last year's appraisal was excellent, despite WfH for the majority, so I really don't see the point in going in more than 1-2 days per week.

@Starseeking

I agree I think some people now want to be at home all the time there is so many pro's. I'm quite happy to do 50/50 and we are now in a hot desking situation anyway and there isn't space for us to all be there all the time I work in a hospital and lots of our office space was converted to clinical space. If you aren't in for 7:30-8 there's a scramble for seats but they say they want us back more
But they've made it impossible by reducing office space

I am generally a little tired of the constant whining and posturing about WFH or not WFH, though. It's as though the only type of 'work' that exists is keyboard-bashing and having meetings. You can't wipe arses, stack shelves, prepare and pack food, perform surgery, install broadband, drive buses, deliver goods or clean hospital wards 'from home'. What's supposed to happen to all the people who do jobs like these in the brave new world of remote working?

@feelsobadfeltsogood I don't mind going into the office 2 times a week, it's the 4 times I really object to. It feels a bit "bums on seats", particularly as like yours, my employer has also heavily reduced office space, so there isn't a desk for everyone.

They've cleverly worded it as saying there'll be "a workspace for anyone who wants one", but the reality of that means you could be working on your laptop in the cafeteria area, or have 3 people working on laptops in a meeting room, if there's no other space that day. You might as well be comfortable at home, in that case, with a second big screen and desk chair (that they sent us during the first lockdown).

@Wreath21

I am generally a little tired of the constant whining and posturing about WFH or not WFH, though. It's as though the only type of 'work' that exists is keyboard-bashing and having meetings. You can't wipe arses, stack shelves, prepare and pack food, perform surgery, install broadband, drive buses, deliver goods or clean hospital wards 'from home'. What's supposed to happen to all the people who do jobs like these in the brave new world of remote working?

You are right. I work in a job that cannot be done effectively from home or done flexibly, and I'm fine with that. In the future, there may be a wage uplift for these sorts of jobs in the same way that unsociable hours have long been paid a higher rate in many industries.

Last time I backed incentivising working in the office I got a bit of a pasting but I stand by the idea that it is undoubtedly more expensive working in the office than from home. I'm not convinced that having the central heating on for a few more hours in the winter really compares to travel costs, maintaining a halfway decent work wardrobe, extra childcare to account for commuting. Not to mention the convenience of being at home and being able to do small but helpful things like stick a wash on, get out for a lunchtime walk, or accept a delivery here and there
I assume you mean "undoubtedly more expensive working in the office than from home for some people "? There are people whose work and home lives are different to yours and who don't save money wfh. My commute is a cost free 13 minute walk. I have no children so no childcare. I don't find maintaining a working wardrobe terribly expensive - I probably buy one new item, costing around £30, every couple of years.
And as for convenience, accepting deliveries was the only thing I found convenient about wfh. I have no need to put a wash on during the working day, I have plenty of time for that in the evening and at weekends. For me a lunchtime walk isn't a convenience, as I get to walk in my commute. I can also go for a walk at lunchtime at my workplace.

[quote Starseeking]@feelsobadfeltsogood I don't mind going into the office 2 times a week, it's the 4 times I really object to. It feels a bit "bums on seats", particularly as like yours, my employer has also heavily reduced office space, so there isn't a desk for everyone.

They've cleverly worded it as saying there'll be "a workspace for anyone who wants one", but the reality of that means you could be working on your laptop in the cafeteria area, or have 3 people working on laptops in a meeting room, if there's no other space that day. You might as well be comfortable at home, in that case, with a second big screen and desk chair (that they sent us during the first lockdown).[/quote]
I'd find something better.

No way I'd go in only to be sat in a fucking cafeteria 🤣 what a joke.

Time to polish up that CV.